Pentagon's Farewell Tour

35
After a successful plot against Trump, the world plunged into a very dangerous situation. The Anglo-Zionist empire is rapidly declining, the neocons returned to power. Not only their words, but all past actions indicate that the only "solution" that they always accept is the unleashing of a war. The most important question is: where will the empire strike this time?

Ideal scenario



The empire's favorite occupation is to find a weak country, organize subversive activities against it, accuse it of violating human rights, impose economic actions, initiate riots and start intervention in defense of “democracy”, “freedom” and “self-determination”. But this is just a political recipe. Consider now what I call the American method of warfare.

During the Cold War, the acquisition of weapons, doctrines, planning and training - all were aimed at conducting military operations in a large conventional (conventional) war against the Soviet Union. We proceeded from a clear understanding that it would quickly develop into a nuclear one. Putting this aspect aside, I would describe the “ordinary dimension” of such a war as “heavy”. Based on the use of large formations (divisions, brigades), a large number tanks and artillery, such a war requires tremendous logistical efforts on both sides. The battlefield is huge, along the front it stretches for hundreds of kilometers. Defense at the tactical, operational and strategic levels is organized at two, and where possible at three levels. It is appropriate to recall that the second strategic echelon of the USSR in Europe was in Ukraine (which is why both sides of the civil war going on there have no shortage of weapons).

With the collapse of the USSR, the threat of such a war disappeared overnight. And then the operation in the Persian Gulf became a big “farewell party” for the United States and NATO, after which the era of “heavy wars” was a thing of the past. At that time, American strategists, mainly from the forces of special operations, developed a concept that I call "cheap war." It works like this. First, the CIA finances, equips and trains some local "rebels" (if necessary, they can be imported from abroad). Then, special US forces are deployed to the “rebels” and equipped with advanced air control equipment (to support helicopters and aircraft for striking at the enemy). Finally, place enough aviation inside the war zone and around it (on aircraft carriers, in neighboring countries or even on captured runways) for round-the-clock support of military operations. The goal is simple - to provide "friendly insurgents" superiority in firepower. Repeat this a sufficient number of times and you will get an easy, cheap and quick victory over a completely suppressed enemy. This basic approach can be strengthened by various “additives” - such as supplying “rebels” with advanced weapons (anti-tank missiles, night vision systems, communications equipment, etc.), as well as the importation of a certain amount of manpower from the United States or allied countries, including mercenaries, in order to “take care” of specially protected targets.

Pentagon's Farewell Tour


And while many among the American military are skeptical of such an approach, the dominance of people from the special forces in command and some individual successes in the “cheap war” made it extremely popular with politicians and propagandists. But the most attractive thing about this technique is that American losses were reduced while conducting such a war, and the possibility of a “plausible denial” of US involvement (in case the situation turned out to be a failure) increased. And, of course, the "ghosts" in the three-letter agency adore such wars. But in the early-developed euphoria of “American invincibility”, many lose sight of the fact that the “cheap war” is based on three very risky assumptions.

First and most important. The calculation is based on the fact that the enemy is deeply demoralized and considers the resistance pointless, since even if the already deployed US forces are limited in size and capacity, the Americans will no doubt, if necessary, transfer more, and so on until the resistance is Is broken.

The second. They proceed from the fact that the United States can provide superiority in the air over the entire space of hostilities. Americans, however, do not like to provide direct support from the air, if there is a possibility that they will be brought down by enemy aircraft or missiles.

Third. For this type of war, it is necessary to have local insurgents who can be used as infantry to actually occupy and control the territory.

Hezbollah, Lebanon, 2006

The United States did not officially participate in that war. But the Israeli armed forces are about the same. Hezbollah used excellent tactics, was well prepared for action on the ground, possessed a Russian anti-tank weaponsable to destroy even the most advanced Israeli tanks. The main result of that war was that for the first time in the Middle East, the very small and relatively weak forces of the Arabs showed no fear of the supposedly invincible Tsakhal.

The “holy victory” won by the “Party of Allah” in 2006 is now repeated in Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq and everywhere else. Fear of the “sole superpower” is no longer there, it was replaced by a fervent desire to continue the endless list of defeats of the Anglo-Zionists and their occupying forces. In the Arab world, heads of state are afraid of Americans, but not peoples.

Hezbollah’s “discovery” —the strategy of victory in confronting a superior opponent — is not to defend against its attacks, but to not provide it with “convenient” goals. Simply put, camouflage tent is better than a bunker, or, if you like, "if you can be found, then you can be killed." Or more academic: "Do not compete in superiority with the enemy - make it superior to his superiority."

