Debunking Two American Myths

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by The Saker,

There are two myths which are deeply imprinted in the minds of most US Americans which are extremely dangerous and which can result in a war with Russia.

  • The first myth is the myth of the US military superiority.
  • The second myth is the myth about the US invulnerability.

I believe that it is therefore crucial to debunk these myths before they end up costing us millions of lives and untold suffering.

In my latest piece for the Unz Review I discussed the reasons why the US armed forces are nowhere nearly as advanced as the US propaganda machine would have us believe. And even though the article was a discussion of Russian military technologies I only gave one example, in passing, of Russian military technologies by comparing the T-50 PAKFA to the US F-35 (if you want to truly get a feel for the F-35 disaster, please read this and this). First, I am generally reluctant to focus on weapons systems because I strongly believe that, in the vast majority of real-world wars, tactics are far more important than technologies. Second, Andrei Martyanov, an expert on Russian military issues and naval warfare, has recently written two excellent pieces on Russian military technologies (see here and here) which gave many more examples (check out Martyanov’s blog). Having read some of the comments posted under Martyanov’s and my articles, I think that it is important, crucial, in fact, to drive home the message to those who still are thoroughly trained by the propaganda machine to instantly dismiss any notion of US vulnerability or, even more so, technological inferiority. I am under no illusion about the capability of those who still watch the idiot box to be woken out of their lethargic stupor by the warnings of Paul Craig Roberts, William Engdal, Dmitrii Orlov, Andrei Martyanov or myself. But I also think that we have to keep trying, because the war party (the Neocon Uniparty) is apparently trying really hard to trigger a conflict with Russia. So what I propose to do today is to connect the notions of “war with Russia” and “immediate and personal suffering” by showing that if Russia is attacked two of the most sacred symbols of the USA, aircraft carriers and the US mainland itself, would be immediately attacked and destroyed.

The aircraft carriers myth

I have to confess that even during the Cold War I always saw US aircraft carriers as sitting ducks which the Soviets would have rather easily destroyed. I formed that opinion on the basis of my study of Soviet anti-carrier tactics and on the basis of conversations with friends (fellow students) who actually served on US aircraft carriers.

I wish I had the time and space to go into a detailed description of what a Cold War era Soviet attack on a US aircraft carrier battle group would typically look like, but all I will say is that it would involved swarms of heavy air and sea launched missiles coming from different directions, some skimming the waves, others dropping down from very high altitude, all at tremendous speeds, combined with more underwater-launched missiles and even torpedoes. All of these missiles would be “intelligent” and networked with each other: they would be sharing sensor data, allocating targets (to avoid duplication), using countermeasures, receiving course corrections, etc. These missiles would be launched at standoff distances by supersonic bombers or by submerged submarines. The targeting would involve space-based satellites and advanced naval reconnaissance technologies. My USN friends were acutely aware of all this and they were laughing at their own official US propaganda (Reagan was in power then) which claimed that the USN would “bring the war to the Russians” by forward deploying carriers. In direct contrast, my friends all told me that the first thing the USN would do is immediately flush all the carriers away from the North Atlantic and into the much safer waters south of the so-called GUIK gap. So here is the ugly truth: carriers are designed to enforce the rule of the AngloZionist Empire on small and basically defenseless nations (like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq). Nobody in the USN, at least not in the late 1980s, seriously considered forward deploying aircraft carrier battlegroups near the Kola Peninsula to “bring the war to the Russians”. That was pure propaganda. The public did not know that, but USN personnel all knew the truth.

[Sidebar: if the topic of carrier survivability is of interest to you, please check out this Russian article translated by a member of our community which is a pretty typical example of how the Russian don’t believe for one second that US carriers are such hard targets to destroy]

What was true then is even more true today and I can’t imagine anybody at the Pentagon seriously making plans to attack Russia with carrier based aviation. But even if the USN has no intention of using its carriers against Russia, that does not mean that the Russians cannot actively seek out US carriers and destroy them, even very far from Russia. After all, even if they are completely outdated for a war between superpowers, carriers still represent fantastically expensive targets whose symbolic value remains immense. The truth is that US carriers are the most lucrative target any enemy could hope for: (relatively) small, (relatively) easy to destroy, distributed in many locations around the globe – US carriers are almost “pieces of the USA, only much closer”.

