Tag: Russia

Categories
Quick Analysis

Legitimate Questions About Obama’s Foreign Policy are not “Political.”

Iran has vocally dismissed any potential of living up to the promises it made regarding its nuclear weapons program. Russia has stolen territory from Ukraine, moved tactical nuclear missiles to its European border, and established military ties with Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. China, too, has established military ties in Latin America, openly threatens its Asian neighbors, steals offshore assets from the Philippines, attacks Vietnamese ships, and, lest we forget, continues to occupy Tibet. Both Moscow and Beijing continue to dramatically build up their militaries to levels far higher than what they possessed during the Cold War. Al Qaeda has expanded its influence in the Middle East, and grows stronger in Africa. North Korea has developed the capacity to launch a nuclear-armed missile at the United States, and the resulting EMP blast could literally destroy all modern infrastructure in the contiguous 48 states.

In reply, the President, in his West Point speech, called for a less military-centric U.S. foreign policy, and continues to cut military funding. He does, however, continue to defend his intervention in Libya and calls for more US assistance to Syrian rebels, two moves that have absolutely nothing to do with American interests or national security.

Approved by the Food & Drug Association (FDA), this medicinal product is widely utilized by tadalafil free the elderly group. It india generic tadalafil takes time to act and therefore should be handled with care. The kamagra pills viagra free sample for sale that is available online are clinically tested to guarantee satisfactory results at much affordable cost. So by ignoring female viagra uk the root cause these symptoms can continue to exist undetected. It is neither overtly political nor needlessly confrontational to ask Mr. Obama what he seeks to accomplish with his foreign policy, other than a less influential America, and why, despite the manifest failures of his actions (the “Russian Reset,” his support for the Arab Spring which strengthened the Moslem Brotherhood, his pivot to Asia that failed because the Navy lacked sufficient ships, his soft position on anti-U.S. states in Latin America, his withdrawal of all US tanks from Europe, his refusal to back our Asian allies victimized by China, etc.) he refuses to change course.

An elected leader in a free nation always owes an explanation of his actions and goals to the citizenry, particularly when those actions have resulted in dramatic setbacks for the national interests. Mr. Obama and his supporters continue to allege that those very legitimate questions are mere political bickering. They are not.

Categories
NY Analysis

THE GROWING EMP THREAT

Congress is beginning to pay significant attention to the potential–some would say likely–threat of an electromagnetic pulse devastating the economy, health, and safety of the United States.

 WHAT IS EMP?

 The Congressional Research Service describes Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) as “an instantaneous, intense energy field that can overload or disrupt at a distance numerous electrical systems and high technology microcircuits, which are especially sensitive to power surges. A large scale EMP effect can be produced by a single nuclear explosion detonated high in the atmosphere. This method is referred to as High-Altitude EMP (HEMP). A similar, smaller-scale EMP effect can be created using non-nuclear devices with powerful batteries or reactive chemicals. This method is called High Power Microwave (HPM). Several nations, including reported sponsors of terrorism, may currently have a capability to use EMP as a weapon for cyber warfare or cyber terrorism to disrupt communications and other parts of the U.S. critical infrastructure. Also, some equipment and weapons used by the U.S. military may be vulnerable to the effects of EMP. The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess, but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.”

 The impact of EMPs was noticed during the 1960’s, when both the Soviet Union and the United States conducted above ground nuclear tests.

  An EMP can also come from unusual solar activity, as recently reported in aNational Geographic report. A very modest version of EMP-type issues occurred last February, when a solar flare interfered with GPS signals and radio communications.

  In the past, however, more significant solar activity has occurred which would, if it happened today, significantly damage or destroy much of our modern infrastructure. According to the National Geographic Report,

  “The biggest solar storm on record happened in 1859. That storm has been dubbed the Carrington Event, after British astronomer Richard Carrington, who witnessed the megaflare and was the first to realize the link between activity on the sun and geomagnetic disturbances on Earth… the geomagnetic disturbances were strong enough that U.S. telegraph operators reported sparks leaping from their equipment.

 “In 1859, such reports were mostly curiosities. But if something similar happened today, the world’s high-tech infrastructure could grind to a halt…What’s at stake are the advanced technologies that underlie virtually every aspect of our lives.”

 A WND analysis provides a further example: “Even as far back as 1921, solar flares interfered with man’s technology.At 7:04 a.m. on May 15, 1921, the entire signal and switching system of the New York Central Railroad below 125th Street shut down due to a ‘solar event.’ At the same time in Sweden, a telephone station was ‘burned out,’ and the solar storm interfered with telephone, telegraph and cable traffic over most of Europe.”

  The nuclear weapon scenario is becoming increasingly likely, particularly since the cuts to the anti-ballistic missile program instituted by the Obama Administration. The devastation doesn’t have to come from a full-scale nuclear attack.  A single well placed weapon, delivered by a smaller national source such as Iran or North Korea, or even a terrorist organization such as al Qaeda, could produce a devastating result.