The main weapon of the Anglo-Zionists is not the nuclear bomb and not the aircraft carrier, but the propaganda machine, which for decades persuaded people all over the world that the US is invincible, that their weapons are better, like soldiers, tactics, etc. In fact, it turns out that this is a complete bullshit - in fact, the US military does not stand close to their counterparts in the world of propaganda When was the last time the US military defeated an enemy capable of meaningful resistance? In the Pacific in World War II?

Russian Armed Forces, Syria, 2015

The Russians sent very small forces and means to Syria, but they did not just defeat the “Islamic State” (banned in the Russian Federation), but fundamentally changed the nature of the political context of the war. Simply put, their presence did not only significantly complicate the American invasion, they did not allow the United States to unleash its favorite “cheap war” against the Syrians.

The problem for Americans is in their risk matrix. If the Air Force and the US Navy decided to take control of Syrian airspace, it could, by virtue of its numerical superiority. But the risk matrix includes not only the Russian military capabilities, but also the political consequences of establishing a no-fly zone over Syria. It would not just lead to further escalation of the already completely illegal American intervention. It would be necessary to consistently suppress Syrian (and, possibly, Russian) air defense weapons. And this is what the White House - at the moment - would not want to do. Especially when it is completely unclear what can be achieved by such a risky operation. As a result, the Americans, like the Israelis, strike here and there, but in reality their actions are essentially meaningless.

Moreover. The Russians are now playing in the American manner and supplying the Syrians with advanced airspace controls, especially in key areas. Artillery spotters and strike systems are deployed, including the MLRS and heavy howitzers, which provide fire superiority to government forces. Paradoxically, but now it is the Russians who are waging a “cheap war”, preventing the Americans and their allies from doing the same.

Who is next? Venezuela?

The United States has always had problems with their local "allies" (i.e. puppets). Some were quite good (South Koreans), others worse (Contras in Nicaragua), but on the whole, every use of local people carries an inevitable risk - they often have their own interests distinct from American ones. And the "allies" very quickly realize that if they depend on the Americans, then they depend on them. Add to this the fact that Americans are not famous for their knowledge of other cultures (just look at how few foreign languages ​​are among them), and you will understand why US intelligence will find out about the problem too late to get the situation right. No amount of new-fashioned technological things will replace strong professional intelligence. The reality is that Americans, as a rule, have no clue about the environment in which they conduct their operations. The failure of the United States in Syria (in Libya, in Ukraine) is a great illustration of this.

Knowing some doctrinal and operational weaknesses of the American “cheap war”, we will try to make a list of potential target countries. If my estimates are correct, then the only candidate is Venezuela. However, to be successful, American intervention requires a realistic strategy (the US armed forces are already overly thinly spread over the surface of the planet, and the last thing the empire needs is to get bogged down in another senseless, useless and losing war a la Afghanistan) . I put the Venezuelan opposition an uncertain “yes” for its ability to be “boots on the ground,” especially if there is support from Colombia. But the pro-American locals in Venezuela do not even come close to the regular armed forces (which, I believe, will oppose the US intervention). And there are also various left-wing guerrilla groups that tolerated the rule of Chavez and Maduro, but kept their weapons with them "just in case." Moreover, there is a problem of terrain. It would be easy - under an optimistic scenario - to take Caracas. But to conduct operations throughout the country is both difficult and dangerous. After all, there is the problem of retaining power. Americans love quick victories, and Latin American partisans have argued many times that they can fight for decades. For all these reasons, although I think the United States is able to invade Venezuela and make a mess there, I still don’t see how they can put the new regime in power and take control of the whole country.

What is supported by the dollar?

For the US, the dilemma is simple - the cold war is long over. Post-cold war is also over. And it is abundantly clear that the US military needs complete reform, which is nonetheless impossible for political reasons. The current US military is a bizarre result of the Cold War, many years of waging “cheap wars” and failed interventions. It will take decades for the Americans to reform, if they go for it. There will be false starts and mistakes. In the meantime, it will take years for the United States only to make at least a simple decision to embark on reforms. Now only kindergarten propaganda is heard: “We are number one, nobody is ahead of us!”. I do not exclude that a truly catastrophic embarrassment will be needed in order for the US military establishment to look into the eyes of reality and begin to act. Until this happens, the US forces will decline to impose their dominance on those countries that refuse to surrender under their threats and sanctions.