Introducing the Zircon 3M22 hypersonic missile

First, some basic data about this missile (from English and Russian Wikipedia):

  • Low level range: 135 to 270 nautical miles (155 to 311mi; 250 to 500km).
  • High level range: 400nmi (460mi; 740km) in a semi-ballistic trajectory.
  • Max range: 540nmi (620mi; 1,000km)
  • Max altitude: 40km (130’000 feet)
  • Average range is around 400km (250mi; 220nmi)/450 km.
  • Speed: Mach 5–Mach 6 (3,806–4,567mph; 6,125–7,350km/h; 1.7015–2.0417km/s).
  • Max speed: Mach 8 (6,090mph; 9,800km/h; 2.7223km/s) during a test.
  • Warhead: 300-400kg (high explosive or nuclear)
  • Shape: low-RCS with radar absorbing coating.
  • Cost per missile: 1-2 million dollars (depending on configuration)

All this is already very impressive, but here comes the single most important fact about this missile: it can be launched from pretty much *any* platform: cruisers, of course, but also frigates and even small corvettes. It can be launched by nuclear and diesel-electric attack submarines. It can also be launched from long range bombers (Tu-160), medium-range bombers (Tu-22m3), medium-range fighter-bomber/strike aircraft (SU-34) and even, according to some reports, from multi-role air superiority fighter (SU-35). Finally, this missile can also be shore-based. In fact, this missile can be launched from any platform capable of launching the now famous Kalibr cruise missile and that means that even a merchant marine or fishing ship could carry a container with the Zircon missile hidden inside. In plain English what this means is the following:

  1. Russia has a missile which cannot be stopped or spoofed by any of the current and foreseeable USN anti-missile weapons systems.
  2. This missile can be deployed *anywhere* in the world on *any* platform.

Let me repeat this again: pretty much any Russian ship and pretty much any Russian aircraft from now on will have the potential capability of sinking a US aircraft carrier. In the past, such capabilities were limited to specific ships (Slava class), submarines (Oscar class) or aircraft (Backfires). The Soviets had a large but limited supply of such platforms and they were limited on where they could deploy them. This era is now over. From now on a swarm of Zircon 3M22 could appear anywhere on the planet at any moment and with no warning time (5000 miles per hour incoming speed does not leave the target anything remotely comparable to even a short reaction time). In fact, the attack could be so rapid that it might not even leave the target the time needed to indicate that it is under attack.

None of the above is a big secret, by the way. Just place “zircon missile” in your favorite search engine and you will get a lot of hits (131’000 on Google; 190’000 on Bing). In fact, a lot of specialists have declared that the Zircon marks the end of the aircraft carrier as a platform of modern warfare. These claims are widely exaggerated. As I have written above, aircraft carriers are ideal tools to terrify, threaten, bully and otherwise attack small, defenseless countries. Even medium-sized countries would have a very hard time dealing with an attack coming from US aircraft carriers. So I personally think that as long as the world continues to use the US dollar and, therefore, as long as the US economy continues to reply on creating money out of thin air and spending it like there is no tomorrow, aircraft carriers still have a bright, if morally repulsive, future ahead of them. And, of course, the USN will not use carriers to threaten Russia. Again, the US press has been rather open about the carrier-killing potential of the Zircon, but what it rarely (never?) mentions are the political and strategic consequence from the deployment of the Zircon: from now on Russia will have an easy and very high value US target she can destroy anytime she wants. You can think of the US carrier fleet like 10 US hostages which the Russians can shoot at any time. And what is crucial is this: an attack on a US carrier would not be an attack on the US homeland, nor would it be a nuclear attack, but the psychological shock resulting from such an attack could well be comparable to a (limited) nuclear strike on the US homeland.

This, on one hand, will greatly inhibit the Russian willingness to strike at US carriers as this would expose Russia to very severe retaliatory measures (possibly including nuclear strikes). On the other hand, however, in terms of “escalation dominance” this state of affairs gives a major advantage to Russia as the US does not have any Russian targets with an actual and symbolic value similar to the one of a US carrier.

