Pentagon chief says US is not ready for hybrid war with Russia

43
The United States intends to adjust defense and other plans due to the unwillingness of the American army to conduct a hybrid and indirect war with Russia. This was stated by the head of the Pentagon, Mark Esper.

Pentagon chief says US is not ready for hybrid war with Russia




According to the US Secretary of Defense, in recent years, Russia has been demonstrating the effectiveness of conducting "hybrid and indirect wars in the gray zone," citing events in the Crimea and the Donbas as an example. Esper called it a new form of warfare, for which the United States is not ready, while Russia is not ready to confront the United States in a conventional war, because it is much weaker.

This suggests that they (Russia) know that they do not want and cannot resist us in a conventional war, therefore they are looking for other ways to challenge us, to conduct strategic rivalries at a level lower than direct armed conflict

- he said.

The head of the Pentagon emphasized that the American army is "very good" in ordinary armed conflicts, but as soon as actions go into the "gray zone", the United States loses its advantage. Therefore, he called for a change in "this strategic situation", and this applies not only to the military, but also to other US departments that should "conduct information companies and more."

This is a new form of warfare. I mean, in many ways this is at least what we are not ready for, and what we should be prepared for. Therefore, we are now studying how our plans for campaigning in different theaters (military operations) are being prepared, we are trying to reach a level of strategic rivalry below this level

- said Esper.
  • https://federalnewsnetwork.com/
Our news channels

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

43 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    19 September 2019
    It’s just that the USA’s self-flagellation is pouring ... Everywhere they’re not ready, their weapons are bad, Russia is an order of magnitude ahead of their poor .. Something has been stolen ..
    1. +1
      19 September 2019
      wage a hybrid and indirect war with Russia

      Well, everyone already knows about the hybrid. And the indirect war - what kind of animal and how is it customary to prepare for it?
      Just inflate the military budget or what other movements to do with it?smile
      1. +4
        19 September 2019
        Quote: Thrall
        Well, everyone already knows about the hybrid. A mediated war - what a beast

        The beast has been known for a long time. The middle name is proxy warfare. But "hybrids" raise questions for me. Everything can be summed up under this, even an occasional bunch at the summit can be passed off as aggression. :)
        1. 0
          19 September 2019
          What kind of war is the US army ready for? The striped ones are ready for wars only with the Papuans or small countries! If there is a real mess, "unconventional fatties" will run from the battlefield ..)))
      2. +6
        19 September 2019
        It seems that the Americans, as they entered the "gray zone" in Vietnam, are still not leaving it. Warriors are bad.
        1. +1
          19 September 2019
          Quote: Egorovich
          It seems that the Americans, as they entered the "gray zone" in Vietnam, are still not leaving it. Warriors are bad.

          So it is, they have always fought and are fighting at the expense of other countries.
      3. +2
        19 September 2019
        Quote: Thrall
        wage a hybrid and indirect war with Russia

        Well, everyone already knows about the hybrid. And the indirect war - what kind of animal and how is it customary to prepare for it?
        Just inflate the military budget or what other movements to do with it?smile

        hi
        Here is the head of the Pentagon M. Esper with his snobby,
        ... the US military is "very good" in conventional armed conflicts,

        Ah, here is the Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu about the importance of ambush in the Mongolian strategy and tactics of warfare
        “The commander must sacrifice something that the enemy wanted to have. ... Offering him the bait, he encourages the enemy to move on, and at the same time, with a detachment of well-chosen people, he lies in wait for him in ambush. "

        winked Which of the Anglo-Saxons call us "Horde" every day?
        That's right - the "Golden Horde" Yes
    2. 0
      19 September 2019
      I propose a hybrid destruction of all American pipifax stockpiles, for example, by mass sending of bark beetles. And then, deprived of the basic element of comfort, the Yankees simply surrender.
      In general, it is impossible to trust the public speeches of American generals, this is a planned disorientation of our military leadership.
    3. +6
      19 September 2019
      The US Army is very good at beating youngsters in the backyard of the school. When did they fight a worthy adversary?
      1. +1
        19 September 2019
        The thief steals first of all that it is easier to steal. So it’s easier for the States to fight with a light opponent. But it didn’t always turn out easy with them, as it did with Vietnam, and today with Afghanistan.
  2. +4
    19 September 2019
    After the words ... the US Army is good in a conventional war .... I want to add, Exactly! In an ordinary war - against the Indians and Papuans! good
    Well, the fact that the Russian Army cannot resist the United States ... in general is a masterpiece! He apparently "does not know" that the only country that can destroy the USA is RUSSIA.
    1. +4
      19 September 2019
      Let them come to a regular tank biathlon. Let's look at their readiness smile
    2. -7
      19 September 2019
      They march pretty well for the "Papuans" ...
      1. +5
        19 September 2019
        Army strength is not measured in marching if you are uncompetitive
      2. +2
        19 September 2019
        Quote: voyaka uh
        They march pretty well for the "Papuans" ...