So, is Venezuela next? I hope no. And in fact, I think not. But if yes, then it will be a hell of a mess with huge destruction and losses with very small acquisitions. Anglo-Zionists have been hitting for decades, going beyond their real capabilities. And the world is becoming aware of this. Defeating Iran or the DPRK is clearly beyond the real military capabilities of the United States. Attacking Russia or China is tantamount to suicide.

However, Ukraine remains. I think that the United States can transfer some lethal weapons to the Kiev junta or organize training camps in Western Ukraine. But that's all. None of this will lead to real change (except that it will anger the Russians). The era of the “cheap wars” is over, and the world is different. As a result, the era of major American military interventions also comes to an end. If necessary, Washington, of course, will be able to find some country the size of Grenada or Panama, and with triumph to beat it.

This new reality immediately raises the question of how and how the US dollar will be reinforced, because until now only the US military power really supported it.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    18 August 2017 15: 34
    The Anglo-Zionist empire accelerates into decline, returned to power neocons.
    probably they print bitcoins? laughing
    1. +13
      18 August 2017 16: 21
      Well, where does the bitcoins regarding the text of the article ?! request Or is it your specific humor ?!
      1. +2
        18 August 2017 16: 24
        and you have no humor about Anglo-Zionism?
        and to the world backstage?
        1. +19
          18 August 2017 16: 34
          Well, if it’s funny to you that these villains have done in Vietnam, Korea, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Georgia, Ukraine then ... there are no words. request Or are these aliens staged ?! According to my brother, who was in the army, he does not laugh in the circus ...! Apparently, you did not serve in the army and did not see the war in your eyes, otherwise you would not write such nonsense.
          1. +2
            18 August 2017 16: 46
            make a substitution of concepts
            replacing the world Zionist backstage with innocent victims, this is an ugly polemic device
            with all due respect
            1. +15
              18 August 2017 16: 48
              You yourself understood the meaning of what was written ?! I personally did not understand what kind of victims and what I replaced ?!
              1. GAF
                +2
                18 August 2017 19: 06
                A friend had a Freud clause. It happens to everyone. Even experienced aces, like Kedmi, recently had an accident in Soloviev’s transmission
              2. 0
                21 August 2017 09: 53
                Quote: Diana Ilyina
                personally, I didn’t understand what victims and what I replaced
                let me explain hi
                my sarcasm was directed at the supporters of the “worldwide Jewish conspiracy”, amateurs to prove that the Rothschilds own billions of trillions, etc ... You angrily condemn war crimes in Yugoslavia, etc., which outrage me as much as you do.
                The thesis about the "Jewish conspiracy" is needed to distract people from real problems.
          2. 0
            18 August 2017 21: 57
            Quote: Diana Ilyina
            According to my brother, who was in the army, he does not laugh in the circus ...!

            Apparently your brother said "who was in the army is not funny to the circus."
            1. 0
              21 August 2017 09: 54
              Quote: Setrac
              "who was in the army is not funny to the circus"

              it should be noted that the meaning of this saying is in desperate contradiction with the rest written in the post ... well, with whom it does not happen ..
            2. 0
              21 August 2017 19: 30
              Quote: Setrac
              he who was in the army does not laugh at the circus.

              the point is in the rhythm of the phrase, in fact - whoever served in the army does not laugh in the circus
        2. +1
          18 August 2017 21: 56
          Quote: A1845
          and you have no humor about Anglo-Zionism?
          and to the world backstage?

          Some things exist regardless of your faith. Do you believe in the existence of a Russian government or a US government? To Catholics and Protestants, to stars and planets ....
          1. 0
            21 August 2017 09: 59
            Quote: Setrac
            Some things exist regardless of your faith.

            and still there are banal prejudices, agree?
            once the witches were to blame for the plague, they were burned at the stake and believed in their cause
            there were still pogroms, and people believed that it was for a better life
            and the truth was somewhere nearby ..
  2. +4
    18 August 2017 16: 07
    I wrote in the comments that the Pentagon could not stand the new victorious war. Of course, they opposed me that the USA is stronger than ever. The USSR was also stronger than ever, but nothing saved it from collapse.
  3. +5
    18 August 2017 16: 44
    10 out of 10 world conspiracy theories.
    Go to ren TV and open your show there.
    1. +1
      18 August 2017 18: 11
      Quote: Vision
      10 out of 10 world conspiracy theories.
      Go to ren TV and open your show there.