There is another aspect of this issue which is often ignored. Western analysts often speak of a Russian strategy of “deterrence by denial” and “Anti-Access Area Denial” (A2AD). Mostly this is the kind of language which gets you a promotion and a pay raise in US and NATO think tanks. Still, there is a grain of truth to the fact that advanced Russian missiles are now providing Russia with a very cheap way to threaten even fantastically expensive US assets. Worse, Russia is willing (eager, in fact) to export these (relatively cheap) missiles to other countries. I find it amusing to see how US politicians are in a state of constant hysteria about the risk of nuclear proliferation, but fail to realize that conventional anti-ship missiles are a formidable, and much more likely, threat. Sure, there are missile export limiting treaties, such as the MTCR, but they only apply to missile with a range of over 300km. With modern ballistic and cruise missiles becoming smaller, deadlier and easier to conceal and with ranges which are (relatively) easy to extend, treaties such as the MTCR are becoming increasingly outdated.

The bottom line is this: as long as deterrences holds, attacking US carriers makes no sense whatsoever for Russia; however, as soon as deterrence fails, attacking US carriers, anywhere on the planet, gives Russia an extremely flexible and powerful escalation dominance capability which the US cannot counter in kind.

Striking at the Holy of Holies – the US “homeland”

If you thought that discussing striking US carriers was bad, here we are going to enter full “Dr Strangelove” territory and discuss something which US Americans find absolutely unthinkable: attacks on the US homeland.

True, for the rest of mankind, any war by definition includes the very real possibility of attacks on your own towns, cities and people. But for US Americans who are used to mete out violence and death far away from their own peaceful towns and cities, the notion of a devastating strike against the US homeland is pretty much unthinkable. On 9/11 the loss of 3000 innocent people placed the vast majority of US Americans into a total state of shock which resulted in a massive over-reaction at all levels (which was, of course, exactly the purpose of this false flag operation by the US and Israeli deep states). Just as with carriers, the dangers of a US over-reaction should serve as a deterrent to any attacks on the US homeland. But, just as with the carriers, that is only true as long as deterrence holds. If the Russian territory becomes the object of a US attack this would clearly indicate that deterrence has failed and that the Russian armed forces should now switch from a deterrence mode to a war-fighting mode.

At this point, the US American over-reaction to begin attacked or taking casualties could, paradoxically, result in a last-minute wake-up call indicating to everybody that what will come next will be truly devastating.

Introducing the RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)

Though officially very little is know about the Sarmat and the Yu-71, the reality is that the Internet has been full of educated guesses which give us a pretty clear idea of what kind of systems we are dealing here.

You can think of the RS-28 Sarmat as a successor of the already formidable RS-36 Voevoda (SS-18 Satan in US classification) missile: it is a heavy, very powerful, intercontinental ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (warheads):

  • Weight: 100 tons
  • Payload: 10 tons
  • Warheads: 10 to 15
  • Hypersonic glide vehicles: 3-24 (that’s the Yu-71 we will discuss below)
  • Range: 10’000km
  • Guidance: Inertial , satellite, astrocelestial
  • Trajectory: FOBS-capable

That last line, about being FOBS-capable, is crucial as it means that, unlike most Soviet/Russian ICMBs, the Sarmat does not have to fly over the North Pole to strike at the United States. In fact, the Sarmat could fly over the South Pole or, for that matter, in any direction and still reach any target in the USA. Right there this capability is, by itself, is more than enough to defeat any current and foreseeable US anti-ballistic missile technology. But it gets better, or worse, depending on your perspective: the Sarmat’s reentry vehicles/warhards are capable of flying in low orbit, maneuver, and then suddenly plunge towards their targets. The only way to defeat such an attack would be to protect the USA by a 3600 coverage capable ABM system, something which the USA is decades away from deploying. And just to add to these already formidable characteristics, each Sarmat can carry up to 3-24 (depending on who you ask) Yu-71 hypersonic glide vehicles.

Introducing The Yu-71 (aka “Object 4202) hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV)

Yet again, this is hardly a topic not covered in the media and you can find numerous articles describing what a hypersonic glide vehicle is and how it can be used. (the best article I could find in English was by Global Security, it is entitled “Objekt 4202 / Yu-71 / Yu-74”).

