Military Review

Seven bumps in the back of the world

21



If the beginning of 2017 was a time of great hope after the historic defeat of Hillary Clinton, then the last months of the year turned out to be grim, almost threatening. Swamp easily, quickly and completely swallowed Trump, the Anglo-Zionist empire does not just retreat after a humiliating defeat in Syria, but the neocons produce endless threats against the entire planet.

The US administration presented the National Security Strategy, which clearly demonstrated that the empire is in a state of "total paranoia." Maybe not everything is as bad as if Hillary had been elected, but badly enough to ask about the inevitability of a big war in the new year.

Neocons, judging by their statements, hold on sight the following countries:

1. Afghanistan (massive military buildup promised).

2. Syria (threats of attack by the US - Israel - Saudi Arabia, there are attacks on the forces of Iran and Hezbollah in the SAR).

3. Russia (the probability of disconnection from the SWIFT system and the expropriation of Russian assets in the United States, attacks on Russian forces in the SAR).

4. Iran (withdrawal from a nuclear deal, attacks on Iranian forces in the SAR).

5. Donbass (support for full-scale attacks ukronatsistov on New Russia).

6. North Korea (direct and open military aggression, air and sea blockade).

7. Venezuela (military intervention "in defense of democracy, human rights, freedom and civilization").

Actually, there are more target countries, but these are the main candidates for American aggression.

Take Syria, for example. All decision makers in the United States are fully aware of the following facts:

1.IG / an-Nusra (banned in the Russian Federation. - S.D.), etc. are their creatures, and they did everything to save these terrorists.

2. The joint efforts of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah IG / "en-Nusra", etc., were defeated, despite the Anglo-Zionist support.

3. Anglo-Zionist troops are in Syria completely illegal.

However, none of this prevents us from asserting that it is the United States, not Russia, who defeated IG / "al-Nusra", etc. The entire planet knows perfectly well what really happened in Syria, but Uncle Sam issues a decree that black - it is white, the water is dry, and the truth is a lie. But the most amazing thing is that they know that everyone knows this, and they don’t care. Why? Yes, because they deeply believe in four fundamental things:

Seven bumps in the back of the world1. We can buy anyone.

2. Who we can not buy, we will intimidate.

3. Whom we can not intimidate, we will kill.

4. Nothing will happen to us; we live in complete impunity - no matter what happens.

In the American national security establishment, the type of personality burdened with knowledge once completely disappeared. Now another type has completely disappeared - a person with honor / courage / honesty. An example is Tillerson.

It is impossible to prove that Tillerson is an idiot. He argued many times that he was smart and quite talented. Still, he is the doormat of Nicky Haley. She is a real imbecile! However, Tillerson does not even have the primordia of honor / courage / honesty to demand the immediate dismissal of this finished imbecile or, if this does not happen, to leave and really slam the door. But no, he sits and takes humiliation for humiliation. Oh yes, he will retire soon! But when it comes, its value will be zero.

The same with the US military. None of the officers found the honor / courage / honesty to quit in protest at the fact that the US is deep in bed with those who are responsible, at least according to the official conspiracy theory for what happened on September 11. No, the US special operations forces are working day after day with Al Qaeda (banned in the Russian Federation - S. D.) and similar groups. And none of these "patriots" gained the honor / courage / honesty to speak publicly on this topic.

Bearing imbeciles give orders, and deprived cowards mindlessly execute them. Such is the system with which we are dealing. Trump would tweet: "This is not good."

Returning to the seven countries listed above, I will explain how the neocons look at them (see table). A couple of explanations.



Afghanistan: the least controversial. There will be an increase in the number of American troops, the result - a greater number of corpses. It will not lead to anything good, will cost a lot of money, but nobody cares.

Syria: very tempting, but there are great risks that the US Armed Forces will face the forces of Iran and Hezbollah, who have been dreaming of this day for decades and are using the capture or destruction of the American military for political purposes. To be honest, engaging the Iranians or Hezbollah is a scary prospect. Ask the Israelites.

Russia is an option for 1: there are rumors that the United States may disconnect Russia from SWIFT or steal (it is politely called “freeze”) Russian assets and money in the United States. Russians make threatening statements, but very vague. This suggests that Russia may not have a good response. Of course, Putin is a master of strategies, and the guys around him are very smart. Perhaps they have some tricks up their sleeve that I might not know about. But I have a strong suspicion that, unlike me, the US intelligence community is probably well aware of what this may be. I am not an economist, so I regard the risks in this column as “unknown”.

