Pentagon's Nuclear Doctrine – Retrograde and Reckless

Via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

In its latest Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), the American Pentagon declares at one point in the document that the Cold War is long over. Apart from that fleeting mention, however, one would think from reading the entire review that the Cold War, for Washington, has never been so palpable.

It is a fear-laden document, relentlessly portraying the world as fraught with existential danger to US national security.

Russia and China, as with two other recent strategic policy papers out of Washington, are again painted as adversaries who must be confronted with ever-greater US military power.

The latest NPR asserts that since the last such review in 2010, “America confronts an international security situation that is more complex and demanding than any since the end of the Cold War.”

It is clear from reading the 74-page document that Russia and China are the main source of security concern for the Pentagon – albeit the reasons for the concern are far from convincing. Indeed one might say downright alarmist.

Washington accuses Russia and China of pursuing nuclear weapons development which is threatening. It accuses Russia in particular of violating arms controls treaties and threatening American allies with its nuclear arsenal. There are several other such unsubstantiated claims made by the Pentagon in the document.

Russia and China responded by condemning the aggressive nature of the Pentagon’s latest doctrine, as they have done with regard to two other recent strategic papers published by the Trump administration.

It is deplorable that Washington seems to go out of its way to portray the world in such bellicose terms. The corollary of this attitude is the repudiation of diplomacy and multilateralism.

Washington, it seems, is a hostage to its own imperative need to generate a world of hostile relations in order to justify its rampant militarism, which is, in turn, fundamental to its capitalist economy.

The lamentable, even criminal, danger of this strategy is that it foments unnecessary tensions and animosity in world relations. Russia and China have repeatedly called for normal, multilateral relations. Yet, remorselessly, Washington demonizes the two military powers in ways that are retrograde and reckless.

The Pentagon’s latest nuclear doctrine goes even further in its provocations. Based on dubious accusations of Russia’s threatening behavior (“annexation of Crimea”, “aggression in Ukraine”), the Pentagon has declared it will rely more on nuclear force for “deterrence”.

That can be taken as a warning that Washington is, in effect, lowering its threshold for deploying nuclear weapons. It overtly states that it will consider use of nuclear weapons to defend American interests and allies from “nuclear and conventional threats”. The language is chilling. It talks about inflicting “incalculable” and “intolerable” costs on “adversaries”. This is nothing short of Washington terrorizing the rest of the world into conforming to its geopolitical demands.

Another sinister development is that Washington has now declared that it will be acquiring “low-yield” nuclear weapons. These so-called “mini-nukes” will again lower the threshold for possible deployment of nuclear warheads in the misplaced belief that such deployment will not escalate to strategic weapons.

What’s disturbing is that the US is evidently moving toward a policy of greater reliance on nuclear force to underpin its international power objectives. It is also broadening, in a provocative and reckless way, what it considers “aggression” by other adversaries, principally Russia. Taken together, Washington is increasingly setting itself on a more hostile course.

Some 57 years ago, in 1961, then US President Dwight Eisenhower gave a farewell address to the nation in which he issued a grave forewarning about the growing control of the “military-industrial complex” over American life. Back then, the American military-industrial complex could disguise its insatiable appetite with the pretext of the Cold War and the “Soviet enemy”.

Today, the American federal government spends about $700 billion a year on military – over half its discretionary budget. The US spends more on military than at any time during the Cold War – in constant dollar terms.

The US military-industrial complex has become a voracious monster way beyond anything that Eisenhower may have feared. It is no longer a threat merely to American life. It is a threat to the life of the entire planet.

Objectively, the US has no foreign enemy endangering its existence; neither Russia nor China. Not even North Korea, despite its anti-American rhetoric, poses a direct threat to the US.

The Pentagon – on behalf of the military-industrial complex – is stretching credulity when it depicts the world as a more threatening place. Fingering Russia and China is absurd.

In order to try to shore up its scare-mongering with a semblance of credibility, the Pentagon is escalating the rhetoric about nuclear weapons and the need to deploy them. There is no objective justification for this nuclear posturing by the US, only as a way to dramatize alleged national security fears, in order to keep the military-industrial racket going.