Here is a summary of what we think we know about this HGV:

  • Max Speed: from Mach 5, according to Scott Ritter, to Mach 9, according to a quasi official Russian source, to Mach 15, acccording to Sputnik, to Mach 20 (that’s 7 kilometer per second, or 25’200kh/h, or 15’000mph), according to Global Security. Whatever the true speed, it will be fantastic and far, far beyond the kind of speeds current or foreseeable US anti-missile systems could hope to engage.
  • Hypermaneuverability: Russian sources describe the Yu-71 as “???????????????? ??????????” or “hypermaneuverable warhead”. What that exactly means in turns of sustained Gs does not really matter as this is not about air-to-air combat, but about the ability to perform sudden course changes making it close to impossible for anti-missile systems to calculate an engagement solution.
  • Warhead: nuclear and conventional/kinetic.

That last line is very interesting. What it means is that considering the speeds attained by the Yu-71 HGV it is not necessary to equip it with a conventional (high explosive) or nuclear warheard. The kinetic energy generated by its high speed is sufficient to create an explosion similar to what a large conventional or small nuclear warhead could generate.

Bringing it all together now

Did you notice the similarities between the Zircon missile and the Sarmat+Yu-71 combo?

In both cases we have:

  1. an attack which can come from any direction
  2. speed of attack and maneuver capabilities which make interception impossible
  3. the capability for Russia to destroy a very high value US target in a very short time

It is amazing to see that while US decision makers were talking about their Prompt Global Strike program, the Russians actually developed their own version of this capability, much faster than the USA and at a fraction of the cost.

These are all ideal ways to “bring the war home” and to encourage a country which enjoyed total impunity for its policies to being seriously thinking about the consequences of messing around with the wrong people.

To make things even more potentially dangerous for the USA, the very same geography which protected the USA for so long is now becoming a major vulnerability. Currently 39% of the US population lives in counties directly on the shoreline. In fact, the population density of coastal shoreline counties is over six times greater than the corresponding inland counties (source). In 2010 the US Census Bureau produced a fascinating report entitled “Coastline Population Trends in the United States: 1960 to 2008” which shows that the coastal counties provide an “intense concentration of economic and social activity”. In fact, a very large number of US cities, industrial centers and economic hugs are located near the USA coastline making them all *ideal* targets for Russian conventional cruise missile strikes which could be launched from very long distances (including over open water). And we are not talking about some future, hypothetical, cruise missile, we are talking about the very same Kalibr cruise missiles the Russians have been using against the Takfiris in Syria. Check out this very well made video which explains how Kalibr cruise missiles can be hidden pretty much anywhere and used with devastating effect on military and/or civilian targets:

The reality is that the US homeland is extremely vulnerable to any kind of attack. This is only in part due to recent Russian advances in military technology. For example, the “just on time” manufacturing or delivery practices which are aimed to minimize costs and inventory are, from a strategic/military point of view, extremely dangerous as it take very little disruption (for example in the distribution network) to create catastrophic consequences. Likewise, the high concentration of some industries in specific areas of the United States (oil in the Mexican Gulf) only serve to further weaken the ability of the United State to take any kind of punishment in case of war.

Most TV watching Americans will dismiss all of the above by saying that “anybody come mess with us and we will kick their ass” or something equally sophisticated. And there is some truth to that. But what this mindset also indicate is a complete mental inability to operate in a scenario when deterrence has failed and the “other guy” is coming for you. That mindset is the prerogative of civilians. Those tasked with the defense of their country simply cannot think that way and have to look beyond the “threshold of deterrence”. They will be the one asked to fix the bloody mess once the civilians screw-up. Georges Clemenceau reportedly once said that “War is too serious a matter to entrust to military men”. I believe that the exact opposite is true, that war is too serious a matter to entrust to civilians, especially the US Neocons (the vast majority of whom have never spent any time in uniform) and who always make it sound like the next war will be easy, safe and painless. Remember Ken Adleman and his famous Iraqi “cakewalk”? The very same kind of scum is in power today and they want us to believe that the next war will also be a cakewalk or that being on a high speed collision course with Russia is something the USA can afford and should therefore engage in. The combined effect of the myth of US military superiority with the myth about the US invulnerability result in a US American sense of detachment, or even impunity, which is not at all supported by fact. I just fervently hope that the people of the USA will not find out how mistaken they are the hard way.