        You would be more careful in expressions ...
        these "Papuans" have a very long and rich development history ...
        1. -1
          19 September 2019
          I answered an opponent who claimed that the Americans can only fight with the Indians and Papuans.
          I put the word "Papuans" in my post in quotes. I believe that the United States defeated in 2003 not the Papuans, but the large and well-armed regular army of Saddam Hussein. With the capture of the capital in a tank breakthrough and complete surrender.
          1. NKT
            +1
            19 September 2019
            Was the US alone or in the pack?
            1. 0
              19 September 2019
              They divided the capture of Iraq into 3 regions: the south, Basra, was stormed by the British. Cities in the West - NATO - Poles and others.
              And the Americans themselves captured Baghdad and the north (having landed an airborne assault).
              1. NKT
                +2
                19 September 2019
                Well ......, not one on one, but all on one. Why do you think this is happening? Why do they have to collect a "get-together" with SUCH ARMY? Minimize your losses? or not confidence?
                1. 0
                  19 September 2019
                  Alone, they would have taken more time, of course.
                  And aviation would have to be used more (in 2003, unlike the Desert Storm in 1991, aviation was used a little).
                  But the result would be the same.
              2. +1
                19 September 2019
                Quote: voyaka uh
                They divided the capture of Iraq into 3 regions: the south, Basra, was stormed by the British. Cities in the West - NATO - Poles and others.
                And the Americans themselves captured Baghdad and the north (having landed an airborne assault).

                ========
                Those. - as usual: WE HAVE SUBSTITTED "allies" ("to drag chestnuts out of the fire") !!!
                Wonderful !! Well just "warriors wow"!!!
                1. -1
                  19 September 2019
                  The south was easy to take.
                  And small towns too.
                  Divisions of the National Guard of Saddam were concentrated near the capital of Baghdad. Which was stormed by the Americans. Without other NATO countries.
          2. +1
            19 September 2019
            Quote: voyaka uh
            I believe that the United States did not defeat the Papuans in 2003, but the large and well-armed regular army of Saddam Hussein.

            =======
            Yes and that just becausethat almost everyone "turned away" from Saddam !!!
            They would try to repeat, if at least someone (well, for example, the Russian Federation) came to the rescue !!!
            I WOULD LIKE ON IT look!!!!
      3. +2
        19 September 2019
        You know very well that you first bribed Iraqi generals. Both in 1991 and 2003. What is it about? Even the Iraqi army did not show what it is capable of. And the effectiveness of ISIS (banned in Russia) was precisely due to the fact that the ludicrous officers of Saddam’s army with Soviet military education were there.
        1. -4
          19 September 2019
          "And in 1991 and in 2003. What are we talking about?" ///
          -----
          These are the tales that appeared after to justify both heavy military defeats.
          National Guard division commanders were subordinate to Saddam Hussein himself. Divisions fought to the last, there were few prisoners.
          1. +2
            19 September 2019
            https://m.lenta.ru/news/2003/05/22/bribe/

            Here they write with reference to the commander of the 2003 coalition forces, Tommy Franks, but yes, Iraqi generals made their little gesheft. There is reason to believe not him, but you?

            https://press.try.md/mobile_item.php?id=17764
            Here they write that financial preparation began well in advance, the article dates from 2002, the number and names of some Iraqi generals are named.

            https://www.pravda.ru/world/809425-saddama_predali_tri_generala_etogo_okazalos_dostatochno/

            It also writes about bribery and names of bribes are called, among which the commander of the guard.