Russia is a variant of 2: the reaction of Russia to the destruction of Turkey by Su-24 in 2015 could well form a belief among American politicians and military leaders that they can do the same and get away with it. Truth be told, they may be right. But they can also be wrong. Now Russia has deployed intimidating air defense systems in Syria that pose a serious threat to American forces. Moreover, if the Russian plane is under fire, and the Russians respond by launching ground-to-air missiles, what will the United States do? Hit the C-400 battery? In aerial collision, the United States will also be in a difficult situation. The F-22 is an excellent aircraft for air superiority. But he has a huge drawback - he was created to defeat the enemy from long positions, firing first before finding him (I mention only F-22, because this is the only American aircraft that can challenge the Su-30CM / Su-35). But if the rules of participation in the conflict state that before firing a Russian plane, the F-22 must issue a clear warning, or if the collision occurs at medium or short distances, the F-22 becomes very vulnerable, especially against Su-30CM / Su-35 . Another big weakness of the F-22 is that, unlike the Su-30CM / Su-35, it does not have a real EW kit (the INEWS system does not count). Neocons are unlikely to be particularly impressed by the risks that Russian forces in Syria represent, and most likely they will want to click the Russians on the nose, thinking that they will swallow. American warlords on earth may have a different opinion, but this does not matter. In this box, I mark risk as “medium”, even if it could potentially lead to a catastrophic thermonuclear war — because I don’t think that the neocons believe that the Russians will escalate (in the end who will go to unleash World War III because it is true ?!). Just think about it: if you were the commander of the Russian grouping in Syria, what would you do if the USA shot down one of your planes (remember that you are a responsible and smart commander, and not a flag-waving maniac)?

In any case, the full-scale demonization of Russia will not stop, so that relations between the two countries will only worsen.

Iran: Trump announced that he wants to withdraw from the nuclear agreement. The technical and legal impossibility of this is not an argument. The United States has long ceased to pretend that they are respecting any right, including international. And since Trump for Israel is Shabbat-goy *, I think it can be assumed that this will happen.

Donbass: Do ukronatsista attack? So they have been attacking for months! They not only did not stop the shelling of Donbass, but also adopted (pseudo) frog jumping strategy, which consisted of locating the armed forces in the neutral zone, seizing defenseless settlements and proclaiming a major victory over Russia. They also retooled, reorganized and regrouped. As a result, ukronatsistov advantage over Novorossia at least 3: 1. But we will look at it through the eyes of the neocons.

The way I see it, in all three cases, the Anglo-Zionists prevail, although option number 2 is the worst, and number 3 is the best. In truth, the neocons do little to lose as a result of the ukronacist attack on Novorossia. You can not say about the Ukrainian people, of course. Let's hope that the ukronatsisty will take up the clarification of the relationship between themselves and that their previous humiliating defeat will keep them from wanting to repeat it. But the attack on the Donbass is very likely.

DPRK: this is a big unknown. It is known about some opponents that they, if necessary, fight to the last person (Iranians, Russians, Hezbollah). But authoritarian regimes have a rather low tensile strength - unless, of course, they manage to convince their own people that they are fighting not for a specific political regime, but for their country. I think no one knows for sure what North Korea will do if it is attacked. But I do not see signs that would suggest that the North Koreans will not resist. One intelligence officer in the region recently wrote to me: “The empty threats to the Trump administration are pitiful. If it was a movie, it would be funny (although, while in *******, I don't want to laugh). It is sad that the central character fits the North Korean propaganda in the best way possible - in every detail even physically it corresponds to their caricature of the evil imperialist arch-capitalist Yankee businessman. It’s like that Hitler was resurrected and began to openly threaten States with destruction (having the opportunity). ”

If this specialist is right, and I have no reason not to believe him, it is reasonable to assume that the possible dislike of the people of North Korea for their ruling elites is much less than their hatred for the United States.

But what my source wrote about the war on the Korean Peninsula.

“Japan will be the main target for several reasons. The main thing is that there are a lot of American bases there, and they will be used to transport additional US troops for combat operations. Another reason is that in North Korea (and in South too) they strongly hate Japan. Even if the war is limited to the peninsula (which will not happen), the global economy will be hit hard, because a huge flow of goods passes through South Korea. To the west of Seoul is “Inchon” - the largest airport in the region, and Busan is among the five busiest ports in the world, surpassing the Japanese. All goods sent from China to the States go through the Sea of ​​Japan. In the event of war, they will have to be redirected. All components for electronic devices prior to their assembly in China are actually manufactured in South Korea. This will become a problem. I have always been surprised at how contemptuous they refer to the “artillery of the Second World War” (which is in service with the DPRK. - SD). These guns killed more people than any other systems. As if there is any difference which system will kill you. ”