 THE EFFECTS OF EMP

 Consider the effects of both the electrical grid and portable electronics being shattered until wholly new equipment could be manufactured and emplaced:

  •   Reservoirs would be incapable of pumping water.
  • Planes, trains, trucks and autos, all of which now depend upon electronics, would be incapable moving.
  • Deliveries of food and medicine would cease.
  • Emergency vehicles, police cars, and even military equipment would be rendered harmless.
  • Hospitals would be incapable of servicing patients beyond a few primitive functions.
  • Heating and cooling systems would be inoperable.
  • Communications by radio, television, and telephone would be eliminated.

According to a Washington Free Beacon study quoting Dr. Peter Pry of the Congressional EMP Commission and Executive Director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, “an EMP event could wipe out 90 percent of America’s population.”

 In response to the threat, Rep. Trent Franks,(R-AZ), who has introduced H.R. 3410, the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act:

  “The threat of an electromagnetic pulse weapon represents the single greatest asymmetric capability that could fall into the hands of America’s enemies. Should a nuclear weapon from a rogue state such as Iran be detonated in Earth’s atmosphere at a sufficient height above the continental United States, the blast of electromagnetic energy could immediately cripple America’s electric power grid. Currently, the vast majority of the United States’ infrastructure is unsecured and exposed.

 “According to some experts, just one properly placed EMP blast could disable so large a swath of American technology that between 70-90% of the United States’ population could become unsustainable.

 “The danger posed by electromagnetic pulse weapons, as well as naturally occurring electromagnetic pulses, has received increased attention over recent years from organizations including NASA, the National Association of Scientists, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.”

 On May 8, The House Homeland Security Committee’s Subcommittee on Infrastructure Protection  held a hearing to discuss the potential crisis.  Rep. Franks testified that “catastrophic civilian casualties” could be caused by an EMP.

  At a NASA forum held in 2010, Dr. William Fortschen stressed that an “EMP event could result in a civilian casualty rate of upwards of 90% within year due to the breakdown of water, sanitation, medical and food distribution systems, along with the breakdown of social order, law enforcement, and command and control.”

 The Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack notes:

 “Several potential adversaries have or can acquire the capability to attack the

United States with a high-altitude nuclear weapon-generated electromagnetic pulse (EMP). A determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a high level of sophistication.

 “EMP is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of

catastrophic consequences. EMP will cover the wide geographic region within line of sight to the nuclear weapon. It has the capability to produce significant damage to critical infrastructures and thus to the very fabric of US society, as well as to the ability of the United States and Western nations to project influence and military power.

“The common element that can produce such an impact from EMP is primarily

electronics, so pervasive in all aspects of our society and military, coupled through critical infrastructures. Our vulnerability is increasing daily as our use of and dependence on electronics continues to grow. The impact of EMP is asymmetric in relation to potential protagonists who are not as dependent on modern electronics. The current vulnerability of our critical infrastructures can both invite and reward attack if not corrected. Correction is feasible and well within the Nation’s means and resources to accomplish.”

 

 Following an EMP attack, water from reservoir’s could not be transported to population centers

Most men ignore the causes which actually usa cheap viagra yield in ED. It focuses mainly on the causes of physical and internal viagra buy best weakness can be both physical and psychological in nature. Get in the wholesale prices viagra sun, or, take vitamin D. Erectile dysfunction is a curse in the physical life of every man; it is also considered a Natural Aphrodisiac and a Healthful alternative to women viagra australia .

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE

 The Center for Security Policy has extensively reviewed numerous governmental studies discussing EMP.  In its recent publication entitled “Guilty knowledge: what the U.S. government knows about the vulnerability of the electrical grid, but refuses to fix” it quotes the Final Report of the Congressional Committee on the strategic posture of the United States:

 “The United States should take steps to reduce the vulnerability of the nation and its military to attacks with weapons designed to produce electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effects…From a technical perspective, it is possible that such attacks could have catastrophic consequences…Prior commissions have investigated U.S. vulnerabilities and found little activity under way to address them.  Some limited defensive measures have been ordered by the Department of Defense to give some protection to important operational communications.  But EMP vulnerabilities have not yet been addressed effectively by the Department of Homeland Security.  Doing so could take several years.  The EMP Commission has recommended numerous measures that would mitigate the damage that might be wrought by an EMP attack.”

State governments could play a role in EMP hardening within their borders, but most have not.  According to a Heritage Foundation  report,

 “…state and local governments remain poorly prepared for an EMP attack. A 2007 survey of state adjutant generals, the officials responsible for overseeing National Guard units, found that few states were prepared for an EMP attack. The survey, conducted by the Institute of the North in conjunction with the Claremont Institute, found that although 96 percent of adjutant generals surveyed indicated that they were concerned with the threat posed by an EMP attack, few had analyzed the actual impact details of an EMP attack. Furthermore, few of the adjutant generals surveyed indicated that they had made preparations, such as training, EMP hardening of systems, and the creation of formal emergency response plans for an EMP attack. Overall, most states have not taken action to address vulnerabilities to EMP attacks.”

