|
Pearl Harbor revisited
Life moves on and most Americans continue to be preoccupied with TV Sports, shopping malls, and Hollywood. Speaking of Hollywood, they did manage to come up with some worthwhile content in the recent movie, Pearl Harbor. See it. The circumstances and the American consciousness in the early 1940s are incredibly similar to what is going on today. "They are making weapons while we are making refrigerators."
On May 19 of this year there was an interesting article posted on WORLD TRIBUNE.COM titled "Arafat regime near collapse as radical states press for war". The essence of the article was that U.S. allies in the Arab world warned the U.S. that the Palestinian Authority had collapsed and Yasser Arafat was under pressure from Iran, Iraq and Syria to escalate the conflict with Israel. U.S. Arab allies are coming under popular pressure to act against Israel. The Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz refused to meet Bush due to his anger over U.S. support to Israel. Egypt's leader Hosni Mubarak was also angry because the U.S. blocked U.N. action against Israel. In this global chess game, the U.S. is caught in the middle of a no win situation.
There are two players in this game and you can bet that Russian intelligence (KGB) is working overtime to destabilize the situation and suck the U.S. deeper into this mire. Despite all the mainstream propaganda you have heard, the power didn't really change in Russia. As another writer said, "it's the same deck of cards that have just been reshuffled to look different." Besides the obvious political benefit to Russia, polarizing the Arab nations against the U.S. would ultimately result in increased global oil prices. This would economically benefit Russia who is a major oil exporter. This means revenge at the U.S. gas pumps. An army travels on its stomach, but the U.S. good life floats on cheap gasoline and diesel fuel. The lifeblood of American prosperity flows out of the Middle East. This strategy of going after the soft underbelly of the U.S can be seen in the Russian military technology transfers to Iran. The recent shipments of advanced Russian ship to ship missiles are posed to drive the U.S military presence out of the Red Sea area.
It is not inconceivable that Russia, Red China, Sadam and North Korea might be planning behind the scenes to launch coordinated attacks. A possible scenario would be that Iraq, Syria and other Arab states move against Israel. At the same time a North Korean invasion force (presently massed on the border) would cross the DMZ into South Korea. Simultaneously, Red Chinese military forces cross the Formosa Straight and invade Taiwan. (A Chinese invasion force presently massed on the coast.) In the event of such a simultaneous three-theater war, U.S. forces would be stretched so thin (due to Clinton and continued Bush military cuts) that U.S. forces stationed in Korea would be overrun and slaughtered by advancing North Korean military forces. The traditional salvation for Taiwan, sending in the seventh fleet, won't work this time, because the Russians also sent the Red Chinese advanced ship to ship missiles that out-maneuver U.S. defense systems.
Back in Israel the wild card drops. It becomes a matter of life or death and Israel goes nuclear. So where does the U.S. fall in all of this? Russia and Red China have missiles pointing at us and the congressional Marxist caucus keeps stalling the deployment of missile defense system. Russia has a multi-layered missile defense system, advanced inter continental ballistic missiles and the world's most advanced submarine fleet, all built with our financial aid.
Welcome to Pearl Harbor! Laxity and lowering one's alert status always invites attack. Thanks to Bill Clinton our new policy is to absorb a nuclear first strike missile attack against the U.S before we retaliate. Before Clinton came into office the U.S. defense policy had always been to immediately launch a retaliatory missile strike in the event that U.S. surveillance satellites detected the infrared signature of a Russian or Chinese ICBM against the U.S. This new policy would almost guarantee that an enemy nuclear first strike would destroy our ability to retaliate against hardened enemy targets such as missile silos and command and control bunkers. (U.S. sub launched missiles are not big enough to take out these hardened targets.)
It should be noted that there is one distinct disadvantage to launching a first strike. If Russia launches a first strike against us, our surveillance satellites immediately note which silos were launched and thus emptied. Then when the U.S. launches a retaliation, just before the Russian or Chinese missiles start touching down, the launched U.S. missiles are only targeting missile silos that have not yet been fired. The U.S. wouldn't be wasting missiles on empty silos. Many Russian missiles on the other hand, would be locked into destroying many empty silos that had just been vacated. Sort of a waste of valuable ammunition. But thanks to U.S. executive leadership, in time of war those missiles will probably never get out of their silos.
And now for "the rest of the story". By Presidential directive, at any time, half of our missile submarines are restricted to port. Sitting ducks for a Russian or Chinese first strike. Also due to presidential directive U.S. submarine commanders no longer have the authority to independently launch missiles. Previous to the Clinton administration, submarine commanders, in the event of a nuclear attack, had the ability to launch missiles even if they were cut off from military command. Traditionally U.S. submarines comprised an effective deterrent to a nuclear attack on the U.S. because of their ability to hide under the oceans. This maked them difficult to target and most could potentially survive a first strike. When the submarine commanders had independent launch ability, these subs could lay low until the initial attack was over and then they could retaliate against the attacker. As such they were a effective deterrent to a nuclear attack on the U.S. This is one reason the Russians have invested so heavily into their advanced attack submarine fleet, so they can hunt and destroy U.S. missile submarines around the globe.
But that is not the end of the story. The U.S. Strategic bombers were taken off alert and Russian bombers continue to violate U.S. airspace probing for holes in U.S. radar detection. The U.S. has no civil defense and no missile defense. Russia has an extensive civil defense system, numerous hardened shelters for the military and government leadership (Yamantau Mountain) and an extensive multi-layered missile defense system. America has nothing! Also the U.S. has no road mobile ICBMs. Russia and China have them. Road mobile ICBMs are almost impossible to target.
Continued military cuts don't help the situation. The U.S. has stalled the development of new strategic weapon systems, but the Russians and Chinese have made strategic modernization their national priority, at our expense. No wonder you have to pay more these days to get into our national parks, all the nation's money went into new Russian weapon systems. (The $200 billion we loaned them sure didn't help the average hungry Russian on the street.) When you go to the store these days everything is made in China, thanks to the Most favored Trading partner Status that gives China the capital it needs to build its war machine. But don't be too hard on Gore and Clinton, because Bush gives nothing more than lip service to defense and he makes no effort to rescind the disastrous actions of the Clinton administration. These guys are blood brothers. They are from the same party and it is not the Democratic or Republican. ItÕs the CFR. If you don't know what the CFR is, you had better educate yourself. Do a search on the Internet. There is days worth of good reading out there.
The bottom line is that the U.S. Government continues to spend billions of dollars in its efforts to protect high-level government officials in the event of war. This is called the Perpetuation of Government Program. This is what Mount Weather and regional FEMA command posts are all about, but there is no effort to protect the American civilian population. Maybe they figure there are just too many of us. After all there is a lot of overpopulation talk in the media these days. Instead of depending on the government to protect you and your family in time of crisis, maybe you should start taking personal responsibility and start preparing.
I didn't write this news letter to frighten you, but to inspire you into action. Action is a big key. We all need to maintain a balance between burying our heads in the ground like and Ostrich (the same as burying your head in TV programming) and getting emotionally invested into a hypothetical disaster somewhere in the future. We need to be alert and aware of what is going on around us but not paralyzed with fear. We need to make rational preparations for potentially unpleasant situations, but keep the bulk of our attention focused in the present in a positive mode. Some people worry others prepare.
Take Care,
Philip L. Hoag |
|
|
|
