IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT THE USA FULLY INTENDS, AT WHATEVER COST, TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER EVERY ASPECT OF THE 'BATTLE SPACE'.
WHAT DOES THAT INCLUDE?
EVERY LAND AREA, THE SKIES ABOVE THE LAND, THE OCEANS AND NAVIGABLE RIVERS, LAKES, WHEREVER A SHIP CAN GO, THE OCEANS' DEPTHS, SPACE, THE CONTROL OF THE MINDS, THOUGHTS OF THE 'ENEMY', THE ABILITY TO CREATE PSYCHOLOGICAL EVENTS, CAUSE FEAR, EMOTIONAL CHAOS, THE CONTROL OVER BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WARFARE, CONTROL OF CYBERSPACE, CONTROL OF THE WEATHER, THE "ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM", THE MEDIA, HOW INFORMATION IS TRANSMITTED AND RECEIVED, WHAT INFORMATION IS BLOCKED, WHAT INFORMATION IS MANIPULATED, CONTROL OF ALL COMMUNICATION MEANS.
IT JUST MEANS THAT AMERICA INTENDS TO ABSOLUTELY, UNEQUIVOCALLY DOMINATE ALL ASPECTS OF "WAR"...AND WAR GETS REDEFINED AS IT SUITS US.
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) HAS A SHORT DEFINITION OF FULL SPECTRUM SUPERIORITY:
"The cumulative effect of dominance in the air, land, maritime, and space domains and information environment, which includes cyberspace, that permits the conduct of joint operations without effective opposition or prohibitive interference."
(Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (JP 3-0) page 96)
BUT IT SURELY DOES NOT END THERE.
BEFORE 9/11, BEFORE WE SELECTED USAMA BIN LADEN AS THE BIG BAD BOOGEYMAN, OUR MILITARY, WHETHER AFTER A NIGHT OF DRUNKEN REVELRY OR AS A RESULT OF DROPPING A LITTLE ACID, MAYBE, OR, IF WE GO BY ITS TITLE, AFTER SMOKING A FEW...???...CAME UP WITH A NEW DELUSION, I MEAN, "VISION".
THEY DID A NICE LITTLE 'PAPER' ABOUT THAT VISION...
<CUE TRUMPETS AND DRUM ROLL, PLEASE...>
"JOINT VISION 2020" ...TAAA DAAA!
LET ME JUST GO BACK AND UNDERLINE "JOINT"...OKAY...ONWARD.
ONCE UPON A TIME, ONE COULD CAN READ ALL ABOUT IT AT THE FOLLOWING THREE WEBSITES...NOT ANYMORE, AS YOU WILL SEE BY THE ERROR MESSAGES YOU GET WHEN YOU TRY.
http://www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfare/
"This error (HTTP 403 Forbidden) means that [this browser] was able to connect to the website, but it does not have permission to view the webpage."http://www.defense.gov/news/Jun2000/n06022000_20006025.html
"404 - Page not found
Defense.gov has recently migrated to a new hosting platform. As a result, many URLs have changed, and the requested resource was not found.
"http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2000/jv2020_a.pdf
"404 Not found. Maybe it doesn't exist any longer?"
THAT'S OKAY, WE CAN STILL FIND IT, AND THAT WE CAN FIND IT IS A PROBLEM THAT RENDERS FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE A MOOT POINT...WE HAVE ACCESS, AND THAT NEGATES THE WHOLE PLAN.
IF YOU TRY LINKS FOR "JOINT VISION 2010", SAME STORY...DEAD ENDS. 404 ERRORS.
SO, HERE'S AN ONLINE PDF OF THE "VISION" AND THERE ARE OTHER SOURCES FOR IT, BUT THIS CAME UP AT THE HEAD OF THE LIST, SO...
"JOINT VISION 2020" , PDF
AT THE END OF THIS POST, I TRIED TO PASTE A FEW PARAGRAPHS FROM THAT PDF BUT WHAT A MESS THAT MADE, SO THAT'S WHY THOSE PARAGRAPHS ARE AT THE END.
ONE SENTENCE THAT STRUCK ME AS RATHER TELLING, AS TO WHY THE OLD INTERNET IS A CURSE TO "DOMINANCE" WAS THIS:
"We will not necessarily sustain a wide technological advantage over
our adversaries in all areas. Increased availability of commercial satellites,
digital communications, and the public internet all give adversaries new
capabilities at a relatively low cost."