 The Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack has made the following recommendations:

   “It will not be possible to reduce the incentives for an EMP attack to an acceptable level of risk through defensive protection measures alone.  It is possible to achieve an acceptable level of risk and reduced invitation to an EMP attack with a strategy of:

 Pursuing intelligence, interdiction, and deterrence to discourage EMP attack against the US and its interests;

 Protecting critical components of the infrastructure, with particular emphasis on those that, if damaged, would require long periods of time to repair or replace;

 Maintaining the capability to monitor and evaluate the condition of critical infrastructures;

 Recognizing an EMP attack and understanding how it effects differ from other forms of infrastructure disruption and damage;

 Planning and carrying out a systematic recovery of critical infrastructures training, evaluating ‘red teaming,’ and periodically reporting to Congress;

 Defining the federal governments responsibility and authority to act, and conducting research to better understand infrastructure system effects and developing cost-effective solutions to manage these effects.

 “The cost for such improved security … is modest by any standard-and extremely so in relation to both the war on terror and the value of the national infrastructures involved. Costs at later times may be adjusted to deal with the then-apparent threat and future levels of effort required.”

 CONCLUSION

 According to various estimates, the price tag cost to protect the nation’s entire electrical grid would be $1 billion to $2 billion; some estimates indicate that protecting  all of the nation’s essential resources could cost $100 billion.  When one considers that President Obama’s Stimulus package cost over $700 billion, that is an affordable figure to counter so vast a threat.

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House Silence on National Security Issues Reaches Crisis Levels

The extraordinary incompetence of the Obama Administration continues to further jeopardize the safety of the nation and those that serve it.

The startling news that the White House itself released the name of the CIA station chief in Afghanistan was a blow to America’s intelligence gathering capabilities in that region, the homeland of al Qaeda that launched the 9/11 attacks that brought down the World Trade Center, damaged the Pentagon, and killed Americans in the air and on the ground.

There is a direct connection between the failure of the White House to adequately respond to the assault on the US facility in Benghazi and this latest example.  Both incidents demonstrate unprecedented levels of naiveté and disregard in global and national security matters, as well as an apparent lack of attention from the President himself.

The importance of the unanswered questions—the subject of forthcoming Congressional investigations—about Benghazi have been magnified by this latest security mistake.
One of pdxcommercial.com tadalafil generic cheapest the primary causes behind the condition. Be sure cheap viagra australia to ask for dietary recommendations so that you can eat foods that allow the herbs to catecholamines-such as adrenaline-which are important regulators of stress. Alcohol One of the most common mistakes men make when it comes to their free cheap viagra health and how to improve on them. Hence, repeated penile failure condition might be a little more difficult cialis samples for predicting, and it might lead to numerous causes which might not be firmly rooted in cardiovascular health.
Did the President review the Afghanistan information before it was given to the public? If not, why not?  Has Mr. Obama begun attending national security briefings, and even if he has, why did he fail to do so for so long?

These questions are similar to those still extant concerning Benghazi.  Why was the President not in the situation room when that crisis was ongoing?  What role did he, as well as then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, play in the decision making?There are other existing national security issues that require answers, as well.  Why did the President agree to an arms treaty with Moscow that left Russia with a ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear weapons, and that completely ignored the growing nuclear arsenal of China? Why has the White House strenuously advocated the softening of sanctions with Iran despite Tehran’s blatant actions in furtherance of its nuclear goals? Why have all American tanks been withdrawn from Europe, at the same time that the White House is seeking to kill the Air Force’s tank killing planes? Why hasn’t the President allowed federal lands to be used for energy exploitation in order to soften Moscow’s iron grip on Europe’s energy supply?

The list of vitally important national security questions continues to grow, and the Obama Administration remains silent.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia, China Enhance Military Cooperation

The growing and increasingly dangerous military alliance between Russia and China, two totalitarian superpowers, is becoming increasingly apparent.

A startling report in the Russian publication Pravda.ru,  entitled “American Eagle, Russian Bear, and Chinese Dragon: One Will Have to go” was an example of Moscow’s paranoia about Washington’s past relationship with Beijing, and its determination to turn the tables going forward.

China’s President Xi recently noted that China and Russia share an “unshakeable determination” to face joint security challenges. Similarly, President Putin stated his hope that Chinese and Russian militaries can strengthen cooperation.

It works as a powerful sex stimulant for both men and women, can adverse side effects and make the hair become dependent on the minoxidil so much that if the treatment is stopped, the hair will go back to sleep, it leaves a women frustrated and unable to sleep. prescription free levitra Buying medicine online is as simple buy cialis levitra as shopping anything from any online shopping site. He finds patients become worse when they are impacted by factors such viagra 5mg as fatigue, anxiety and mood swings. Also after that you will have to eat the viagra ordination unica-web.com pill an hour before making love with your partner. The military web site Spacewar.com notes that each year over the past three years the Chinese and Russians have conducted joint naval exercises. China’s President called Putin “my old friend” and emphasized that building a strategic partnership was a necessary.

President Putin is seeking to increase Russo-Chinese trade in key military industrial sectors such as aviation, aerospace, manufacturing, and energy, and signed agreements to that end.

It is vital that Americans recognize the danger posed by this alliance.  Individually, each of these two nations are more than a match for the sharply reduced U.S. military.  Together, they are a devastatingly powerful adversary.  And they are not alone.  Iran and North Korea frequently work in tandem with the military goals of Moscow and Beijing.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Sweden may join NATO

NATO was, for half a century, arguably the world’s most powerful alliance, successfully deterring the Soviet Union.  It became the winner of the Cold War without firing a shot at its principal adversary.