If you attack a small and defenseless country, you, in general, can ignore the mistakes. But when you are dealing with a country like the DPRK, neither a reasonable politician nor the commander has the right to take a risk and miscalculate. But delusional imbeciles giving orders, and dishonest cowards, who execute these orders, will they show caution when faced with such a threat ?! Honestly, I do not think. Remember the "easy walk to Iraq"? This term, created by one of my teachers, Kenneth Adelman **, is an amazing illustration of the neocon mindset: pure ideology and cautious remarks. We all know what this “easy walk” cost for Iraqi and American people: significantly more than a million dead (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-deaths-survey/iraq-conflict-has- .. .) for the first and much more than five trillion dollars (http://thesaker.is/the-costs-of-war/) - for the second. Wow, "easy walk" ... The truth is that at the moment no one knows what the outcome of the American attack on North Korea will be.

Venezuela: no matter how hated the American elites are, this country is not an easy target. Excellent target for subversion, but not suitable for invasion. Violence inside Venezuela directly corresponds to American interests, but direct military intervention is most likely not. My contacts tell me that the Venezuelan armed forces are vicious and vicious (and rather corrupt), but these same people argue that the popular will to resist “these Yankees” is so strong that any military intervention will immediately launch a terrible guerrilla war (not to mention consequences for the rest of Latin America). The truth is that the United States may have the strength and resources for military intervention in Venezuela, but they have better options.

To summarize The odds are high that in 2018, the United States:
will escalate the war to Afghanistan;
give up the nuclear agreement with Iran;
support ukronatsistov in their attack on New Russia.

It is very likely that the United States:
shot down a Russian plane in the sky over Syria.

It is unlikely that the United States:
invaded Syria;
invaded Venezuela.

I can not estimate the probability that the United States:

disconnect Russia from SWIFT or freeze Russian assets;
will attack the DPRK.

All my education has always been based on an important central assumption — the adversary is rational. This was basically true during the Cold War. Today I am inclined to believe that psychologists may be better suited by military analysts to predict the actions of the rulers of the Anglo-Zionist empire. Moreover, история teaches that the combination of delusional imbeciles and dishonest cowards is exactly what usually destroys empires. We have clearly seen a good example of this in the collapse of the Soviet empire.

Since Trump was a fiasco, I personally gave up the hope of ever seeing an American president able to make a positive contribution for the good of the people of the United States or the rest of the planet. This burden is now clearly on the shoulders of Russia and China: they must do everything possible to prevent the United States from unleashing even more catastrophic and deeply immoral wars. This is a very difficult task, and to be honest, I'm not sure that they can do it. I hope. This is the best I can say.
Author:
Originator:
https://vpk-news.ru/articles/40790
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Lexus
    Lexus 21 January 2018 06: 23 New
    0
    Seven bumps in the back of the world

    And everywhere FSA is involved. Woody Tramp
  2. Krasnodar
    Krasnodar 21 January 2018 06: 37 New
    0
    1. Anglo-Zionist troops in Syria - what kind of beast? )))
    2. What is the danger to the United States in the war against Hezbollah and Iran? In 2006, under stupid leadership, the Israelis managed to kill many times more Hezbollons in a partisan war on foreign territory than the latter destroyed the advancing Jews.
    3. Americans have not been fond of Iran since 1979 (the capture of Amer hostages in Tehran and the failed attempt to free them with special forces) - Trump’s good attitude towards Jews has nothing to do with it.
    4. In the Donbass, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not achieve anything, firstly, and, again, where the Zionists are not clear.
    5. Neither Hezbollah, and even more so, Pts Iranians who have poorly established themselves in Syria, do not fight to the last man. The North Koreans fought for the last time in the 50s, if not for half a million Chinese volunteers under the air cover of the Russians, the Amers would have quickly lost the war.
    6. For the States themselves, Trump is not a fig, it’s not a fiasco - the economy is growing, unemployment is declining.
    As an analysis, not seriously.
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 21 January 2018 07: 20 New
      +3
      Afghanistan: everything is the least controversial. There will be an increase in the number of American troops, the result - a larger number of corpses.