IT WOULD BEHOOVE THE "VISIONISTS" TO TAKE OUT THE INTERNET, YES?
TOWARD THAT END...DID YOU HEAR THE ONE ABOUT THE U.S. MILITARY'S MULTI-OBJECT KILL VEHICLE PROGRAM?
DID YOU KNOW THAT RAYTHEON, WHO HAS BEEN HAULED UP FOR MORE VIOLATIONS THAN I CAN COUNT SHARES THE FEDERAL CONTRACT TO PRODUCE THIS?
"This August, the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) awarded contracts to fund research and development for the Multi-Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV).
Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing were awarded approximate U$10 million contracts by the Pentagon to design a prototype for the MOKV, “a concept that can destroy several objects within a threat complex by considering advanced sensor, divert and attitude control and communication concepts,” according to a MDA press release.
The Pentagon has previously tried its luck on a similar endeavor, the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program. The Defense Department terminated the program back in 2009 over what then Defense Secretary Robert Gates called: “Significant technical challenges and the need to take a fresh look at the requirement.”
JUST ONE OF MANY NEW TOYS TO HELP ACHIEVE "FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE".
A kill vehicle keeps people safe by destroying an incoming missile before it reaches its destination. It is the part of an interceptor that strikes an incoming warhead, using force of impact alone to limit effects on the ground. All of today’s major U.S. missile defense systems use the hit-to-kill force-of-impact technology pioneered by Lockheed Martin in Sunnyvale.
EVER HEAR OF "PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY" (PNAC) ?
WHAT A PIECE OF WORK THAT WAS/IS!
IT WAS THAT LITTLE GROUP THAT ACTUALLY GAVE US THE GRAND IDEA OF "FULL SPECTRUM SUPERIORITY" IN A FORM THAT COULD BE SOLD TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
Founded in 1997, it was a 'neoconservative think tank" based in Washington D.C.
It created quite a stir, so the name was changed in 2006 and it was carried on by the original 'founders', William Kristol and Robert Kagan
Twenty-five "thinkers" signed the founding statement and 10 of those, including old smiling Donald Rumsfeld, 'Darth' Dick Cheney and another narcissistic egomaniac, Paul Wolfowitz went on to help shore up Junior Bush in his, ummm, administration.
JUST ONE OF MANY NEW TOYS TO HELP ACHIEVE "FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE".
A kill vehicle keeps people safe by destroying an incoming missile before it reaches its destination. It is the part of an interceptor that strikes an incoming warhead, using force of impact alone to limit effects on the ground. All of today’s major U.S. missile defense systems use the hit-to-kill force-of-impact technology pioneered by Lockheed Martin in Sunnyvale.
EVER HEAR OF "PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY" (PNAC) ?
WHAT A PIECE OF WORK THAT WAS/IS!
IT WAS THAT LITTLE GROUP THAT ACTUALLY GAVE US THE GRAND IDEA OF "FULL SPECTRUM SUPERIORITY" IN A FORM THAT COULD BE SOLD TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
Founded in 1997, it was a 'neoconservative think tank" based in Washington D.C.
It created quite a stir, so the name was changed in 2006 and it was carried on by the original 'founders', William Kristol and Robert Kagan
Twenty-five "thinkers" signed the founding statement and 10 of those, including old smiling Donald Rumsfeld, 'Darth' Dick Cheney and another narcissistic egomaniac, Paul Wolfowitz went on to help shore up Junior Bush in his, ummm, administration.
Those 10 really worked their butts off to sell the Iraq war to the American sheeple people and did a bang-up job.
The MAIN reason this "think tank" was created?
To slime Bill Clinton.
No, really.
To slime Bill Clinton.
No, really.
Kristol and Kagan believed the Republican Party lacked a "compelling vision for American foreign policy," which would allow Republican leaders to effectively criticize President Bill Clinton's foreign policy record.
"...they argued that American conservatives were "adrift" in the area of foreign policy, advocated a "more elevated vision of America's international role," and suggested that the United States' should adopt a stance of "benevolent global hegemony".