In the meantime, the Russian Chief of General Staff, General Gerasimov, has announced that Russia had completed what he called a “non-nuclear deterrence system” based on the Iskander-M, Kalibr and X-101 missiles. According to General Gerasimov, the Russian armed forces now have enough high-precision weapon systems to strike at any target within a 4000km range. Furthermore, Gerasimov declared that the number of platforms capable of launching such missiles has increased twelve times while the number of high precision cruise missiles has increased by a factor 30. General Gerasimov also explained that the combined capabilities of the Kalibr cruise missile, the Bastion mobile coastal defense missile system and the S-400 air defense system made it possible for Russia to fully control the airspace and surface of the Baltic, Barents, Black and Mediterranean seas (talk about A2AD!). Gerasimov concluded his briefing by sayingthe development of high-precision weapons has made it possible to place the main burden of strategic deterrence from nuclear to non-nuclear forces”.

To fully evaluate the implications of what Gerasimov said please consider this: deterrence is, by definition, the action of discouraging an action or event through instilling doubt or fear of the consequences. So what Gerasimov is really saying is that Russia has enough conventional, non-nuclear, capabilities to inflict unacceptable consequences upon the USA. This is something absolutely new, a fundamental game changer. Most importantly, that is the official declaration by a senior Russian official that the USA does not have any technological superiority and that the USA is vulnerable to a devastating counter-attack, even a conventional one. In one short sentence General Gerasimov has put to rest the two most important myths of US geostrategic theory.

Keep in mind that, unlike their US counterparts, the Russians typically like to under-evaluate Russian military capabilities. You will find the Russia media bragging about how “totally awesome and best in the world” Russian weapons systems are, but military personnel in Russia still has a corporate culture of secrecy and under-reporting your real capabilities to the enemy. Furthermore, while junior officers can say pretty much anything they want, senior officers are held to very strict rules and they have to carefully weigh every word they say, especially acting officers. So when the Chief of Staff officially declares that Russia now has a conventional strategic deterrence capability – you can take that to the bank. It’s real.

Alas, the western media is still stuck in the “full idiot” mode we saw during the transit of the Russian aircraft carrier from the North Atlantic to the Mediterranean: on one hand, the Admiral Kuznetsov was presented as a rusty old bucket while on the other NATO forces constantly shadowed it as if it was about to strike London. Likewise, US politicians present Russia as a “gas station” while, at the same time, stating that this “gas station” has the capability to decide who lives in the White House. This kind of reporting is not only unhelpful but outright dangerous. One one hand the “the Russians are backward brutes” fosters an arrogant and cocky attitude. On the other hand, constantly speaking about fake Russian threats results in a very dangerous case of “cry wolf” in which all possible Russian threats (including very real ones) are dismissed as pure propaganda.

The reality is, of course, very different and simple in a binary way: Russia represents absolutely no threat to the United States or anybody else (including the three Baltic statelets). But if some western politician decides that he is smarter and stronger than Napoleon or Hitler and that he will finally bring the Russians to their knees, then he and his country will be destroyed. It is really that simple.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
NoDebt's picture

I have a question:  Who the FUCK wants a war with Russia except the MSM meth-fueled echo chamber and their sycophants?  Even the NeoCons aren't crazy enough to call for an armed conflict with a nuclear power like Russia.  

Yes, Israel, blah, blah, blah, whatever.


sincerely_yours's picture

The Jewish neocons rekindled the conflict with Russia because they knew that if Russia got involved in the Middle East, their plan for Greater IsraHell would be finished.

In fact, Russia is helping Syria and Iran. And IsraHell hates it. Still does. That's why they're wagging the US to wag Saudi Arabia to start a major regional war to accomplish their satanic deeds.

"By way of deception thou shall do war." Israeli Motto

Bla, bla, bla is not a solid argument.

GoyimUprising's picture

Assad truly is the man of the Century.  My personal hero.  Not that I'm really into the world leader sort of racket, but I give him props for holding up and maintaining a dignified composure through some serious Jew kike bullshit!  

sincerely_yours's picture

Have to wholeheartedly agree with you there. In fact, this is a great article about what's truly going on down there.

bobcatz's picture

It's about time that shitty country full of Fake Hebrews go the way of Sparta before it leads the world to the catastrophic point of no return.

Escrava Isaura's picture

Debunking Two American Myths

Debunking? Good luck under a lifelong brainwashing and indoctrination.

Secondly, and the most important: Before debunking someone else, try to debunk your biases first.

And here’s how it works, but many of you will be able to improve it.

Again, oversimplified but you’ll get the idea.

