Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

[GRG55]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

When the Soviet Union expectantly collapsed, the M-I boyz went into panic mode. (Remember their nightmarish "peace dividend" :p )

Seems everything has turned out all right after all ;):eek:

An oldie, but goodie. Eerily prescient.

From The Onion, naturally...

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'

January 17, 2001 | Issue 37•01

WASHINGTON, DC–Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."

My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."

Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.

During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.

"You better believe we're going to mix it up with somebody at some point during my administration," said Bush, who plans a 250 percent boost in military spending. "Unlike my predecessor, I am fully committed to putting soldiers in battle situations. Otherwise, what is the point of even having a military?"

On the economic side, Bush vowed to bring back economic stagnation by implementing substantial tax cuts, which would lead to a recession, which would necessitate a tax hike, which would lead to a drop in consumer spending, which would lead to layoffs, which would deepen the recession even further.

More...

[Shakespear]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Nice Onion article to awake one from a dream state. :-)

gwynedd1
As you point out the numbers speak for themselves. US is the huge military spender. Throwing in "hammer" prices does not lesson the significance of the dollars being spent.

Russia is doing what it has in the past. When threatened it goes in to the arming mode and to hell with all else. It can get agressive but so far we have seen that it keeps it pretty close to its boarders. The US is in the arming mode none stop and has been expanding its forces globaly none stop. I am sure that is not lost on the planners in Beijing or Moscow, hence all the reactive moves. There is a lot that is going on on the Chess Board.

Hence Russians will not yield on missiles in Poland and radars in Czech Republic. The Czech gov. does not have the votes to make the radars happen, so perhaps this will fall off the board. The people are resisting inside and outside the government.

NATO expansion into Ukraine is another hot button that simply will not happen without a war, IMO. That war may be in the form of gas cut off, HC production reduction, political "manipulations" in Ukraine etc. Russians are good at these games and they will pull all the stops to halt this one. Otherwise the Brzezinski "Grand Chess" Plan will roll on and on around their neck. This is a game as old as this planet and they will simply not back off.

Next in line is China, and it realizes that military force is one of the key components of diplomacy. They are going into space, then on to the moon and will probable eventually land on Mars. I think they also know that this is not the time for sitting on your hands as fires are burning fairly close to its boarders. It is a time to be ready.

With the financial crises China will slowly pull in Taiwan closer to its view of reality. Its presence in Africa is also indicative of its need to expand at this crucial juncture in history.

I still can't get out of my head Brzezinski's speech that was posted on iTulip. I'm not sure it is one that gives us hope for the future.

[Judas]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

As you point out the numbers speak for themselves. US is the huge military spender. Throwing in "hammer" prices does not lesson the significance of the dollars being spent.

*shrug*

OK, you're right. I work in defense in the area of undersea warfare, but I can't even publically discuss things I do know, so it's pointless to argue because it just frustrates me.

Much like the forever bubbles and financialization, I think many people confuse numbers with fundamentals. I reckon a burn pit in Iraq sending millions of dollars of good equipment into the air as smoke every day isn't the same as capability, and worry that we are once again going to "forget the lessons of Vietnam".

But I'm glad my concerns are unfounded. Long live the invincible empire!

[Shakespear]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Haha, one could argue that indirectly China is propping up the US military as it buys those US treasuries

Bottom line is money is being wasted

http://www.yardwear.net/blog/2005/11...Graveyard.aspx

In case of the Russians, it is junk once it rolls out of the factory.

[Judas]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Haha, one could argue that indirectly China is propping up the US military as it buys those US treasuries

In a way, but one could argue that China has been only propping up the US long enough to steal it's military and missile tech. Think of the US as China's R&D department.

[Andreuccio]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

An oldie, but goodie. Eerily prescient.

From The Onion, naturally...

Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'

January 17, 2001 | Issue 37•01

WASHINGTON, DC–Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."

My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."

Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.

During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.