      I think in the north of AFGHANISTAN a bridgehead will be created from the Ishilovites to invade the republics of TAJIKISTAN, UZBEKISTAN, KYRGYZSTAN ...
      there are enough adherents of ISIS.
      1. Mih1974
        Mih1974 21 January 2018 13: 21 New
        0
        It is possible, but since Afghanistan is a “gray zone”, in addition to the Americans, no one bothers any country in Asia to carry out “preventive” sweeping operations in neighboring territories. good
        Moreover, according to rumors, China is already or is about to invade the border region of Afghanistan "to protect itself from attacks." belay As they say, "sailed". Even if Afghanistan, with the support of the United States, starts to say something, these people will really begin to send dill into the country (well, you understand). Because, as the Country of Afghanistan, it has been destroyed, they no longer have power or jurisdiction. But the reality is that the United States will not risk attacking anyone in Afghanistan. No. Because - they don’t have legal justification for this, and according to how much political strife is in the United States itself, anyone who would make this “right decision” will turn out to be extreme, even if it is correct for the USA. belay
    2. dSK
      dSK 21 January 2018 15: 11 New
      0
      Quote: Krasnodar
      Anglo-Zionist troops in Syria - what kind of beast?
      Syria because of the Golan Heights does not sign a 60-year peace treaty with Israel. These are the "children" and help the "grandparents" eliminate Assad.
      1. karish
        karish 21 January 2018 15: 13 New
        +1
        Quote: dsk
        Quote: Krasnodar
        Anglo-Zionist troops in Syria - what kind of beast?
        Syria because of the Golan Heights does not sign 60 years of peaceful dreservation with Israel. These are the "children" and help the "grandparents" eliminate Assad.

        Another connoisseur of alternative history.
        60 years ago, the Golan was Syrian. laughing
        1. dSK
          dSK 21 January 2018 15: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: karish
          60 years ago, the Golan was Syrian.

          After the last Arab-Israeli war, Egypt and Jordan signed peace treaties with Israel, they did not suffer territorial losses.
      2. dSK
        dSK 21 January 2018 15: 22 New
        0
        Quote: Krasnodar
        Trump’s good attitude towards the Jews has nothing to do with it.
        Israel is the main “customer” of Iran, they have long-standing accounts. Israeli lobby, via Kursner, helped trump become president. Now Trump is working out a favor.
        1. Krasnodar
          Krasnodar 21 January 2018 16: 06 New
          -1
          Quote: dsk
          Quote: Krasnodar
          Trump’s good attitude towards the Jews has nothing to do with it.
          Israel is the main “customer” of Iran, they have long-standing accounts. Israeli lobby, via Kursner, helped trump become president. Now Trump is working out a favor.

          ))))
          The only Amer president since 1979, who has normal relations with Iran, is Barack Obama. The rest of Ayatrl Iran hated.
      3. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 21 January 2018 16: 03 New
        -1
        Quote: dsk
        Quote: Krasnodar
        Anglo-Zionist troops in Syria - what kind of beast?
        Syria because of the Golan Heights does not sign a 60-year peace treaty with Israel. These are the "children" and help the "grandparents" eliminate Assad.

        Syria does not sign the peace treaty for other reasons. In the five Arab-Israeli wars, she acted as an aggressor, and as a result of which she lost the Golan.
    3. dSK
      dSK 21 January 2018 15: 55 New
      0
      Quote: Krasnodar
      In the Donbass, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not achieve anything, firstly, and, again, at what here are the Zionists is not clear.
      100% Kolomoisky is the main sponsor of the "right sector", half-breeds Tymoshenko, Yushchenko ...
      1. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 21 January 2018 16: 07 New
        -1
        Quote: dsk
        Quote: Krasnodar
        In the Donbass, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not achieve anything, firstly, and, again, at what here are the Zionists is not clear.
        100% Kolomoisky is the main sponsor of the "right sector", half-breeds Tymoshenko, Yushchenko ...

        These are Ukrainian Jews, which of them is a Zionist - it is not clear, and Yushchenko in general, what side? )))
  3. karish
    karish 21 January 2018 07: 01 New
    +1
    Yeah.
    And what
    Murzilka is a popular Soviet, then Russian monthly children's literary and artistic magazine. Published since May 16, 1924
    ,
    Really rejected the article?
    1. dSK
      dSK 21 January 2018 23: 22 New
      0
      Quote: karish
      do