The despicable danger from this retrograde Cold War strategy is that the US is recklessly pushing the world toward war and possibly nuclear catastrophe.

Fortunately, Russia and China have highly developed military defenses to keep American insanity in check. Nevertheless, American belligerence is pushing the world to combustible tensions.

The problem is that American rulers have become a rogue state. The American people need to somehow sack their rogue rulers and their military madness, and return the nation to a democratic function.

Until then, Russia and the rest of the world must be on guard.

Comments

overbet Bes Sun, 02/11/2018 - 01:25 Permalink

Trump certainly made a uturn on war. Just like every other President in my lifetime. They always go back on some of their promises, but the one common denominator none seem able to avoid is supporting wars. I used to be very naive and justified their actions believing they must have some secret knowledge that forces them to change their position on war for the good and safety of the country. Now that I am older, wiser and more cynical I think it must be more along the lines that the mic is the most powerful far reaching entity on the planet and some presidents, even if they wanted to resist, have no choice. One of those Corleone offers or worse.

In reply to by Bes

Lordflin overbet Sun, 02/11/2018 - 06:42 Permalink

If you will recall, Trump promised to rebuild the military... which certainly needs rebuilding as it is ripe with expensive boondoggles, filled with traitorus animals infused into the system over time, but most especially introduced by the last administration  after a major rifting of upper leadership that puts one in mind of Stalin's destruction of military leadership in Russia on his rise to power leading up to the Second World War.

Sadly, the rebuilding that is necessary seems far afield from that taking place. There does appear at times to be some reapproachment with the Russians (hard to tell for certain from a distance... who the hell really knows what is said behind closed doors) while at the same time animus between the US and China is on the rise. This instinct is not necessarily wrong, as Russia is our natural ally (and was moving in that direction prior to the American Civil War) and China our natural competition.

As to whether there is in fact a true power shake up at the highest levels, this too is impossible to know from a distance, but it appears possible. Time will tell.

But this world is heading to war, and no one, and certainly not the man in the White House who does not appear to be overly grounded in historical fact, is going to stop it. We are way too far down that road, trapped now by our own nature, and we do not, as a collective entity, have the will to pull ourselves back from the edge.

Rather, like the lemmings we are, we will take the plunge over the edge.

In reply to by overbet

pipes overbet Sun, 02/11/2018 - 10:08 Permalink

They lack even the capacity to take on the debt.

 

Don't be a obtuse douche. You know what was meant by the statement, and you know damned well it's true. Commies then - and muzzies now - would proliferate similarly in a heartbeat, if they could. 

In reply to by overbet

Element ACP Sun, 02/11/2018 - 08:02 Permalink

q

 

 

Yeah!!! .. rah rah rah!!! ... yeeaah!!! ... gggggggrrrrrr!!!! ......... and it's not like pootie has a carbon-copy arsenal or nuffin  .... that he just finished spending 15 years comprehensively renovating .... and placing on to new ballidtic and cruise missiles .... and threwtening to use them or nuthin ... dduuuuhhhhhhhh!!!!

Dumb is the new black!

So one-eyed you may be the cyclops.

In reply to by ACP

HRClinton roddy6667 Sun, 02/11/2018 - 10:55 Permalink

Sorry for the long post below, but it us 100% relevant (110%, if you're Spinal Tap)...

Sec. "Mad Fog" Mattis just made his announcement two weeks ago, that our "War on Terrorism" will take a back seat to the New Cold War against Russia, China and the "rogue states" of NK and Iran.

 

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/01/28/trump-general-just-announced-new-cold-war-who-will-stop-it.html

Mattis made his announcement in a speech to the Paul Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins. Mattis began the speech by paying tribute to what his prepared remarks called the “character” of (((Paul Nitze))), a noted Cold War hawk. 

In the SAIS speech, Mattis declared that “Great Power competition between nations (is) becoming a reality once again.” He continued: “Though we will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists … Great Power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of U.S. national security.”

Nitze named China and Russia as the primary threat, describing them as “nations that … seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models, pursuing veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic and security decisions.” He also cited North Korea and Iran, describing them as “rogue nations” that “persist in taking outlaw actions that threaten regional and even global stability.”