"You better believe we're going to mix it up with somebody at some point during my administration," said Bush, who plans a 250 percent boost in military spending. "Unlike my predecessor, I am fully committed to putting soldiers in battle situations. Otherwise, what is the point of even having a military?"

On the economic side, Bush vowed to bring back economic stagnation by implementing substantial tax cuts, which would lead to a recession, which would necessitate a tax hike, which would lead to a drop in consumer spending, which would lead to layoffs, which would deepen the recession even further.

More...

That's one of my favorite Onion articles. Right up there with this one:

Hijackers Surprised To Find Selves In Hell

'We Expected Eternal Paradise For This,' Say Suicide Bombers

September 26, 2001 | Issue 37•34

JAHANNEM, OUTER DARKNESS—The hijackers who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon expressed confusion and surprise Monday to find themselves in the lowest plane of Na'ar, Islam's Hell.

"I was promised I would spend eternity in Paradise, being fed honeyed cakes by 67 virgins in a tree-lined garden, if only I would fly the airplane into one of the Twin Towers," said Mohammed Atta, one of the hijackers of American Airlines Flight 11, between attempts to vomit up the wasps, hornets, and live coals infesting his stomach. "But instead, I am fed the boiling feces of traitors by malicious, laughing Ifrit. Is this to be my reward for destroying the enemies of my faith?"

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38673

[KGW]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Could you be more specific on this point?

Here is an article by Mr. Lind:

March 5, 2008
Linear Tactics in a Chaotic War

by William S. Lind

One of several dead hands the First Generation of Modern War lays on contemporary state militaries' throats is linearity. Most state militaries both seek and expect linearity on and off the battlefield. Sometimes, this manifests itself in tactics that offer magnificent if unintentional tableaux vivants. I recall a field exercise years ago with the Second Marine Division at Camp Lejeune where, rounding a bend, we found a lieutenant had built a perfect 19th-century fortress wall across the road, complete with firing step. The division sergeant major, in whose jeep I was riding, said, "My God, it's the siege of Vicksburg!"

More often, linearity manifests itself in a military service's culture, as a subtle but omnipresent mindset. It is easy to understand why this is so. Both on land and at sea, tactics became linear right at the beginning of the First Generation in the mid-17th century. In armies, that was when lines of infantrymen two or three deep replaced the square formations of the tercios. In navies, beginning with the British Navy in the Dutch Wars, the line ahead replaced the general melee. The two developments were causally related: the line ahead was adopted when generals took command of the British fleet under the Commonwealth.

The First Generation lasted about two centuries, centuries in which the culture of state militaries was formed. Linearity on the battlefield carried over directly into that culture, where it remains today. In Second Generation militaries, such as the American, the tactics too remained largely linear. As late as the First Gulf War a battalion commander in the Second Marine Division was nearly relieved for "breaking the line" when he pulled his unit back to avoid an Iraqi fire sack.

The expectation of linearity lies behind much of the U.S. military's misreading of the current situation in Iraq. If you look at its projections of success, they follow a line. It foresees a linear "building process" where its alliance with some Sunni militias in Anbar province and parts of Baghdad leads to similar alliances elsewhere, with no regression in "pacified" areas. Similarly, it expects the Sunnis to follow their acceptance of U.S. forces with acceptance of the Shi'ite-dominated government in Baghdad and its army and police. These lines, which lead to improved security, then mesh with other lines such as economic and political developments that represent the reemergence of a state in Iraq. It graphs nicely as a series of vectors on a chart, all pointing up. Linearity has marched from Waterloo to PowerPoint.

Unfortunately, Fourth Generation wars (and many other types of war as well) are not linear. Rather, they are chaotic, an unending melee of coming together and splitting apart that leaves an occupier running in place. Seemingly linear progress is matched or exceeded by non-linear regression. The state military perceives the former much more readily than the latter because linearity is what it expects. You find what you seek, whether or not it is there.

