Slouching Towards Bethlehem – 3

Mark Steyn:

The butchier-than-thou vibe of the last GOP debate reached its apogee when Chris Christie proclaimed his no-fly zone over Syria and then threatened to shoot Russian planes out of the sky. Rand Paul was impressed. “If you want World War Three,” he said, “there’s your candidate.”

Actually, on the fifth anniversary of the Arab “Spring”, I get the feeling World War Three is coming with or without Chris Christie – for the same reasons that World Wars One and Two came: the order enforcers can no longer enforce order, and the provocateurs know it, and in that kind of environment stray peripheral threads can unravel the entire geopolitical quilt.

I too get the feeling that WW3 is coming. Everything just seems to be getting uglier and uglier.

Since mid-2014 the Pentagon has run all manner of war games – as many as 16 times, under different scenarios – pitting NATO against Russia. All scenarios were favorable to NATO. All simulations yielded the same victor: Russia.

Why are they running so many war games? Legendary US Colonel Douglas Macgregor:

In early September he circulated a PowerPoint presentation showing that in a head-to-head confrontation pitting the equivalent of a U.S. armored division against a likely Russian adversary, the U.S. division would be defeated.

“Defeated isn’t the right word,” Macgregor told me last week. “The right word is annihilated.” The 21-slide presentation features four battle scenarios, all of them against a Russian adversary in the Baltics — what one currently serving war planner on the Joint Chiefs staff calls “the most likely warfighting scenario we will face outside of the Middle East.

Russia Insider:

Russia is a defensive empire, that is, most wars or series of wars were not started by Russians but by enemies attacking or massing on Russia’s borders. After 800 years of almost non-stop aggression by Europeans, Russia does not tolerate any enemy massing on her borders in what appears as a preparation for invasion or the creation of large scales basing areas as would be a US neo-con dominated Ukraine.This is also coupled with the Russian approach of not abandoning Russians (ethnic or cultural) and allies, as opposed to Anglo society where back stabbing allies when the opportunity to earn exists, is a prized skill.

As such, this is a spiral approach. Any escalation by the foreigners will lead to a direct escalation by Russia and not deescalation. Balance of power does not work when Russia feels her survival threatened. Enough of an enemy escalation in the hope of forcing Russia to back off will generate an exact opposite effect in generating a first strike and total war, as Russia feels her life and existence is threatened by the enemy.

And with the EU empire showing ever-increasing signs of disintegration, what better way to unite Europe than a war against some external enemy? These people are probably mad enough to do that. As  I wrote nearly 2 years ago:

And in a time when nationalism is on the rise throughout Europe, and the European economy is sliding into depression, what better way to rekindle the faltering dream of European unity than to discover an ‘enemy at the gates’, and use that threat to push hard for ‘even closer union’ against ‘our common enemy’?

Janet Daley:

As the EU is presently conceived, it represents not so much a permanent monument to post-war reconciliation as a continuation of the mentality of the Cold War. The great danger, we are told, in abandoning our membership is that we would be isolated – adrift in a hostile world without the collective strength of our European partners. This is the language of competing power blocs to which the second half of the last century had become accustomed. The assumption was that the world would remain divided into megalithic rival camps for military protection and economic advantage.

About the only US presidential candidate (apart from Rand Paul) who isn’t beating the war drum is, oddly enough, Donald Trump. Which may be one of the reasons why Vladimir Putin singled him out for praise a few days ago. Russia Insider again:

Let’s also address the fact that maybe Putin said something flattering about Trump because Trump is the only presidential candidate (and this includes Democrats Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders) who hasn’t been threatening his country. Trump, along with maybe Rand Paul, doesn’t support worsening relations with Russia.

It’s pretty apparent from the Republican debates that pretty much all the candidates from the clown car that is the GOP have completely jumped the rails. Same goes for the Dems. Hillary Clinton is a warmonger and Bernie Sanders has nothing new to offer on the foreign policy front. When it comes to our relations with Russia, Trump may be our only sane option.

Could The Donald be the man to avert WW3?

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Slouching Towards Bethlehem – 3

  1. Roobeedoo2 says:

    So for ordinary Americans (young and old) who don’t want WW3, the option is to vote for Rand or Trump. Could both be a…

    Well, US government did lie about…

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/TONKIN.html

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/lieofthecentury.php#axzz3uony4vmq

    Trump got booed the other night when he said he’d shut down parts of the internet. He should not be elected president. In fact he sounded like someone who doesn’t realise quite how important the internet has become to some people. Especially the young…

    Image courtesy of a senior citizen, WHO sent it to me as a gift ;)

  2. smokingscot says:

    The EU already has a naval force, codenamed EUNAVOR MED that patrols the Med seeking migrants in knackered boats or dingies.

    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/operation-sophia-what-new-eu-naval-mission-targeting-mediterranean-people-smugglers-1523125

    Deal’s this, you get a couple of miles off the the Libyan coast then send an SMS to say you’re sinking and hey presto an EU naval vessel comes along, picks you up and disembarks you in mainland Italy, or France.

    And they have another one seeking pirates off the coast of Somalia that’s been in operation since 2008 and has a mandate that expires at the end of this year.

    http://eunavfor.eu/mission/

    So stacks of naval vessels from various EU countries with their running costs picked up by the EU. It’s good for the naval powers as it helps pay bills and gives lots of hands on experience.

    Now they’ve come up with the terribly cunning plan to have a common external border force. Frontex has a new mission that includes sending trained border personnel into various hotspots and more importantly they send in Coast Guard vessels, even without the host nations’ approval. (So pretty much a case of saying the Greeks and Bulgarians are not doing it right).

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20151210IPR06845/Broad-backing-for-EU-external-border-force-plan

    There’s more on the ground stuff going on in Ukraine, though that’s bilateral for the most part (UK has a couple of dozen trainers there – as do several other EU countries).

    Nato has recently puffed their chest because they got Montenegro to apply to join. That’s been a creeping wildfire with the list of ex-Eastern-Block-Nations growing every year, much to the ire of Russia (who happened to be righteously furious at little Montenegro).

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

    There’s a certain logic behind most of these developments, and maybe it is the most efficient way to police EU borders. But having set up a command structure I see there’s already mission creep, so yes I can see a time when an EU army will evolve.

    But the Big Cheese who ran scenario’s showing NATO will get creamed should it ever go head to head with Russia probably didn’t factor in the effects of the Web, Social Media, satellite phones and such. Had he done so he’d have seen that whatever time scale he felt it might take for the Russians and their allies to whoop them would be reduced to hours, not days.

    Simply because everything I’ve listed is politics. There’s little knowledge and naff all public support for what they’ve done in our name.

    (Something Mr. Abdel Fattah Saeed Hussein Khalil el-Sisi, the boss man in Egypt, found when he sent planes to bomb Libya. That’s why he did that only once and even then had to make sure the aircraft only had the fuel to fly there and back. People on the ground in Egypt made darned fine certain the folk in Libya knew the target and the expected arrival time – and no Egyptian aircraft made it to the EU to claim asylum).

  3. Frank Davis says:

    Trump responds to Putin’s praise.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s