Mattis has now declared, however, that the primary goal of the US military is to prepare for state-to-state conflict with “Great Powers” and “rogue nations.” If that goal isn’t challenged, it will be much harder to argue against massive investment in cost-intensive military technology.

https://ourfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/xMilitary-budget-pie-chart.jpg.pagespeed.ic.b0WrXKqAx2.webp

The U.S. military budget is larger than that of the next ten biggest spenders – put together. It is four times bigger than China’s and nearly ten times bigger than Russia’s. China, Mattis’ leading Great Power threat, spends 13 percent of the global total, while Russia spends 4.1 percent. If the United States cannot defend itself from these nations, even with these disparities in spending, the military has a serious management problem.

The disparity is even more striking when this country’s share of the world’s military spending is contrasted with its 4 percent share of the world’s population.

Here are a few other useful links from that sight, worth perusing...

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/09/pentagon-nuclear-doctrine-retrograde-and-reckless.html

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/01/15/us-assisted-evacuation-of-militants-from-syria-rerun-operation-odessa.html

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/01/18/us-syria-policy-one-step-closer-new-large-scale-war.html

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/01/26/america-national-defense-really-offense.html

Does this give you info, intel, perspective and... clarity -- as to where we are headed?

In reply to by roddy6667

SoDamnMad LiteBeeer Sun, 02/11/2018 - 03:00 Permalink

Russia and China get a lot more "bang for the buck" than we get from our MIC.  When you see some of our selection choices you have to wonder what Senators and Congressmen got paid "for their constituents. We got Boeing's aerial tanker somewhere after 2004. Anybody seen one?  What was the other choice? Before that choice was lobbied out and Boeing got the order.  The Raptor. What was the other choice?  And why was the Raptor tooling scraped so that more can't be ordered.  The F-35 Lightning II. God, how much for that piece of crap.  The list of things it can't do is too long.

Now the Army pistol replacement for the M-9 Beretta. Have you heard that if you drop it a certain way the gun goes off.  If someone shouts, "Drop that gun!" you might be dead anyway.

In reply to by LiteBeeer

TeethVillage88s SoDamnMad Sun, 02/11/2018 - 07:48 Permalink

Planned Inflation has had a number of huge impacts:

1) Weapons are now too expensive 2) Logistics for MIC are too expensive 3) Nuclear Power Plants are too Expensive 4) Military Parades in Washington DC are too Expensive since these vehicles damages roads, bridges and must be hauled cross country and deployed into a Staging Ground and maintained with trained technicians, mobile facilities and other equipment

4) Plus Fixed income citizens are damaged, old and infirm, retired are damaged 5) Youth and out of work are damaged by retraining and relocation costs in $10s of Thousands of Dollars 6) Trust Funds, Foundations, Universities, Insurance and Pension plans are damaged 7) World Reserve Currency is damaged to point of loss of confidence and finally collapse of country and world system

In reply to by SoDamnMad

pipes LiteBeeer Sun, 02/11/2018 - 10:01 Permalink

Reading this article, I was struck by the parallels from the past...as the press and other intellectuals discounted and diminished the dangers and threats in the world-at-large, and more specifically, from communism, Americans were lulled into an ever more clueless malaise. 

 

History repeats now, with snowflakes and American-guilt firsters professing that all would be well, if only America would stop being so ready to defend itself in a fight...that being capable to fight, somehow translates to being desirous of that fight.

 

Sure, the MIC could be considered to be in that camp, but that is NOT the same as our current leadership being there. While Teddy advised "Walk softly and carry a big stick.", those words were more geared toward a stalking hunt, than our current world.

 

I find it preferable today to "Walk tall, carry a big stick, and make sure everybody knows you'll use it if they cross you."

 

 

In reply to by LiteBeeer

nekten LiteBeeer Sun, 02/11/2018 - 13:16 Permalink

According to the Wikipedia 2017 Fact Sheet of Military Expenditure (taken from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute--SIPRI), the United States spends more on its military than the next nine countries combined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

It spends almost three times as much as China, and almost nine times as much as Russia.