The reality in Iraq is that both Sunnis and Shi'ites are split along many different axes. Factions come together in temporary alliances of convenience, including with the foreign occupiers, only to split apart again and fight former allies. Reality for all parties is local and short-term. To the Iraqis, one alliance, such as with the Americans, does not imply any other alliance, such as with the central government. Arrangements that appear contradictory to us are natural to them. Linear progress toward a set of goals that represent a state is not what they expect. Our linearity and their non-linearity are ships passing in the night.

It will happen from time to time that the chaos shakes out into patterns in which we can see linear progress. But the reality remains chaos, which means the patterns will soon reform into other, quite different shapes. We cannot anticipate what those shapes might be. If we can be quick enough, we may be able to use some of those new shapes, as we have used the unexpected outbreak of fighting between local Sunni militias and al-Qaeda. What we must not do, if our orientation is to be accurate, is project these kaleidoscopic pattern shifts in linear terms.

Regrettably, that is what the U.S. military in Iraq is doing now. Given its First Generation heritage, it may not be able to do anything else.

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

I'm not sure who Willian Lind is, but it is he that is well behind the times in his analysis.

When he wrote that piece in March of 2008, the US military had already turned the tide in Iraq and was within just a couple of months of snuffing out the remaining insurgency.

Lind uses a lot of big words and abstract ideas to criticize the US military and form some sort of op-ed piece that conforms to his pre-conceived notions. I recommend Mr Lind read the Counter Insurgency Manual by Gen Petraeus and review the operations of the Army and Marines during the surge. I think he'll find operations there anything but linear.

[Sharky]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’

Sounds to me like Russia is still suffering from dreams of imperialism.

What I'd like to know is how are they going to pay for it? It's almost enough to make me laugh. Will they borrow from the Chinese? I don't think so....

Russian GDP in 2007 was about 1.3T -- only about a third more than South Korea. If we assume they spend twice the percentage of GDP on their military as any other country , that would put them on a par with France (assuming equal results for equal expenditures, which is probably far from accurate). Does anyone seriously think that France alone could be a threat to world peace?

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

According to William Lind, who studies these matters in great detail, the U.S. military is at least a generation behind contemporary realities. And, this is in addition to the fact that we are invaders; "we" are not defending our own country.

"Waist deep in the Big Muddy, and the damn fool says to march on. . ."

We are not engaged in combat with the Russians.

In SOME respects, the United States was fighting "the last war" in Vietnam.

The United States was capable of winning every conventional conflict...Air, Land, Sea.

The North Vietnamese and the Vietcong fought a different war, playing to THEIR strengths of inexhaustable casualty tolerance, eternal patience, unconventional operations, and fighting the media war.

The North Vietnamese pretty much lost every battle but still won the war.

Does the US risk the similiar failure in Afghanistan, or possibly elsewhere, today?

Certainly..........


For example, while the US and it's Coalition allies totally annihilated Iraqi forces in 91 in what was a large scale conventional air/land conflict due to it's force posture and doctrine were perfectly aligned to fight EXACTLY that conflict....in Iraq 2003, post kicking down the door, US forces outside of the special operations community were undermanned, underequipped, and poorly focused at the start to dominate the battlespace in a complex COIN environment.

They have since adapted and (re)learned old lessons.

It's quite common for such large entities to require substantial time to shift doctrine to fight the "next war".

But this thread is about "Russia Re-arming".

If you would like to engage in some sort of measuring contest to see who's right we should probably take it to PM and not bother everyone else.

The fact is the United States military possesses more overwhelming conventional force projection capability to dominate ANY conventional battlespace ANYWHERE in the world than probably at any time in it's history.

The differences between US and Russian equipment ON AVERAGE OVERALL represent probably the greatest qualitative technological gap in favor of the US than at any time since 1945.

The US also possesses recent and nearly universal combat experience that is unmatched by any likely large-scale conflict opponents.