      "The baptismal bathing of Russian President Vladimir Putin subdued the citizens of Europe and Canada. Europeans look with envy at the Russian leader and dream of the same in their homeland, writes British edition of Dailymail. They are delighted that Putin never hesitates to take off his shirt in front of the camera and show everyone his masculinity. It is no coincidence that in the UK the Putin-2018 calendar is in great demand and popularity. It contains photographs of the Russian leader over the past few years. “It’s a pity that we don’t have Putin who would agree on Britain’s exit from the EU, Kale and migrants on behalf of the UK,” commented on the material about the Russian president user under the name Candu from Canada.
      At a critical moment, moral superiority can be decisive.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. dSK
        dSK 22 January 2018 01: 27 New
        0
        The American ambassador to Russia, John Huntsman, plunged into the icy water of the font of the New Jerusalem Monastery in the Moscow Region. Together with him, seven men and two women from the US Embassy took baptismal bathing. It is reported that the ambassador crossed the path to the font in white boots. After bathing the ambassador, his wife wrapped him in a towel, giving her husband a mug of hot tea. “This is an unforgettable experience,” the diplomat said about his impressions. “I’m very impressed with your traditions,” he added. After that, the delegation of the embassy, ​​headed by Huntsman, made a detailed excursion around the cathedral of the New Jerusalem Monastery. As previously reported, US Consul General in Vladivostok Michael Keys plunged into the baptism of ice. Other diplomatic mission staff also bathed. It is reported RIA Novosti, 21.01.18/XNUMX/XNUMX.
  4. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 21 January 2018 07: 50 New
    +3
    The nonsense imbeciles give orders, and the cowards without honor honor them without thought.
    We can agree with this. But is there a concept of honor in the American army? The use of atomic weapons in Japan, carpet bombing, pesticide pollination ("Orange") in Vietnam and the further actions of the US military suggest that war crimes are the norm for the United States. The concept of honor and the United States are not compatible when the concept of dollar dominates. It is useless and harmful for those to agree on something for those who, by their naivety, intend to agree.
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 21 January 2018 08: 04 New
      +1
      But is there a concept of honor in the American army? The use of atomic weapons in Japan, carpet bombing, pollination with pesticides ("Orange") in Vietnam


      It’s easy to kill civilians ... because women, children and the elderly don’t show any resistance ... what an honor ... what
      DRESDEN ... consequences of the massive bombing of civilians.
      1. rotmistr60
        rotmistr60 21 January 2018 08: 07 New
        +2
        .Lead women children and the elderly do not show resistance ...
        I completely agree. But Americans are not familiar with the “great” specialists and the feeling of remorse.
      2. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 21 January 2018 16: 10 New
        -1
        Quote: The same Lech
        But is there a concept of honor in the American army? The use of atomic weapons in Japan, carpet bombing, pollination with pesticides ("Orange") in Vietnam


        It’s easy to kill civilians ... because women, children and the elderly don’t show any resistance ... what an honor ... what
        DRESDEN ... consequences of the massive bombing of civilians.

        Do you have any pictures about the consequences of the German bombing of Stalingrad?
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. Mih1974
    Mih1974 21 January 2018 13: 15 New
    +1
    I want to immediately answer for the question "what will you do if you are a commander in Syria" - Yes, I'm not a monk, but "Moscow is behind us" and personally I would do EVERYTHING within the framework of those orders that were issued to me. You forget the most important thing - in the Army 99% happens on orders, especially at the level of "the beginning of the war" soldier . If the orders have permission to "return fire" - I would use any weapon (even if I had a tactical nuclear weapon) against the Americans, that is, not from the United States, of course - I won’t get it, but it’s easy to get to their neighboring bases. good
    Again, even if desired, Putin can almost immediately strike at all US bases and ships in B. Vostok directly from our territory - with "calibers." good And I can feel it from the inside out, such options have been worked out in the General Staff and the preparatory work has already been done (flight routes have been calculated, carriers on permanent duty have been allocated).
    The “lies in which the Americans make the whole World believe” mentioned by you are nothing more than self-deception for the USA itself. In general, the United States made a fatal mistake for them - if earlier they attacked all sorts of "objectionable" Panama, Libya, Iraq, then after their Threats with Korea, which it pointedly did not give a damn about, Americans - the bully of which everyone stopped being afraid. tongue negative Yes, America still has a huge arsenal, but it can’t use it First fool and they just proved it. That is, any country, having secured the support of China or Russia, can - having assumed responsibility for the economic consequences, do not give a damn about ANY US requirements. belay lol
    1. Lelek
      Lelek 21 January 2018 18: 05 New
      +1
      Quote: Mih1974
      If the orders have permission to "return fire" - I would use any weapon

      hi
      This your message is confirmed by the European media (Contra Magazin):
  7. Sands Careers General
    Sands Careers General 21 January 2018 14: 08 New
    0
    The enemy is rational, but the situation is pushing for wars around the world, the more blood, the better the United States.
  8. Plate
    Plate 21 January 2018 16: 55 New
    +1
    “It will”, “it will happen” ... In general, the article is good, it was interesting to read. But such words, which I highlighted at the beginning of the comment, spoil the impression a bit. I would recommend that the author try to avoid such unambiguous statements, as if everything is already known. I don’t know, as with others, but from such statements my opinion about the authors is slightly spoiled. But again, it was interesting to read, I think the article is good.