(SEE Maria Ryan. Neoconservatism and the New American Century. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-230-10467-3 and also William Kristol and Robert Kagan, (1 July 1996). "Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy". Foreign Affairs.
BE ADVISED, that PDF can be a real bother.)
(SEE Maria Ryan. Neoconservatism and the New American Century. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-230-10467-3 and also William Kristol and Robert Kagan, (1 July 1996). "Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy". Foreign Affairs.
BE ADVISED, that PDF can be a real bother.)
Stuart Elden has stated that "The influence that PNAC had was astonishing", and noted that...
"The number of figures associated with PNAC that had been members of the Reagan or the first Bush administration and the number that would take up office with the administration of the second President Bush demonstrate that it is not merely a question of employees and budgets."
"The number of figures associated with PNAC that had been members of the Reagan or the first Bush administration and the number that would take up office with the administration of the second President Bush demonstrate that it is not merely a question of employees and budgets."
(SEE Terror and Territory: The Spatial Extent of Sovereignty, Stuart Elden, University Of Minnesota Press, 2009, p.15. THAT IS A GOOGLE ONLINE BOOK LINK, BTW.)
They were pulling Junior Bush's strings with all their might, you see.
They screamed for a "regime change" in Iraq, huge increases in defense spending, cried that PNAC's principles were necessary "if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next".
And, they added, " we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles."
( Elliott Abrams, et al., "Statement of Principles", June 3, 1997, newamericancentury.org)
AMERICA,, THEY SUGGESTED, NEEDED A "NEW PEARL HARBOR" TO PUSH THE POPULACE TO ACCEPT WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST!
A section of Rebuilding America's Defenses entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" became the subject of considerable controversy.
The passage suggested that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor"...
A section of Rebuilding America's Defenses entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" became the subject of considerable controversy.
The passage suggested that the transformation of American armed forces through "new technologies and operational concepts" was likely to be a long one, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor"...
INTERESTINGLY, THAT CLEVER OLD CROOK GEORGE SOROS CALLED 9/11
THAT "PEARL HARBOR" IN AN ARTICLE IN THE ATLANTIC, DECEMBER, 2003.
"Before September 11 the ideologues were hindered in implementing their strategy by two considerations: George W. Bush did not have a clear mandate (he became President by virtue of a single vote in the Supreme Court), and America did not have a clearly defined enemy that would have justified a dramatic increase in military spending.
September 11 removed both obstacles.
President Bush declared war on terrorism, and the nation lined up behind its President.
Then the Bush Administration proceeded to exploit the terrorist attack for its own purposes. It fostered the fear that has gripped the country in order to keep the nation united behind the President, and it used the war on terrorism to execute an agenda of American supremacy. That is how September 11 changed the course of history.
In effect, the doctrine establishes two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations; and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the will of the United States.
This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Several journalists like John Pilger pointed to this passage about a "new Pearl Harbor" when he argued that the Bush #2 administration had used the events of September 11 as an opportunity to capitalize on long-desired plans.
NO! REALLY?
YOU THINK, MAYBE...SURELY NOT!
OTHERS WENT A STEP FURTHER IN SLAMMING THE ILLUSTRIOUS THINK TANK.
Writing in Der Spiegel in 2003, Jochen Bölsche claimed that Rebuilding America's Defenses "had been developed by PNAC for Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Libby," and was "devoted to matters of 'maintaining US pre-eminence, thwarting rival powers and shaping the global security system according to US interests"...It amounted to global American hegemony.
The outrage continued... British MP Michael Meacher agreed, stating in 2003 that Rebuilding America's Defenses was "a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana," which had been "drawn up for" key members of the Bush administration.
Peter Dale Scott, Canadian diplomat and academic, wrote:
“[PNAC’s] ideology was summarized in a major position paper, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, in 2000. This document advocated a global Pax Americana unrestrained by international law."
GASP!
SHOCK AND AWE, RIGHT?
HOW DARE THEY CRITICIZE THE PEACE-LOVING BOYS AT PNAC?
Well, PNAC 'fellow' Reuel Marc Gerecht DID say...
"We have no choice but to re-instill in our foes AND FRIENDS the FEAR that attaches to any great power.... Only a war against Saddam Hussein will decisively restore the AWE that protects American interests abroad and citizens at home".
SHUT UP!