While the overall size of US forces are far smaller than during it's numerical peak leading up to Desert Storm 1.0, and the US would be unlikely to be able to HOLD ground for long in some of the more inhospitable regions of the world....it clearly possesses the capability to SEIZE it........or prevent any other human being from doing so with relative ease.......assuming a total war concept of operations.

Russia is simply in desperate NEED to replace existing and dangerously decrepit kit...as well as completing step 14 of it's 72 step long-term plan to turn it's conscript rabble of a military into leaner and meaner professional pipehitters.

I currently serve and have a bloody good understanding of current military capabilities.

The only thing to fear more than a well motivated, well trained, and well equipped enemy in a complex urban COIN environment is the United States military when it is your opponent in conventional operations.....land/sea/air you will not even see what kills you.

The good news for those concerned about potential for the US to get more aggressively grabby going forward...the ability for the US to maintain it's operational tempo as well as the continued acceleration of its long-term military technological dominance is low since it's brokeass.

The threat from Russia is it's useable economic weapons, rather than it's long-standing, unuseable nuclear triad or it's antiquated but updating small conventional military threat.

[KGW]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

I'm not sure who Willian Lind is, but it is he that is well behind the times in his analysis.

When he wrote that piece in March of 2008, the US military had already turned the tide in Iraq and was within just a couple of months of snuffing out the remaining insurgency.

Sorry, I don't drink that Kool-Aid. A more recent piece by Mr. Lind:

February 18, 2009
The Magic Potion

by William S. Lind

In many Gilbert and Sullivan operettas, the story line depends on some sort of magic elixir or potion. Similarly, the advocates for a Brave New World tell us the comic opera called "democracy" flows from the magic of elections. Just hold elections, and presto!, wars vanish. Regrettably, the Brave New World's music is not nearly so entertaining as that of Sir Arthur Sullivan, while its plot is even more absurd than most of Gilbert's.

Two recent elections point to a grimmer reality. The first was in Iraq, for provincial councils. In Iraq, as in most of the world, the question is neither whether elections were held nor who won. The question on which social order depends is who accepts the results of an election. If elections are to substitute for war, not only the winners but also the losers must accept their outcome. Losers must give up power, patronage, one of the very few local sources of money (often lots of it), and possibly physical security as well, hoping for better luck next time, if there is a next time.

I suspect the odds of that happening in Iraq are small. The Washington Post recently quoted one U.S. officer who served as an adviser to Iraqi army units saying of Iraqi commanders, "When you got to know them and they'd be honest with you, every single one of them thought that the whole notion of democracy and representative government in Iraq was absolutely ludicrous."

That quote was in a piece by Tom Ricks, the Post's longtime defense correspondent, in the Feb. 15 "Outlook" section. Ricks goes on to say, "I don't think the Iraq war is over, and I worry that there is more to come than any of us suspect."

Many of those closest to the situation in Iraq expect a full-blown civil war to break out there in the coming years. "I don't think the Iraqi civil war has been fought yet," one colonel told me.

In such an environment, elections do not substitute for war but rather prepare the way for it. They exacerbate differences, heighten local conflicts, and lengthen the lists of "injustices" each party uses to justify fighting.

This unfortunate reality points again to what America needs to do in Iraq: get out now, fast, while it can. If we are lucky, history will grant us a "decent interval" between our departure and the next round of 4GW in Iraq. If we dawdle until the fighting ramps up again, we may find it difficult, politically if not militarily, to leave at all.

This brings us to another election, that in Israel. It is not clear what government will emerge from Israel's vote. It is clear the Knesset has shifted to the right. From the standpoint of America's interests, that is a negative outcome.

The danger is not only to prospects of peace between Israel and the Palestinians, which are probably small in any event. The danger is that a new Israeli government in which Likud and voices to Likud's right are stronger is more likely to attack Iran.