How to tell if you were brainwashed or indoctrinated:

If questions or realities make you angry, they don’t fit your believes, you’re brainwashed.

If questions or realities make you uncomfortable, it silences you, you’re indoctrinated.

Let’s go to an ‘easy’ example. And an economic/political ‘easy’ example because Zero Hedge is biased that way.

Trump and the Republicans are right winger private power ideologues. Saudi Arabia and Russia are right wing state power ideologues. And, America Democrats, the liberals, are servant of both.

What do these mean?

Neither Private Power nor State Power care about the people. However, at the State Power system, the people can vote the rascals out. At the Private Power system, people have no say.

Which one are you?


BennyBoy's picture


Russia has all these weapons, so does China and the USA.

Maybe Russia will give Lebanon a few hypersonic missiles to defend against Arabia, Israel and the US.

Scar Bro's picture

They myths actually destroying America

i. The jews don't control everything.

ii. The jews did not destroy Russia as well as Germany



yomutti2's picture

This article is just another Russian mouthpiece jabber about Russia.

Nobody cares about Russia, except those few paid to do so.



BOPOH's picture

So what you and your partners are care about?

BlindMonkey's picture

"Nobody cares about Russia"


So what's with the Avatar?  You must be a paid agent. 

HoyeruNew's picture

YOU seem to care a LOT, thats ALL you post about and your avatar tells us all we need to know.

Pure Evil's picture

His avatar and handle tell us he's gay and he's got a love interest in Putin.

monk27's picture

You must be one of those "paid to do so" 'cause you seem to care about Putin's Russia very much...

HillaryOdor's picture

And the Brazilian is completely retarded living in opposite world, as usual and expected.

1. You cannot really vote out state thugs, because the elected government is not the only power.  Try voting out the MIC.

2. You can absolutely vote on a free market, because the market is free.  You vote every time you buy something.  Boycotts are far more effective than the scam called democracy.  More importantly the private sector can not use force on you.  Only government can do that.  That is the only useful definition of government.

3. The term right-winger is completely meaningless.  It's just a tool to keep morons (you) thinking they're superior for believing in the correct kind of collectivism.  All collectivism is a lie.

Darth Rayne's picture

We are all one, there is no which.

GoyimUprising's picture

Absolutely.  I think we have Veteran's Day coming up here and I've been reading all over the Internet how it's all the Jew bankers waging wars for profits.

Never One Roach's picture

It's interesting that far left propaganda outlets like NPR used to attack Assad daily, all day long with bull shit fake news (everything from his 'butchering babies" to gassing them)....until...Trump got elected.


Now NPR attacks Trump 24/7 with anti-Trump propaganda, 99.9% of it false and very malicious. They seem to have forgotten about Assad, "the Butcher" as they labelled him. And we don't see CNN other far left TV trolls faking babies washed up on the shore anymore either.

Cistercian's picture

I have enjoyed the vineyard of the saker for some time...that being said he is insane to think Russia is much of a threat to our military. I discussed a scenario with a very high ranking general whose opinion I trusted. He considered Russia a trivial problem. Now, the Chinese are actually a very serious problem....

Our systems work well. But the Chinese bring the whole quantity has a quality all it's own to bear in a way Russia simply cannot. I like the Saker. I would like to drink vodka with him until I pass would be fun.

but he is just wrong on this point.

I still like him though.

OverTheHedge's picture

Good to see you completely failed to read the article: I didn't see anything "trivial" there about Russian capabilities. Or is it just the American Exceptionalism that makes your pet General believe it is a trivial problem?

Now, if I was going to actually damage the US, I would drop a few nukes on the Canary Islands, and then say ,"Who? Me? I didn't do it, no one saw me do it, you can't prove anything". But the entire eastern seaboard, up to 20 miles inland, wouldn't be there any more. Allegedly.

zhandax's picture

"Even the NeoCons aren't crazy enough to call for an armed conflict with a nuclear power like Russia."

It's football s eason;   never bet on how crazy a neocon is...

Internet-is-Beast's picture

Oh the hutzpah, he called the neocons "scum"!

fockewulf190's picture

I continue to wonder why some people see the Tsunami option as viable. What ends up happening is five or six Fukushimas and then perhaps a spent fuel rod storage facility or two start reacting with the atmosphere. It doesn’t matter if some nation thinks they can hide their complicity or not, it ends up becoming an extinction level event from all the continual and unstoppable radiation contamination.