            I am sure that by 1991 there would have been a lot of such materials, if the Internet had been more developed. In any case, I heard about this in expert conversations.
  3. +3
    19 September 2019
    Openly, the head of the Pentagon, Mark Esper, hints that they (the USA) are preparing for war with Russia, but so far they have not been able to persuade the Poles about the attack, the outbreak of the conflict, the whole Pentagon, Mr. nnidon
  4. 3vs
    +3
    19 September 2019
    This suggests that they (Russia) know that they don’t want and cannot resist us in a normal war,

    Citizen Mark Esper does not understand the simple truth - Russia does not want to fight with anyone! fool
    Comrade Putin clearly tells you - "guys, let's live together!" Yes
    Well, or get in the face! Yes
  5. 0
    19 September 2019
    what is he smoking .. this guy named esper?
  6. +2
    19 September 2019
    Pentagon wants to knock out new greens from the Senate
  7. 0
    19 September 2019
    Already in plain text they say that the budget is not enough. lol
  8. -1
    19 September 2019
    US Army is not ready, US Navy is not ready (four AUGs turned into KUGs), US Patriot does not catch mice: "What, son, did your Yankees help you?" - N.V. Gogol (C) bully
  9. +1
    19 September 2019
    Did they themselves invent this hybrid war, or is it not a hybrid war that the endless American undercover preparations and implementation of coups and "color revolutions" around the world? in my opinion, this is exactly what the shtatovtsy have become skilled in .... so the head of the Pentagon does not need to belittle his "merits" ...
  10. +1
    19 September 2019
    The United States intends to adjust defense and other plans due to the unwillingness of the American army to conduct a hybrid and indirect war with Russia.

    What is it like? the most, the most, the army of the most, of the country itself and is not ready ??? embarrassment and only .... or maybe they still want money, Trump plucked them a little, they want compensation.
  11. 0
    19 September 2019
    Pentagon chief says US is not ready for hybrid war with Russia
    Another excuse
    to receive money, at the same time and from other countries to get no less.
  12. +1
    19 September 2019
    According to the US Secretary of Defense, In recent years, Russia has demonstrated the effectiveness of waging "hybrid and proxy wars in the gray zone" giving an example of events in the Crimea and the Donbass. Esper called it a new form of warfare, for which the USA is not ready, while Russia is not ready to confront the USA in a conventional war, because it is much weaker.

    The head of the Pentagon emphasized that the US military is "very good" in conventional armed conflicts, but as soon as the actions go into the "gray zone", the US loses its advantage. Therefore, he called for a change in "this strategic situation", and this applies not only to the military, but also to other US departments, which should "conduct information campaigns and so on."

    The head of the Pentagon forgot to mention that the American army can fight only with the overwhelming superiority of equipment and means of destruction, and still mostly with the wrong hands ...
    And God forbid they check in Russia what they are good for as warriors .... Nothing good will come of it! The result will not be achieved, and disaster will happen.
  13. 0
    19 September 2019
    Today, in addition to Russia, countries such as Mexico, Nigeria, Arab countries, Vietnam, China, etc., whose natives are already actively exploring the United States, may wish to receive a white "commissary body" in a hybrid war. And it is to contain such a threat that the United States is now building a fence on the border with Mexico.
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. 0
    19 September 2019
    Strange, the SSH units were created about 5 years ago, and yet they are "not ready".
  16. 0
    19 September 2019
    due to the unwillingness of the American army to conduct a hybrid and indirect war with Russia
    But at the same time he did not forget to knock himself on the chest with his heel and declare in his blue eye: "... they (Russia) know that they do not want and cannot resist us in a conventional war." Probably all the same it is not necessary to combine two different concepts "do not want" and "cannot". Apparently, the Americans, unlike us, really want to, but cannot, because know how it can end.
  17. 0
    19 September 2019
    They like to flatter themselves - the US army is much stronger than Russia in a normal war ..... but we think differently, all the conquerors thought that they were stronger than the Russian Empire, the USSR, and now the Russian Federation ...
  18. 0
    19 September 2019
    Increase the Pentagon’s budget for another billion by 100-150.
  19. +1
    19 September 2019
    The head of the Pentagon stressed that the American army is "very good" in conventional armed conflicts

    This is when, with overwhelming superiority, di and then - in every way for one.
  20. 0
    19 September 2019
    Well, judging by how their systems worked in Saudi Arabia, they are not very ready for a war with Iran, despite Trump’s bravado.

"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"