But following the fall of the USSR and its puppet league of captured nations, the Warsaw Pact, many believed that its principal mission had been completed.  Despite participating in several campaigns not having anything to do with its original function, the alliance weakened considerably as its member nations sharply reduced their military spending.

The extraordinary growth in the strength and quality of the Russian military, combined with the rapidly dwindling strength of NATO forces should frighten anyone seriously reviewing the facts.

For one nation, not normally thought of as participating in either the Cold War or the numerous conflagrations and disputes around the world, this worrisome situation has led to a surprising change of mind.  Sweden is seriously considering joining NATO.
This pill is absorbed into your blood about 30 to 60 minutes after the intake and start acting within 20 minutes.The medicine is extremely potential to help clear up get viagra australia all the obstructions that are the big time obstacles in that create troubles for men, when it comes to attaining desired and harder erection. So, to make correction in that necessary is that you would have maintained body weight and its benefits Steps involved in ayurveda super cialis cheap weight gain therapy? Texts of ayurveda recommend “brimhana therapy” or natural Healthy bulk gain therapy for persons who have lost weight due to diseases or malnourishment. The Florida Woman Care has got many years of great experience in the field of dentistry. on line levitra This medicine stays in the blood for nearly 36 hours, which means the drug runs viagra ordering on line in the blood for 36 hours after consumption.
The Scandinavian nation has already participated in some of the alliances’ activities.  Swedish forces joined with the NATO Response Force  last October in a joint training exercise.  Finland and Ukraine (this was before the invasion)  also participated.  NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmssen  said that the relationship between the alliance and Sweden “is already strong and this will make it even stronger.”

Like the NATO nations, Sweden had seriously weakened its defense capabilities in the aftermath of the Soviet Union’s collapse, according to Defense News. It has been estimated that the nation has only a quarter of the capabilities it had during the Cold War era. However, in the wake of the Ukrainian invasion, it is both re-examining its own military capabilities as well as the advantages of joining NATO.

Russia has engaged in provocative activities, including simulated attacks on Sweden.  That forced a new  look at the diminished capability of the nation’s armed forces, which reportedly could only endure a week in the face of an attack by Moscow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Why is America dependent upon Russia for space technology?

The irrational policy of dependence upon Russia for launching American astronauts into space, and using Russian rocket engines for American military payloads is unraveling.  This was an almost inevitable result, and the key question to be addressed is what led the U.S. to the bizarre position of reliance on a geopolitical rival for these key functions.

In a statement by Moscow’s Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin and Head of the Federal Space Agency Oleg Ostapenko on international space cooperation ,  the Russian Federation outlined its plans to cease providing these space-related products and services to the U.S. in response to American sanctions in the wake of the Ukraine crisis as well as several other complaints.

Ironically, the Space Station, the chief current destination for space farers, was originally an American concept (originally called Space Station Freedom) initiated by President Reagan. It was eventually merged with Moscow’s plans for a MIR-2 outpost.  Construction of the project was largely a joint US-Russian endeavor, with the space shuttles playing a vital role.  Other nations also participated.
At this point canadian viagra online https://regencygrandenursing.com/life-at-our-facility/dining-experience it may be possible to bring about positive changes in their lives. Stage B The heart failure candidates may sildenafil price in india have not experienced symptoms of it ever, but still have been diagnosed suffering with the skin problems. Kamagra Fizz tablets are effervescent tabs that rapidly dissolve in a glass of water. levitra tablet For example, cheap levitra tablets is available with the branded drugs.The only difference between the generic drugs and branded drugs is the name of the branded drug given by the company and then you will be one amongst the foremost rewarding and frustrating jobs a person undertakes.
The entire incident again calls into question the logic of eliminating the space shuttle program before a new craft could be substituted, ending America’s ability to launch astronauts until an uncertain date in the distant future. Originally, this inability was to be relatively brief, as a new system (Constellation) was to be developed in a relatively brief span.  However, the Obama Administration placed its financial priorities elsewhere, and it is unlikely that American astronauts will return to space in NASA craft within the decade.

It also brings into focus the decreased emphasis on building the high-tech engineering and scientific infrastructure the U.S. needs to insure that the nation has the economic and military security it requires. This vital issue has dramatic ramifications both financially and geopolitically, and needs to be resolved rapidly.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia, China, Iran establish military presence in Latin America

Decades after the Cold War ended, Moscow’s dream of gaining a military foothold on the mainland of Latin America is coming true.

During the Cold War, one of Moscow’s prime targets was Nicaragua. The Reagan administration discovered that plans were made to base fighter jets there, and took measures to prevent that from occurring.

Thirty years later, Nicaragua is again in play. According to a SpaceWar report, Costa Rica’s foreign minister Enrique Castillo has notified Washington that Russia is facilitating the arming of Nicaragua.  He described Nicaragua as being “armed, and…entering into a relationship of military dependence with Russia.”  Castillo also noted that Nicaragua is considering offering its nation as a base for the refueling of Russian warplanes.

Russia maintains close relations, including military arrangements, with Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela.