As I have said repeatedly in past columns, an attack on Iran by the U.S. or Israel threatens consequences disastrous to America. The worst potential consequence is the possibility of the destruction of the army the U.S. now has in Iraq. As almost no one in Washington seems to realize – thanks, as usual, to hubris – that possibility is all too real. All one need do to see it is look at a map. Iran sits alongside our main line of communications, supply, and retreat all the way from Baghdad to the straits of Hormuz. Add in the probability that various Shi'ite militias and perhaps much of the new Iraqi army as well would join with the Iranians in attacking us, and the possibility of finding 100,000 American troops in an operational Kessel is frighteningly evident.

Thus we find that in two overseas elections, the magic elixir has proven poisonous to the United States. The two reinforce one another in their toxic effects, the one threatening to hold us in Iraq, the other to entomb us there. As Tom Ricks concluded his piece in the Post, "In other words, the events for which the Iraq war will be remembered probably haven't even happened yet." Thanks to two elections, they may be coming all the faster.

---------------------
BTW, William Lind is Director of the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the Free Congress Foundation.

[KGW]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

The fact is the United States military possesses more overwhelming conventional force projection capability to dominate ANY conventional battlespace ANYWHERE in the world than probably at any time in it's history.

Unfortunately, what is more important than force projection itself is why the force is being projected. . .If the U.S. intention is to beat everyone else into submission, to advance the joys of commodification provided by our corporations, to enable democracy so bankers can be free, it has already lost.

[Rajiv]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’

By CLIFFORD J. LEVY
Published: March 17, 2009


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/wo...dvedev.html?hp

Why do I have the sneaking feeling that this item was deliberately put into the NY Times?

Maybe it was to prevent this from taking place?

March 17, 2009
.
.
.
.
Two defense officials who were not authorized to speak publicly said Gates will announce up to a half-dozen major weapons cancellations later this month. Candidates include a new Navy destroyer, the Air Force's F-22 fighter jet, and Army ground-combat vehicles, the offi cials said.

More cuts are planned for later this year after a review that could lead to reductions in programs such as aircraft carriers and nuclear arms, the officials said.
.
.
.
.
.

[Guest]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

So much for the "invulnerability of the military industrial complex". I suppose that preoccupation was overblown as the sink-hole of money already gone into the F-22 alone renders this item all by itself a stunning pullback. Add carrier groups into the cancellations and the down sizing here mentioned would be secular in scale. Taken all together, this would be big, big news for the US posture, no? So it bears noting then - How many posts have we read on this site in the past two years heatedly insisting that the US would be further "arming to the teeth" going into the next decade? Can those heories be now described as having been grossly exaggerated, if not even flat wrong, given these massive program cancellations? These are not small cancellations - seem to rate rather as very large.

Why do I have the sneaking feeling that this item was deliberately put into the NY Times? Maybe it was to prevent this from taking place?

Quote:

March 17, 2009 Two defense officials who were not authorized to speak publicly said Gates will announce up to a half-dozen major weapons cancellations later this month. Candidates include a new Navy destroyer, the Air Force's F-22 fighter jet, and Army ground-combat vehicles, the officials said. More cuts are planned for later this year after a review that could lead to reductions in programs such as aircraft carriers and nuclear arms, the officials said.

[Sharky]

Re: Russia Is Planning a ‘Large-Scale Rearming’ - ny times

Regarding the proposed cutbacks in the F-22 program, there was an article on Bloomberg recently:

Intel, Lockheed Tell Obama on Taxes, F-22: Not in This Economy

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=a_OqNC8WLyfU

Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin is trying to continue production of the F-22 fighter jet, the most expensive aircraft in U.S. history, as the Obama administration reviews weapons programs for possible cuts.

During the past three weeks, Lockheed bought daily newspaper advertisements that focused on 1,000 companies and 95,000 workers dependent on the project.

“If you’re looking for stimulus and to stop the bleeding and job losses, step one is to stabilize the current situation,” Larry Lawson, Lockheed’s F-22 program manager, said in an interview. Cutting the F-22 would mean Lockheed and its suppliers “would start laying people off,” he said.