      "Ren TV" - is it like a mental hospital? sorry, not familiar with the current Russian slang ...
      1. +2
        19 August 2017 22: 11
        Well something like that. Only one where patients have taken power and practice on doctors.
    2. +3
      18 August 2017 21: 58
      Quote: Vision
      10 out of 10 world conspiracy theories.
      Go to ren TV and open your show there.

      However, state conspiracies do exist, what prevents world conspiracies from being?
      1. 0
        21 August 2017 10: 00
        Quote: Setrac
        However, state conspiracies do exist, what prevents world conspiracies from being?
        also involving alien mind
        also crown for rent
        1. 0
          21 August 2017 14: 59
          Quote: A1845
          also involving alien mind

          Here you know better.
  4. +2
    18 August 2017 17: 49
    how few among them speak foreign languages
    In fact, quite a lot of Americans know a foreign language, do not believe Zadornov.
    1. +5
      18 August 2017 18: 45
      We read articles by American analysts. Knowledge of dozens of languages ​​will not help these people. Zadornov is absolutely right.
      1. +4
        18 August 2017 19: 43
        The average "stupid" can afford a standard of living no worse than that of Zadornov. Which to be treated by the way ran west as hot. And he prefers to live with the spratofascists in Jurmala. Although this shows that he himself is certainly not stupid laughing
      2. 0
        18 August 2017 19: 56
        Quote: article
        Hezbollah used excellent tactics, was well prepared for operations on the ground, had Russian anti-tank weapons capable of destroying even the most advanced Israeli tanks. The main outcome of that war was that for the first time in the Middle East, the very small and relatively weak forces of the Arabs showed no fear of the supposedly invincible Tsahal.

        Lebanon War: 2006
  5. +3
    18 August 2017 20: 00
    Quote: article
    Anglo-Zionist Empire Accelerates to Decline

    Honestly, this "gang" has already tortured the whole world (especially after the collapse of the USSR and the socialist system) and if it sinks into oblivion, I think no one will regret it.
  6. +4
    18 August 2017 21: 04
    "Anglo-Zionists" is a contrived concept. World government is not pro-Jewish power. Anti-Semites make such a mistake in their assessments, suffering from anti-Semitism. This force without any problems doomed millions of Jews to be destroyed by Hitler, helping him with money and oil during WWII. This power uses the Jewish theme - yes. But the Jews themselves are for her the same consumables as the Anglo-Saxons. This is a consumable that is for them only a means, not a sacred goal. Without a doubt, they will throw the Anglo-Saxons and Jews into the furnace of slaughter, if it meets their plans for achieving complete world domination.

    It is more appropriate to call this supranational power, the shadow world government - Satanists.

    And among the Jews and among the Anglo-Saxons there are loving people, humanity.

    If you confuse all Jews with Satanists, you are making a big mistake. Jesus is also a Jew ...
    1. +2
      18 August 2017 21: 51
      Quote: askme
      "Anglo-Zionists" is a contrived concept. World government is not pro-Jewish power. Anti-Semites make such a mistake in their assessments, suffering from anti-Semitism

      Are you sure or just trying to "smear" them?
      And your references to the Great Patriotic War of the Nazis and the affected Jews, as it were, do not fit, for example, with the current position of Israel’s "main mouthpiece of Jews" about that time:
      Israel’s position on Sobibor borders on betrayal, Zakharova said
      The position of Israel, which did not object to Poland’s refusal to allow Russia to participate in the project to renew the memorial in the former Sobibor concentration camp, borders on historical betrayal. This opinion was expressed by the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maria Zakharova.

      "I categorically refuse to understand the position of Israel. For me, I now say in my personal capacity as a person the position of this state on this issue is absolutely unacceptable, and, I believe, it borders on betrayal, on historical betrayal."
      On October 14, 1943, the only successful of the major uprisings in the Nazi death camps, led by Soviet officer Alexander Pechersky, took place in the Sobibor concentration camp.

      https://ria.ru/politics/20170818/1500661787.html

      Quote: askme
      Jesus is also a Jew ...

      A fairy tale invented by Jews - Jesus is the material embodiment of GOD on Earth (or the son of GOD according to another version) and GOD of nationality does not have any reason that he was born a Jew in all religious books it speaks of a Jew, that is, a resident in those days of Rome Judean provinces where not only Jews lived
    2. 0
      18 August 2017 22: 01
      Quote: askme
      This force without any problems doomed millions of Jews to be destroyed by Hitler, helping him with money and oil during WWII.