BTW, the same event could happen anywhere on the planet where the ability to continually cool nuclear power reactors, and especially the spent fuel rods, is lost. You only need one good EMP blast, or the next Carrington Event to happen and it’s game over for billion and billions of us.

Pure Evil's picture

You mean no more football?

Basketball season just started.......and hockey!

TuPhat's picture

I think your brain has already had its extinction event.  What you have said would not happen.  We have had chernobyl and fukushima and nothing even remotely like your scenario has occurred.  You need to learn more about radiation and nuclear power to know what has happened in these events and what would actually happen if there were more.  These events are serious, yes, but not all life extinguishing.

BOPOH's picture

I think the issue is not  US military capability. 

The real issue is that Americans have no tolerance for pain. This makes America vulnerable.

They all almost happy today, and have no idea what a real pain is about.


not dead yet's picture

If you're talking numbers being brought to bear Russia wins. That's because Russia only has to defend the homeland. The military of the US is spread out all over the world and just can't pull out at a moments notice, if it can at all. Long lines of supply too.

New_Meat's picture

Not much of a general if he thinks that a MRC or bigger is "trivial."

Probably thinks that the "diversity of the force" is the objective of the mission, too.

Escrava Isaura's picture

Cistercian: I discussed a scenario with a very high ranking general whose opinion I trusted. He considered Russia a trivial problem. Now, the Chinese are actually a very serious problem....

Your general is absolutely correct, and here is why:

About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." 


Eurasia is at China’s backyard.


So when I hear nationalism talk, it’s either just talk or ignorance, because Americans businesses need to be at that Eurasia market. That’s the only growth left on the planet.


TuPhat's picture

I don't need your stinkin growth.  Business conducted freely will take care of the things you mention.

ThirteenthFloor's picture

Like the other commenter/response you failed to read the entire article. It is a characteristic failure in American today - scan and move on.

1) Failure to analysize a situation throughly and understand it from various angles and outcomes is a formula for failure.

2) throughout history Americans have swallowed fictional realties which have lead to failed outcomes or death time after time. Weather they are a false flag, made up fiction, or a false identity (Americans are exceptional or superior).

3) Our leaders (sic) today are leading us to destructive means not constructive means, for whatever sicko agenda (bankers, greater Israel, greed, war, or sicko satanic rituals) and are NOT working to ....

“insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity....”

Thank you saker the more we understand our situation and reality, the more we can do to try and correct the false reality we are constantly shoved down our throats.

monk27's picture

It's called "lack of critical thinking capabilities", and usually precedes a total societal collapse...

Freddie's picture

Threat to US military?  The one that cannout sail a naval ship without hitting a giant slow moving tanker? A nation with dindus and white fanboy cucks who cheer on pro, college and high school Trayvons?

Why would Russia want to invade Europe or the USA?  they are broke and filled with feral people now thanks to Soros and ZWO.  Does Putin and Russia want to invade Europe and the USA to prop up bankrupt pension plans that are going to implode soon?   Prop up the petrodollar which will also fail and will be a mega shock to fat low IQ Americans? 

If you want to see how pathetic the USA is now then watch daytime TalmudVision.  The local gym has 25 TV's with this mindless drivel. I do not watch TV at all but glance at it every once and a while in the gym.  A land of Trayvon and dumb white males who love their Trayvon ball players.  Southern white males who worship college ball are among the most pathetic.

Back to the USA military shit, The Pentagram and DoD.  The weapons procurement process is totally about stealing money fromthe taxpayer.  The fake proxy wars bankrupting America are about stealing money.  The F-35 is junk.  Much of the US military software is written by retards like the F-35's buggy software is probably Indian H1-Bs.

The Russians are pretty peerless in rocketry and software development which is pretty much all you need today.  Saker is right about aircraft carriers being a huge waste and can only be used to bully small countries.   it did not work in Syria back in the fall of 2013 when Russia essentially dared the US Navy to try to launch Tomahawks at Syria over Russian ships.  Nothing happened.

In addition, my guess is the Russians can probably jam or bring down Tomahawks.  I think they have already done that.

Meanwhile, I am getting Dindu Star Trek pop ups on ZH.  This is the gay dindu Star Trek.  LOL!  Hollywood and America are so morally bankrupt yet the sheep keep watching Talmudvision.