Looking at the military spending of the top thirty countries, The U.S., with its likely allies of the UK, Canada, Germany, France, Japan, Israel, Australia, Netherlands and South Korea spend $892.8B on their militaries.

Of these "allies," only Israel spends more as a percentage of GDP (not surprisingly). Only France, Isreal, Australia, and South Korea meet the military spending 2.0% of GDP suggested by NATO. The U.S. spends 3.3% of the world's largest economy on the military.

If we supposed an opposing alliance of Russia, China and Iran; their combined military spending is $297.2B, just less than a third of Western spending.

Since WWII, the US taxpayer (and children, grandchildren, and great-grandchidren--thanks to the debt) has paid/will pay the biggest bills. It's time to reduce the burden we've borne.

There is no "Cold War" with Russia, or China. There are only proxy wars fought over oil and gas and their pipeline routes. The sooner we internalize this fact, the better.

In reply to by LiteBeeer

Eyes Opened Blue Steel 309 Sun, 02/11/2018 - 07:22 Permalink

I don't think thats what he was getting at...

US citizens, if they even disagree at ALL, sit there wringing their hands & crying "Woe is us" .... not gonna do it folks... u need a bit more oomph in your efforts to resist the tyrannical  .gov ... 

See (in another thread) how they pay themselves ?? Then redact FOIA salary lists ??

See how they treat the average citizen ??

Pissing in your faces & tellin u it's rainin....

 

Well.... do u think its gonna get better or worse... (rhetorical) & all the while, your ability to fight back in any meaningful way is being eroded every day...

Good Luck... you'll need it... 😔

In reply to by Blue Steel 309

WernerHeisenberg HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 Sun, 02/11/2018 - 00:35 Permalink

The USSA is the military arm of a worldwide Evil Empire actually.  The City of London is the financial arm.  And Israel operates the (one ring) secret service which secretly runs all of the other secret services.  The USSA has instigated or participated in 80% of the armed conflicts since WW2, in which 20 - 30 million people, mainly civilians, have been killed.  The USSA is much worse than a rogue state, it is a mindless beast under the command of Satanists.

In reply to by HRH of Aquitaine 2.0

Yen Cross Sat, 02/10/2018 - 23:29 Permalink

  PENTAGON WANTS LITTLE NUKES | Military.com 

  Before I go any further look at the date of this article.

    Humanity is stuck in an endless loop<>

 How many remakes of Hollywood movies does it take for the entertainment industry to die?

   The same is applicable to war.

 

   I'm not against fighting for good reasons, but this endless small scale conflict is idiotic and un-productive for anyone but the people that build the crap that kills people.

Element Yen Cross Sun, 02/11/2018 - 07:26 Permalink

They are just putting rebuilt old low-yield nukes on to new cruise misiles, and also existing refurbished ballistic missiles.

 

i.e. ALL of the nukes already exist.

 

They've had these all along.

 

This is signalling, and not much more.

 

Same thing happened with the B-61 (allegedly) tactical bomb.

 

It's nothing new, but it does sell a lot of pop-up adds.

 

How many adds have to be blogged before people stop getting hysterical about nukes any more?

 

(or ... How I Stopped Worrying And Learned To Love The Bomb ...)

In reply to by Yen Cross

Savvy Sat, 02/10/2018 - 23:31 Permalink

This is nothing short of Washington terrorizing the rest of the world into conforming to its geopolitical demands.

 

So what else is new?

Neochrome Sat, 02/10/2018 - 23:32 Permalink

US is a country rapist who is complaining that it's victims are not enjoying the rape, moreover, it demands that you greet it bent over and holding your ankles.

Nuke it from the orbit.

Brazen Heist MK ULTRA Alpha Sun, 02/11/2018 - 06:02 Permalink

It doesn't matter where he is from.

The US military is a fucking cancer. Haven't you been paying attention or you're too blinded by your exceptionalism? What ever country this cancer injects itself in, it soon metastasises and weakens the host, eating away its resources.

There is nothing patriotic about supporting a rogue empire that thrives off parasitic destruction and conflict peddling for a small group of criminal tyrants who trample all the values they pay lip service to.

In reply to by MK ULTRA Alpha