      This is because not all Jews are equal within their own people and they can sacrifice a majority without any regret.
      Quote: askme
      Jesus is also a Jew ...

      Yes, do not care about who Jesus is, let the Jews survive.
    3. 0
      19 August 2017 14: 38
      Quote: askme
      It is more appropriate to call this supranational power, the shadow world government - Satanists.

      There are no complaints against people, neither against Jews nor against mattresses, Claims against the System.
    4. 0
      20 August 2017 11: 54
      The same force, incidentally, sponsored the Union of Michael the Archangel, and those pogroms forced Jewish youth to join the ranks of revolutionaries.
    5. 0
      20 August 2017 13: 45
      There are Zionists, there are Jews. One is a subset of the other. It is obvious.
  7. +1
    18 August 2017 22: 35
    Quote: quilted jacket
    Are you sure about this?
    Yes. I am sure. At the level of world government there is no place for national affection. It is international in composition. The concept of so-called “meritocracy” can most closely describe the reality of world government. In addition, Satanists are a sect. Satan has no nationality, do not think that Putin recently spoke about horns and hooves for the sake of a red word ...

    And only naive people can believe that the appearance on the ORT recently of a mini-series about secret societies, their origin and evolution, as well as a documentary about the Rothschild family is an “accident." There is no chance in this ...

    The Jews themselves are used, as are the Anglo-Saxons. They are equally "chosen." "Favorites" log in the firebox of the slaughterhouse .....
  8. +2
    19 August 2017 02: 24
    America can only incite and give weapons, but tries not to fight itself, the American company of the war failed miserably in Vietnam, they were in difficulty in Syria, as well as in the Balkans, they bombed civilians, they said that they didn’t receive exact data from space intelligence , there’s nothing to do with reconnaissance from outer space and the author is right that the CIA and Pentagon’s machine is all at home among the people of those countries where they want to establish their regime. But then there was a parade in St. Petersburg for the day of naval Russia and the world of the planet Earth saw the power of the naval forces of Russia, and there was also an exhibition of the Air Force of Russia. But the most important meeting of the heads of state is 20, where President V.V. Putin gave the exact course of the political development of Russia and the defense of the country of Russia. America is a lying country, it also visited the Moon as it conducts its policy only to intimidate and trade sanctions, but you can’t drive Russia away from them, Russia survived those 90 years and does not live the politics when some leaders of Russia of that time told the people of Russia, the West to us will help. My generation litter even the times of Khrushchov as the ships cut, and Borya and Misha also managed to with the Russian nuclear shield, well, they gave one Nobilivka and another monument. Russia began to rise from its knees before the West only under V.V. Putin, and now Russia is a proud power. Yes, many politicians say to Putin that the hens of the economy are not the same, but forgive me, gentlemen of politics, that it’s better to lie on your feet like a rag in front of the West so that we wipe our feet off or be like raw materials and cheap labor, this is what Putin did not allow master of the state, first you need to make Russia a powerful power and then give the benefit to the people. I’ll give an example, take two tablespoons in one hand and immediately eat the porridge; it’s impossible to go to the state administration, at the beginning the defense will come and politics will come, and then raise the economy of the states.
    Corsair grandfather Vovka.
  9. 0
    19 August 2017 10: 21


    How is it in the movie "Brother"? "Soon your America kirdyk.
  10. +1
    20 August 2017 17: 13
    The shell-shocked anti-Semites are not interesting not because they are what they are, but because their standard thinking does not allow them to go beyond the common knowledge. Any of their views is just a retelling of what has been said many times, and at first it seemed strange to me that an “opinion” of this kind could interest someone other than the newspaper “Tomorrow” or “Thirty-third of Rome.” But, as they say in Ukraine, there is a buyer for every product, and it’s sincerely sorry that you were among them. However, the "freedom of speech" sometimes fails even the "Echo of Moscow". I will not retell all the mistakes of this strange "opinion." I will be late only in the war of 2006. According to the author, Israel lost this war to Hezbollah. By the way, even the Israeli press is of the same opinion, because its principle is that it is better to go too far in the direction most convenient for yourself: beat your own people so that strangers are afraid. I’ll note one simple result of this war: for more than 10 years, Hezbollah has been sitting silently like a mouse, and her bearded leader has not climbed out of his scorion for the same amount of time, although he is brandishing his fists. I’ll say more when the events in Syria began, Israel could end this “hiza” with one blow, but I am a purely civilian person, and my opinion is not of interest to the General Staff. I hope that at least you, who give room for any frills, will not make exceptions for me.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"