REALLY?
The Strategic Studies Institute' s Jeffrey Record in his monograph Bounding the Global War on Terrorism, Gabriel Kolko, research professor emeritus at York University and author of Another Century of War? (The New Press, 2002), in his article published in CounterPunch, and William Rivers Pitt, in Truthout, respectively, argued that the PNAC's goals of military hegemony exaggerated what the military can accomplish, that they failed to recognize "the limits of US power", and that favoring pre-emptive exercise of military might over diplomatic strategies could have "adverse side effects".
WOW! DID IT EVER!
IT GAVE OUR MILITARY HEADS THAT "VISION 2020"!
IT GAVE OUR MILITARY HEADS THAT "VISION 2020"!
IT PUMPED UP THE BIG PUSH TO FUND AND RE-FUND AND OVER-FUND THE PENTAGON'S WISH LISTS UNTIL EVEN
RUMSFELD WONDERED WHERE OVER $2 TRILLION HAD DISAPPEARED TO.
WHO HASN'T SEEN THE VIDEO OF "RUMMY" SPILLING THE BEANS ABOUT THAT?
BUT, THE NEXT DAY, 9/11, ERASED WHAT HE SAID FROM A LOT OF MEMORIES.
WHO HASN'T SEEN THE VIDEO OF "RUMMY" SPILLING THE BEANS ABOUT THAT?
BUT, THE NEXT DAY, 9/11, ERASED WHAT HE SAID FROM A LOT OF MEMORIES.
"The pentagon cannot account for $2.3 trillion"
"You could say it's a matter of life and death"
Donald Rumsfeld
9/10/2001
BY THE WAY, JEB BUSH WAS A SIGNATORY OF THE PNAC 'STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES'.
HE SIGNED USING HIS REAL NAME, JOHN ELLIS BUSH.
OTHER SIGNERS MOST MIGHT RECOGNIZE?
~STEVE FORBES
~ I. LEWIS "SCOOTER" LIBBY, WHO TOOK A FALL FOR THE NIXON TEAM.
~ J. DANFORTH "DAN" QUAYLE
~WILLIAM JOHN "BILL" BENNETT OF REAGAN'S AND BUSH SENIOR'S TEAMS.
~ FRANK J. GAFFNEY, president of the Center for Security Policy, a group that has been described as an "extremist think tank"
OH, BTW, GUESS WHO WROTE FOR THE "CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY"?Former CIA director James Woolsey co-authored a report for the center, claiming that sharia law is a major threat to United States.
TRUMP has quoted him a few times.
LOOKING AT THE LONGER LIST, AS WELL AS THIS SHORT ONE, ONE MAY WONDER WHY, WHY ON EARTH, THIS PNAC WAS CALLED A "THINK TANK".
IT WASN'T COMPRISED ,OF 'GENIUSES' BY ANY MEANS.
SURE, SOME WENT TO YALE AND OTHER SUCH INFLUENTIAL COLLEGES, BUT SO DID BUSH JUNIOR, WHO NEEDED A TELEPROMPTER IN PHONICS TO READ, OR TRY TO READ, HIS WAY THROUGH HIS TWO TERMS.
BUT, OUT OF IT ALL CAME AMERICA'S MILITARY'S VISION FOR GLOBAL SUPREMACY...FOR FULL SPECTRUM SUPERIORITY, FOR NEVER-BEFORE-SEEN TOTAL MULTI-TRILLION DOLLAR DOMINANCE.
I WONDER HOW THE BOYS AT THE PENTAGON FEEL ABOUT AMERICA GOING BELLY-UP TO THE U.N., BEING RULED BY THE "BLUE HELMET GANG", MAKING ALL NATIONS' MILITARY SERVANTS INSTEAD OF "DOMINATORS"?
WELL, THAT FAILED COUP AGAINST OBAMA PERHAPS SHOWED US THEIR TRUE FEELINGS.
DIDN'T A LOT OF BIG NAMES IN THE MILITARY PAY FOR THAT SNAFU?
The EU TIMES had a romp with that... see <THIS>.
THE TEA ROOM REPORTED ON THE FAILED COUP IN MAY, 2014.