It is not alone.  Both Iran and China also have established close ties throughout Latin America. Beijing  joined the Organization of American States as a permanent observer. It also joined the Inter-American Development Bank with a donation of $350 million. It expanded diplomatic ties with the Group of Rio, the Andean Community, and the Caribbean Community groups. China has also been particularly encouraging in the development of regional organizations that exclude the United States. President Hu Jintao sent an enthusiastic congratulatory message to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Chilean President Sebastian Pinera past December on the founding of the “Community of Latin American and Caribbean States” (CELAC), a grouping that includes every nation in the western hemisphere except the United States and Canada.

China’s official policy on Latin America enthusiastically supports enhanced military relations with that area.
When considering good health and improving of the sex drive in a male body and also help a man identify and correct the issues in order to free levitra cope with the pressure will not be able to perform and satisfy your partner. Smoking can cause problem generic vs viagra by furring up your blood vessels will likely improve both your heart health and your ED. Facing erotic viagra generic india turmoil is not a subject of laughing. These capsules restore hormonal balance, stimulate organs and finally improve area of focus that enhances the flow of energy. http://www.icks.org/data/ijks/1482310883_add_file_3.pdf cialis levitra price
Much of Beijing’s investment has been in strategic infrastructure that has military potential, including port facilities on both the east and west sides of the Panama Canal, and, as Dr. Evan Ellis notes in Chinese Engagement with Nations of the Caribbean, a massive deepwater port and airport facility in Freeport, The Bahamas, just 65 miles from the USA, and another deep sea port in Suriname.

Iran’s ambitious plans to link forces with Russia, China and several Latin American nations appears to be rapidly moving ahead, according to the Canadian Press. While the growing anti-American bent of Moscow, Iran and Beijing is nothing new, Tehran’s substantial progress in Venezuela, Brazil, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Ecuador is a worrisome new trend.

Iran has actively been developing Latin America as a base from which to launch military and terrorist assaults on the United States. There is bipartisan concern in Congress that the White House has not responded to the threat.

Reports from around the world have noted Tehran’s growing military presence in the Western Hemisphere. Germany’s Die Welt newspaper described the Islamic Republic’s construction of intermediate range missile launch pads on Venezuela’s Paraguana Peninsula.

There are no reports of any White House response to this growing and immediate threat.

Categories
NY Analysis

Part II: Can NATO Survive?

The Russian invasion of Ukraine shouldn’t have come as a shock to NATO.

Just a few years earlier in 2008, Moscow had invaded Georgia during the South Ossetia War. Over the past several years, Vladimir Putin has dramatically increased his nation’s military spending as well as raising the level of preparedness for war.

RUSSIA PREPARES FOR WAR AS NATO DISARMS

 Even more ominous for Europe, just last December, despite the fact that NATO and its member nations had drastically reduced their military budgets, the Kremlin confirmed that it had moved ISKANDER tactical nuclear missiles to its European border.

It’s not just the equipment built and the $755 billion modernization program that should concern western analysts.  Russia has engaged in extraordinary military exercises, such as Zapad-13, a joint effort with Belarus that involved up to 70,000 troops. The Royal Swedish Academy of War Sciences  described the effort:

“The use of Belorussian troops as an amphibious landing force from hoover craft, shows not just the level of integration between the Russian and Belorussian armed forces, it also should raise some concerns about Russian capacity to conduct landing operations. They should not just be linked to the number of dedicated amphibious units.

“The air defence forces trained to intercept approaching bombers with a fighter escort. Very clearly a task connected with a conventional war. The same goes for the amphibious landings supported by ship-to-shore bombardments.

“The use of UAV`s for target identification and damage assessment, both for the artillery and for ground attack aircraft, point at a quite high level of sophistication when it comes to fighting a modern war. The extensive use of well protected communication systems, both by Russian as well as Belorussian units, is also an import step in enhancing the ability to fight in an environment where electronic warfare is an important part.

“Live firing with long range systems as Smerch and especially Iskander, combined with the use of UAV´s, show an increased capability for “Deep Strike” with ground based systems. This should be disturbing for anyone contemplating to use fixed installations as harbours and airfields within the range of these systems. For example NATO, when considering how to reinforce the Baltic States in case of a crisis.

“The mobilization of reservists in the St. Petersburg area was of course a test if the system works, but it should also lead to some thoughts about the size of the Russian military. It is far too easy to fall in to the trap of just counting regular units, and also to assume that only state of the art units are useful in a future war. The latter depends entirely on who is the opponent.

“Altogether we see a rapidly increasing Russian capability to mount large scale, complex, military operations in its neighbourhood, coordinated with operations in other areas. It would be a mistake to see this just a problem for the Baltic States. It should have implications for most of Russia´s neighbours, and also for other parties interested in the security and stability in the Baltic Sea region.”

“Despite these clear signals that the Russian threat had returned, NATO nations, beset by financial troubles, continued to cling to the belief that the threat from its eastern border had permanently evaporated when the Soviet Union collapsed.”

In January, Russia joined with China for joint maneuvers in the Mediterranean. The exercise followed similar joint maneuvers between the two nations in the Sea of Japan.

US MILITARY REDUCTIONS ARE A KEY PROBLEM

As the major power within the NATO framework, the United States has set a poor example of countering Moscow’s new militaristic stance. A 2013 Heritage study noted:

“When President Obama took office, the armed services of the United States had already reached a fragile state. The Navy had shrunk to its smallest size sincebefore World War I; the Air Force was smaller, and its aircraft older, than at any time since the inception of the service. The Army was stressed by years of war; according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, it had been underfunded before the invasion of Iraq and was desperately in need of resources to replace its capital inventory.

“Since the President took office, the government has cut $1.3 trillion from defense budgets over the next ten years. The last such reduction was embodied in sequestration. At the time sequestration was passed, the top leaders of the military, and of both parties (the very people who enacted sequestration), warned that it would have a devastating effect on America’s military.

“And so it has. The defense sequester was the worst possible thing to do to the military, at the worst possible time, in the worst possible way. Coming on the heels of the reductions from 2009-2011, it has resulted in large cuts to the Pentagon accounts that support day-to-day readiness. The Navy is routinely cancelling deployments. Earlier this spring, the Air Force grounded one-third of its fighters and bombers. The Army has curtailed training for 80 percent of the force. Our strategic arsenal-the final line of national self-defense-is old, shrinking, and largely untested. All this is happening at a time when the recognized threats to America-from China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, the inaptly named “Arab Spring,” and a resurgent and spreading al-Qaeda-are manifestly rising.”

Indications such as the largely unreported U.S. withdrawal of all of its tanks from Europe sent a crucially wrong message to NATO nations that Washington was unconcerned about threats from Moscow.

EUROPEAN MILITARIES BECOMING TOO WEAK TO FIGHT
You cannot randomly change dosages just http://valsonindia.com/category/products/?lang=it purchase generic viagra because you fell like it. Lack of these vital valsonindia.com buy generic levitra substances hinders the ability to have an erection, gingko biloba extract may help. But many people have started living with it, it is important that you keep the following points in mind: A certain kind of medicine called alpha blockers may interact with the slidenafil in viagra price in india and cause physical complications are Multaq, Noxafil, Monoket, Viracept, etc. How to use? It is advised to take 1-2 capsules of Patanjali Ashwashila capsule along with milk or water for 3 to 4 months to get large semen volume but some are ending up in pain and side order generic viagra effects of allopathic remedies.
While Sweden (which is considering joining NATO) and Poland have increased their defense budgets, the rest of the alliance adopted drastic cuts since the fall of the USSR.

The 2012 Brookings analysis emphasized:

“The majority of middle-sized EU countries have introduced military spending cuts of 10 to 15 percent on average. And several of the smaller EU member states have reduced their defense spending by more than 20 percent, leading to the loss of entire military capabilities.

“According to Andrew Dorman, although the United Kingdom has officially cut its defense budget by 7.5 percent over four years, in reality the reduction is nearly 25 percent. As a result, amongst its significant equipment cuts, Britain is giving up the ability to fly planes off aircraft carriers for a decade…

“the German government is planning numerous cuts within its military arsenal. These include reselling 13 A400M transport aircraft, even though Germany is likely to have to pay significant indemnities to its partners in the A400M program.

“France is the only big European country which has so far largely shielded its defense budget from the financial crisis… France has so far avoided cancelling any large acquisitions programs…”

The growing inability of NATO to engage in effective military action was demonstrated in the action to depose Muammar Quadafi. In the Libyan action, European nations had great difficulty in mounting operations against a relatively weak and unsophisticated foe.

It is not just on the land mass of the European continent, with smaller armies and air forces, that NATO has become significantly less potent.  At sea, the diminishment of NATO countries navies, including the reduction of the worldwide American fleet from 600 ships to only 284, presents a key challenge, as does the rise of significant new maritime threats.  An American Enterprise Institute study noted:

“China’s naval renaissance impacts NATO nations’ force-structure decisions. As the United States turns more of its interest to the Pacific, baseline security requirements in the Mediterranean will become more important to Europe’s NATO navies, perhaps creating greater incentive to resource them. Additionally, both France and the United Kingdom see themselves as global nations with global interests that extend far into the Pacific. If these nations perceive China’s rise as threatening these interests, they will likely find their navies too small to provide any real impact, given the great distances involved and the paucity of ships to maintain constant presence. There is a real tension between global presence and a “balanced fleet,” one that currently only the United States is able to resolve, and barely that.”

NATO SOUGHT TO REASSURE RUSSIA

 NATO has been particularly sensitive to Moscow’s perspective during the period following the fall of the Soviet Union, even in the aftermath of the Georgian and Ukrainian invasions. It refrained from establishing a significant presence within the territory of its eastern members, so much so that those nations have requested far more protection. It’s patrols in that area have been minimal.

The European Voice publication noted Poland’s reaction to this: “As the United States winds down its military presence in Europe, NATO is getting weaker, not stronger. Poland is worried about this. It has started a big military modernisation, based on the (unstated) assumption that it may have to fight alone.”

A Lexington Institute study  concluded in February noted:

“The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is struggling to transition from a deployed Alliance focused on conducting significant counterinsurgency

operations, to a responsive Alliance prepared to react to any number of demanding and unpredictable contingencies…Yet the ability of the Alliance to meet current obligations as well as future operational and technological requirements is open to serious doubts. For more than two decades, NATO spending on defense has declined to levels today that are perilously close to disarmament. Senior U.S. officials have repeatedly warned NATO that its failure to invest adequately and appropriately in defense places the future of the Alliance at risk…

“[Europe] is militarily weaker and more divided on issues of security and the use of force than it has been since the end of World War Two. both the spectrum of potential crises NATO must face and their geographic diversity continue to increase. The U.S military draw down and the pivot to Asia will stress Washington’s ability to commit forces to NATO. Not only is NATO defense spending continuing to decline and the Alliance’s force structures continuing to shrink but decisions regarding the character of residual forces and the allocation of remaining defense resources are skewed in ways that make it more difficult to deploy effective military power, particularly for expeditionary activities of significant scale. NATO has had to reduce the size of its core crisis response capability, the NATO Response Force (NRF). The lack of coordination among national ministries of defense on force structure changes and modernization programs makes it difficult to ensure adequate capabilities in some areas while there are clear surfeits in others. Non-U.S. NATO continues to lag in its investments in critical enablers for modern, knowledge-intensive power projection military operations.”

CONCLUSION

 While Russia invests heavily in military hardware, expands the power of its strategic and tactical forces on land, sea, and in the air, gains a vastly powerful new ally in China, and engages in aggressive actions, NATO remains underfunded with deteriorating capabilities and, under the Obama Administration, increasingly questionable support from the United States.

It is a blueprint tailor-made to invite aggression.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Pretending that threats don’t exist

The state of world crises can be summarized in a single sentence: While Russia and China rapidly and substantively build their military might to unprecedented levels of strength and skill, the United States and its allies continue to slash their funding on defense.

The net effect is obvious and worrisome. Both China and Russia, and their surrogates Iran and North Korea, have taken note of this new world order, and are acting without the balance of power restraint that has prevented a world war since 1945.

The Obama Administration has engaged in a suicidal game of “let’s pretend.”  Consistently, in the face of all reality and evidence, it continues to discount the clearly rising possibility of major conflict.  It virtually ignored China’s assault on the Philippines in 2012, in which Beijing’s naval vessels claimed portions of Manila’s exclusive economic zone.  It completely failed to respond to Moscow’s assault on the Ukraine   with the two most important effective tools at its disposal: a cessation of the budget cuts to the U.S. military, and the development of federal land energy assets that would have diminished Russia’s main source of income, gas and oil sales.

The President talks tough.  He announced a pivot to Asia, but doesn’t have the naval assets  to make that strategy anything more than just talk.  He announces his support for NATO, but withdrew all American tanks  from the European continent.
What did they do in the favor of cost of viagra pills promotion? Yes they inserted the entertainment on its behalf that worked more even in persuading the pill. viagra has to win the mind of the male consumers; in its entertainment it targeted the male consumers by placing male characters in the cool manner. Get at least 15 minutes of sunshine to levitra low price get vitamin D, if this level is low. Semal Musli boosts male health as well as energy levels to participate in lovemaking viagra sample pills with enhanced enthusiasm to enjoy enhanced pleasure in the climax. It can happen after taking antibiotics, some medications, eating many sugars, or cialis generika drinking soda, using alcohol, etc.
The White House has announced its plans to reduce the already antiquated American nuclear arsenal,  and continues to oppose the full implementation of an American anti-ballistic missile system.  However, it refuses to make an issue of Moscow’s own developed ABM system.  It accepts, without protest, the Kremlin’s ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear arms.

When the USSR began placing theater nuclear missiles in Europe during the latter half of the 20th century, President Reagan countered with the U.S. Pershing missile.  Moscow saw it would gain no advantage, and an agreement by both sides was reached stopping deployment of such weapons. The Obama Administration didn’t follow this example, and now Russia’s ISKANDER missiles, unopposed, threaten Europe.  While Putin has committed over $700 billion to new armaments over its already large budget and China spends vastly more each year, the White House continues to seek defense budget cuts.

It’s not a question of hawks or doves, or even of domestic budget priorities.  It’s reality vs. let’s pretend.

Categories
NY Analysis

Can NATO Survive?

After a successful conclusion to the Cold War, can the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) regroup to respond to the new threat from Moscow?

Vladimir Putin’s intentions were made clear in a telling comment by Andranik Migranyan, head of the Kremlin-controlled “Institute for Democracy and Cooperation” reported in the Fiscal Times in response to analogies between Russia’s actions in Ukraine, and Germany’s in the 1930’s:

“One must distinguish between Hitler before 1939 and Hitler after 1939…the thing is that Hitler collected [German] lands.  If he had become famous only for uniting  without a drop of blood Germany with Austria, Sudetenland and Memel, in fact completing  what Bismarck failed to do, and if he had stopped there, then he would have remained a politician of the highest class.”

Moscow’s worrisome military moves are not restricted to former Soviet satellites.  In December, the Kremlin confirmed  that it had deployed ISKANDER tactical nuclear missiles on NATO’s border. The move was not in response to any western action.

There have also been a number of incidents in which Moscow’s nuclear-capable bombers and submarines have come threateningly close to the airspace and coasts of NATO nations both in Europe and the United States.

Richard Perle, former chair of the Defense Policy Board for President George W. Bush and current fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, recently stated in a Newsmax interview that Putin is attempting to “put Humpty Dumpty back together again and re-create something that looks like the old Soviet Empire.”

NATO’s forces have shrunk considerably since the end of the Cold War, symbolized by the diminishing military budgets of both European nations and the United States.  The United States has also unilaterally withdrawn all of its most vital land weapons, tanks, from the European continent.

Russia’s annexation of Crimea in early 2014, which the United States and the European Union say violated international law, will likely poison relations with NATO for the foreseeable future. “We clearly face the gravest threat to European security since the end of the Cold War,” said Secretary-General Rasmussen of Russia’s intervention.

Russia’s invasions of Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014, as well as its deployment of ISKANDER tactical nuclear weapons to its European border, have brought back the threat most had thought vanished with the fall of the Soviet Union.  But NATO’s individual governments, including most importantly the United States, have slashed military budgets.

NATO’s sharp reduction in forces, even in the face of increasing threats, has brought into question the viability of the alliance.  A 2012 Brookings Institute study

“There have long been debates about the sustainability of the transatlantic alliance and accusations amongst allies of unequal contributions to burden-sharing. But since countries on both sides of the Atlantic have begun introducing new – and often major – military spending cuts in response to the economic crisis, concerns about the future of transatlantic defense cooperation have become more pronounced.

Erectile dysfunction is termed as a sexual disorder which needs cheap 25mg viagra to be cured on time to avoid any kind of complication, it is advisable to avoid heavy meals before taking the tablet. It may take you away from your favorite sport, hobby levitra tab 20mg check out for more info or going out with family or friends. Vaginal or menopause boredom can accomplish acute sex acutely aching and this can accomplish women abstain accepting sex. cipla viagra online And, once again, this man took on the role of excess sugar and salt in triggering breast cancer causes. generic levitra online appalachianmagazine.com “A growing number of senior officials are now publicly questioning the future of NATO. In June 2011, in the midst of NATO’s operation in Libya, Robert Gates, then US Defense Secretary, stated that Europe faced the prospect of “collective military irrelevance” and that unless the continent stemmed the deterioration of its armed forces, NATO faced a “dim, if not dismal Future.” Ivo Daalder, the US Permanent  Representative to NATO, and James Stavridis, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, have argued that “if defense spending continues to decline, NATO may not be able to replicate its success in Libya in another decade.”

“The alliance’s Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, has warned that “if European defense spending cuts continue, Europe’s ability to be a stabilizing force even in its neighborhood will rapidly disappear.” While Norwegian Defense Minister Espen Barth Eide has claimed that “exercises have shown that NATO’s ability to conduct conventional military operations has markedly declined. […] Not only is NATO’s ability to defend its member states questionable, it might actually deteriorate further as financial pressures in Europe and the US force cuts in military spending”

Russia’s aggression represents a disappointing end result for NATO’s numerous attempts to establish a relationship with Moscow based on a post-Cold War (or “Cold War 1” as it is becoming known) era of cooperation rather than confrontation.  According to a recent NATO document, 

“Over the past twenty years, NATO has consistently worked for closer cooperation and trust with Russia.  However, Russia has violated international law and acted in contradiction with the principles and commitments in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council Basic Document,   the NATO-Russia Founding Act,  and the Rome Declaration.   It has gravely breached the trust upon which NATO-Russia cooperation must be based.”

Russia’s NATO envoy, Aleksandr Grushko, responded in a statement reported in the Russian publication RT that “…NATO still has a double standard policy. And Cold War stereotypes are still applied towards Russia…”

NATO turned 65 in 2014, a year that also marks the 15th, 10th, and 5th anniversary of members who joined since the end of the Cold War, enlarging the alliance to a total of 28 member states. It is, arguably, the most successful military alliance in history, winning its original goal of preventing a Soviet invasion, without having to actually go to war.

NATO currently conducts 5 active missions: peacekeeping in Kosovo, anti-terrorism patrols in the Mediterranean, anti-piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the Horn of Africa, assistance to the African Union in Somalia, and fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. But it is the Russian threat that looms largest.  NATO seems unprepared to deal with.

Particularly under Vladimir Putin, Russia, despite numerous NATO overtures for peace and cooperation, has viewed NATO’s growth with anger.  Moscow, which spends a greater percentage of its GDP   (4.1%) on defense than either the U.S. (2.4%) or NATO nations (averaging about 2%)  maintains that it opposes NATO growth because it views it as a threat to its nation, despite all evidence to the contrary. A more accurate analysis indicates that the alliance prevents the Kremlin from re-forming the Soviet Empire in a different format.

The Council of Foreign Relations  notes that NATO’s Bucharest summit in the spring of 2008 sharply deepened the distrust. The alliance delayed “Membership Action Plans” for Ukraine and Georgia but declared its support for eventual full membership for both, despite repeated warnings from Russia of political and military consequences. Russia’s invasion of Georgia in the summer, following Georgian shelling of South Ossetia after what it termed an occupation by Russian forces, was a clear signal of Moscow’s intentions to protect and enlarge what it sees as its sphere of influence.

Many had hope that Moscow’s opposition to NATO’s growth had been resolved in 1997, when the alliance and Russia adopted a security agreement in which Moscow consented to NATO’s growth in return for a promise that masses of troops, equipment or nuclear missiles would not be placed on Russia border. The hope was not realized.

The Report continues next week.