DipshitMiddleClassWhiteKid's picture

Russias sigint/electronic warfare is next level 


id also be willing to bet that israel has sold them many state secrets to help develop them



BlindMonkey's picture

" I discussed a scenario with a very high ranking general whose opinion I trusted."


I'd love to have a beer and a long talk with this guy. Personally, I think you are likely mistating his positions but there is always the possibility he is a complete fool. There are only 2 nations on earth with large stocks of ICBMs and neither stockpile can be considered to be "trivial".

monk27's picture

Drinking beers with US military personnel (especially generals) doesn't qualify as a reliable information gathering method when it comes to serious things as war and deep state. Of course he's gonna tell you not to worry about Russians; his paycheck (and pension) depends on toeing the official line. However, if he really believes this nonsense then he's even a bigger moron that those listening to him...

BOPOH's picture

Jew bankers accompanied by democratically elected leaders are just agents. 

Read the Protokols carefully.

Paul Kersey's picture

"The Jewish neocons rekindled the conflict with Russia because they knew that if Russia got involved in the Middle East, their plan for Greater IsraHell would be finished."


Quite the opposite.  Netanyahu has made four recent trips to Russia, and has been on his kneepads in front of Putin. Bibi may act tough, but he ain't suicidal. 


"Netanyahu heads to Moscow for fourth Putin parley in a year PM and Russian president to discuss security cooperation in Syria, mark 25 years since establishment of bilateral ties"

"Netanyahu urges Putin to block Iranian power corridor on Israel’s border"


bobcatz's picture

He's just trying to gauge and bluff Putin.

sincerely_yours's picture

By way of deception, my friend.

monk27's picture

Netanyahu can't do shit against Russia, and Putin knows it. About 20% of the "Jewish" population of Israel is of Russian/Soviet origin and have a rather high view of Putin... In case of conflict between the two, the allegiance of all those "Jews" will be very questionable, to say the least. 

esum's picture

Russia is all about ENERGY... and the Clintonistas are TRAITORS
Clinton was selling out America since his sojourn in Russia while a Rhodes “scholar”... and Hillary is A COMMIE CUNT suck ya dick for a dolla whore...

NEWS FLASH...... back in 1966 on a carrier attack task force we ALL knew that the lifespan of the carrier when the balloon went up was 10 minutes... hence launch ALL the birds and they are kamakazies also.... THAT IS THE REALWORLD .... not the think tank world... nothing has changed...
Russian subs shadowed by cruising under the carrier and could pull back and sink it .... or a missle... take your choice... and we countered that with attack subs... Lots of shit going on behind the scenes...

Russia and USA have mutual interests..... ISLAMIC JIHAIDS for example...
Obozo pushed Russia to China alliance and now we have to deal with it...

WOWurstupid's picture

That is a Chinese motto...I bet your eyes are brown

GoyimUprising's picture

The Israelis and Saudis want a war with Iran, Lebanon and Hezbollah.

WOWurstupid's picture

Well no shit Sherlock they both hate Shia

Giant Meteor's picture

"On 9/11 the loss of 3000 innocent people placed the vast majority of US Americans into a total state of shock which resulted in a massive over-reaction at all levels (which was, of course, exactly the purpose of this false flag operation by the US and Israeli deep states)."

True ..

I disagree regarding neocons and neolibs, two sides of the same coin, not being crazy enough.  When one ponders, observes the sordid affairs of spirituality bankrupt human beans, pure self serving sociopaths, in on these capers, it is difficult not to despair for the fate of mankind.

Nothing is off the table ..

BlindMonkey's picture

"Who the FUCK wants a war with Russia except the MSM meth-fueled echo chamber and their sycophants?"


The correct question is:  Who the fuck wants to scare the pants off people so they willingly let the congresstoads spend on the MIC like there is no tomorrow?

Guderian's picture

Those who have realised that there is no tomorrow.

veritas semper vinces's picture

But meanwhile the EVIL EMPIRE and vassals  are preparing to start another criminal war in the ME:high ranking officers from Norway,US ,and Saudi Arabia just met in Paris to discuss attacking Lebanon(those are the reports from credible sources)

I hope they all  rot in Hell.

land_of_the_few's picture

Norway (and Denmark) have a history of supporting military adventures that are no good for their survival ... such as backing Napoleon :D