Paul Vallely, a retired major general and senior military analyst for the conservative news channel FOX, told the 'Surprise, Arizona, Tea Party Patriots' during a Dec. 3 speech that other retired military personnel and veterans groups had contacted him about the possibility of a coup.
“I had a call this afternoon from Idaho, the gentleman said, ‘If I give you 250,000 Marines to go to Washington, will you lead them?’” Vallely said as the group laughed and gasped.
“I said, ‘Yes, I will, I’ll surround the White House and I’ll surround the Capitol building, but it’s going to take physical presence to do things.”
[NOTE: THIS WAS RECORDED.]
THE VERY LAX SECURITY AT THE WHITE HOUSE IS LIKELY NO ACCIDENT, NO OVERSIGHT.
PLENTY PEOPLE WANT OBAMA GONE, DOESN'T MATTER HOW.
AND IT DAMNED SURE WAS NOT ABOUT BENGHAZI.
The Republican House Armed Services Committee report concluded that,
“There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi,” AND THAT REPORT ALSO EXPLAINED THAT "the Defense Department did, in fact, begin spinning up assets immediately", contrary to accusations.
REPUBLICANS SAY SO, MUST BE TRUE, RIGHT?
THERE'S STILL A CHANCE FOR THE PENTAGON...
IF DARPA AND THE FEDERAL LABRATORIES CAN JUST RUSH ALONG THOSE "CYBORGS" AND THAT MIND CONTROL STUFF, MAYBE SOME BETTER BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS, AMERICA'S MILITARY MAY YET HAVE A FIGHTING CHANCE.
IF THEY CAN JUST GET BOOTS ON THE GROUND IN SYRIA IN LARGE NUMBERS THAT WOULD HELP THEM HANG ON, BUT OBAMA IS FIGHTING THEM ON THAT AS WELL...
Paul Vallely, a retired major general and senior military analyst for the conservative news channel FOX, told the 'Surprise, Arizona, Tea Party Patriots' during a Dec. 3 speech that other retired military personnel and veterans groups had contacted him about the possibility of a coup.
“I had a call this afternoon from Idaho, the gentleman said, ‘If I give you 250,000 Marines to go to Washington, will you lead them?’” Vallely said as the group laughed and gasped.
“I said, ‘Yes, I will, I’ll surround the White House and I’ll surround the Capitol building, but it’s going to take physical presence to do things.”
[NOTE: THIS WAS RECORDED.]
THE VERY LAX SECURITY AT THE WHITE HOUSE IS LIKELY NO ACCIDENT, NO OVERSIGHT.
PLENTY PEOPLE WANT OBAMA GONE, DOESN'T MATTER HOW.
AND IT DAMNED SURE WAS NOT ABOUT BENGHAZI.
The Republican House Armed Services Committee report concluded that,
“There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi,” AND THAT REPORT ALSO EXPLAINED THAT "the Defense Department did, in fact, begin spinning up assets immediately", contrary to accusations.
REPUBLICANS SAY SO, MUST BE TRUE, RIGHT?
THERE'S STILL A CHANCE FOR THE PENTAGON...
IF DARPA AND THE FEDERAL LABRATORIES CAN JUST RUSH ALONG THOSE "CYBORGS" AND THAT MIND CONTROL STUFF, MAYBE SOME BETTER BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS, AMERICA'S MILITARY MAY YET HAVE A FIGHTING CHANCE.
IF THEY CAN JUST GET BOOTS ON THE GROUND IN SYRIA IN LARGE NUMBERS THAT WOULD HELP THEM HANG ON, BUT OBAMA IS FIGHTING THEM ON THAT AS WELL...
FROM AN ARTICLE BY 'COYOTE PRIME':
The Pentagon is now engaged in a Vietnam-style escalation of boots on the ground across “Syraq”.
50 commandos are already in northern Syria “advising” the YPG Syrian Kurds as well as a few “moderate” Sunnis.
Translation: telling them what Washington wants them to do.
The official White House spin is that these commandos “support local forces” (Obama’s words) in cutting off supply lines leading to the fake “Caliphate” capital, Raqqa.
Another 200 Special Forces sent to Iraq will soon follow, allegedly to “engage in direct combat” against the leadership of ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, which is now ensconced in Mosul.
These developments, billed as “efforts” to “partially re-engage in Iraq and Syria” are leading US Think Tank Land to pen hilarious reports in search of “the perfect balance between wide-scale invasion and complete disengagement”– when everyone knows Washington will never disengage from the Middle East’s strategic oil wealth.
All these American boots on the ground in theory should be coordinating, soon, with a new, spectacularly surrealist 34-country “Islamic” coalition (Iran was not invited), set up to fight ISIS/ISIL/Daesh by no less than the ideological matrix of all strands of Salafi-jihadism: Wahhabi Saudi Arabia.
Since mid-2014 the Pentagon has run all manner of war games – as many as 16 times, under different scenarios – pitting NATO against Russia.
All scenarios were favorable to NATO.
All simulations yielded the same victor: Russia.
And that’s why Erdogan’s erratic behavior actually terrifies quite a few real players from Washington to Brussels.
Let Me Take You on a Missile Cruise:
The Pentagon is very much aware of the tremendous heavy metal Russia may unleash if provoked to the limit by someone like Erdogan.
The Pentagon is very much aware of the tremendous heavy metal Russia may unleash if provoked to the limit by someone like Erdogan.
Let’s roll out an abridged list.
Russia can use the mighty SS-18 – which NATO codenames “Satan”; each “Satan” carries 10 warheads, with a yield of 750 to 1000 kilotons each, enough to destroy an area the size of New York state.
Russia can use the mighty SS-18 – which NATO codenames “Satan”; each “Satan” carries 10 warheads, with a yield of 750 to 1000 kilotons each, enough to destroy an area the size of New York state.
The Topol M ICBM is the world’s fastest missile at 21 Mach (16,000 miles an hour); against it, there’s no defense.
Launched from Moscow, it hits New York City in 18 minutes, and L.A. in 22.8 minutes.
Launched from Moscow, it hits New York City in 18 minutes, and L.A. in 22.8 minutes.
Russian submarines– as well as Chinese submarines– are able to launch offshore of the US, striking coastal targets within a minute.
Chinese submarines have surfaced next to US aircraft carriers undetected, and Russian submarines can do the same.
A former adviser to the US Chief of Naval Operations essentially goes on the record saying the whole US missile defense apparatus is worthless.
Chinese submarines have surfaced next to US aircraft carriers undetected, and Russian submarines can do the same.
A former adviser to the US Chief of Naval Operations essentially goes on the record saying the whole US missile defense apparatus is worthless.
Russia has a supersonic bomber fleet of Tupolev Tu-160s; they can take off from airbases deep in the heart of Russia, fly over the North Pole, launch nuclear-tipped cruise missiles from safe distances over the Atlantic, and return home to watch the whole thing on TV.
Russia can cripple virtually every forward NATO base with tactical – or battlefield – small-yield nuclear weapons. It’s not by accident that Russia over the past few months tested NATO response times on multiple occasions.
The Iskander missile travels at seven times the speed of sound with a range of 400 km.
It’s deadly to airfields, logistics points and other stationary infrastructure along a broad war theatre, for instance in southern Turkey.
NATO would need to knock out all these Iskanders. But then they would need to face the S-400s – or, worse, S-500s — which Russia can layer in defense zones in nearly every conceivable theater of war.
Positioning the S-400s in Kaliningrad, for instance, would cripple all NATO air operations deep inside Europe.
It’s deadly to airfields, logistics points and other stationary infrastructure along a broad war theatre, for instance in southern Turkey.
NATO would need to knock out all these Iskanders. But then they would need to face the S-400s – or, worse, S-500s — which Russia can layer in defense zones in nearly every conceivable theater of war.
Positioning the S-400s in Kaliningrad, for instance, would cripple all NATO air operations deep inside Europe.
And presiding over military decisions, Russia privileges the use of Reflexive Control (RC). This is a tactic that aims to convey selected information to the enemy that forces him into making self-defeating decisions; a sort of virus influencing and controlling his decision-making process.
Russia uses RC tactically, strategically and geopolitically.
A young Vladimir Putin learned all there is to know about RC at the 401st KGB School and further on in his career as a KGB/FSB officer.
Russia uses RC tactically, strategically and geopolitically.
A young Vladimir Putin learned all there is to know about RC at the 401st KGB School and further on in his career as a KGB/FSB officer.
All right, Erdogan and NATO; do you still wanna go to war?”
DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR MOTIVATED NAPOLEON TO CONQUER THE WORLD, RIGHT?
AND THEN...WATERLOO.
OUR BOYS IN THE PENTAGON AREN'T AFRAID OF RUSSIA!
THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE BAT GUANO INSANE.
THEY HAVE A VISION!
THEY RULE THE WORLD!
DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR MOTIVATED NAPOLEON TO CONQUER THE WORLD, RIGHT?
AND THEN...WATERLOO.
OUR BOYS IN THE PENTAGON AREN'T AFRAID OF RUSSIA!
THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE BAT GUANO INSANE.
THEY HAVE A VISION!
THEY RULE THE WORLD!
AND SO THNK ALL OTHER MILITARY HEADS IN EVERY NATION LISTED IN THE TOP 10... THEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM...EVERYBODY WANTS "FULL SPECTRUM SUPERIORITY", EVERYBODY WANTS TO DOMINATE.
LIKE THE OLD TV SHOW "HIGHLANDER" SAID:
"IN THE END, THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE."
ACTUALLY, IF THINGS CONTINUE AS THEY HAVE, IN THE END, THERE WILL BE NONE.
NUCLEAR WINTERS PLAY HELL WITH HUMAN BEINGS....
___________________
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
Three aspects of the world of 2020 have
significant implications for the US Armed
Forces.
First, the United States will continue to
First, the United States will continue to
have global interests and be engaged with a
variety of regional actors. Transportation,
communications, and information technology
will continue to evolve and foster expanded
economic ties and awareness of international
events. Our security and economic interests,
as well as our political values, will provide the
impetus for engagement with international
partners.
The joint force of 2020 must be
The joint force of 2020 must be
prepared to “win” across the full range of
military operations in any part of the world, to
operate with multinational forces, and to
coordinate military operations, as necessary,
with government agencies and
international organizations.
Second, potential adversaries
will have access to the global
commercial industrial base and
much of the same technology as
the US military. We will not
necessarily sustain a wide
technological advantage over
our adversaries in all areas.
Increased availability of
commercial satellites, digital
communications, and the public
internet all give adversaries new
capabilities at a relatively low cost. We should
not expect opponents in 2020 to fight with
strictly “industrial age” tools. Our advantage
must, therefore, come from leaders, people,
doctrine, organizations, and training that enable
us to take advantage of technology to achieve
superior warfighting effectiveness.
Third, we should expect potential adversaries
to adapt as our capabilities evolve. We
have superior conventional warfighting
capabilities and effective nuclear deterrence
today, but this favorable military balance is not
static. In the face of such strong capabilities,
the appeal of asymmetric approaches and the
focus on the development of niche capabilities
will increase. By developing and using approaches
that avoid US strengths and exploit
potential vulnerabilities using significantly
CONCLUSION
This vision is firmly grounded in the view
that the US military must be a joint force
capable of full spectrum dominance. Its basis
is four-fold: the global interests of the United
States and the continuing existence of a wide
range of potential threats to those interests; the
centrality of information technology to the
evolution of not only our own military, but also
the capabilities of other actors around the
globe; the premium a continuing broad range of
military operations will place on the successful
integration of multinational and interagency
partners and the interoperability of processes,
organizations, and systems; and our reliance on
the joint force as the foundation of future US
military operations.
Joint Vision 2020 builds on the foundation
and maintains the momentum established
with Joint Vision 2010. It confirms the direction
of the ongoing transformation of operational
capabilities, and emphasizes the importance of
further experimentation, exercises, analysis,
and conceptual thought, especially in the
arenas of information operations, joint
command and control, and multinational and
interagency operations.
This vision recognizes the importance of
technology and technical innovation to the US
military and its operations. At the same time, it
emphasizes that technological innovation must
be accompanied by intellectual innovation
leading to changes in organization and doctrine.
Only then can we reach the full potential of the
joint force – decisive capabilities across the full
range of military operations. Such a vision
depends upon the skill, experience, and training
of the people comprising the Total Force and
their leaders. The major innovations necessary
to operate in the environment depicted herein
can only be achieved through the recruitment,
development, and retention of men and women
with the courage, determination, and strength to
ensure we are persuasive in peace, decisive in
war, and preeminent in any form of conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment