When things are investigated, knowledge is extended. When knowledge is extended, the will becomes sincere. When the will is sincere, the mind is correct. When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated. -- Confucius
Politically correct ideals are garbage: true wisdom comes from decades of deep thought and neutral observation. Only a so-called sociopath could ascertain wisdom from this crazy world in a neutral way. Cool thoughts- uncorrupted by modern politics, social norms, or societal ideals- are required for wisdom. Questioning everything, and going against the grain on all universally accepted norms is the path to true intelligence. The Gods notice this.


Ukraine Spells Doom for USA

So I have been watching the world news lately on television. I also happen to read the world news on the internet, directly from several foreign news sites. While the American t.v. news seems thorough and detailed, all narrated matter-of-factly by the dapper newsmen, it is striking what is simply never mentioned: the other side of the stories.

According to American news, this is what is happening in a country called Ukraine:
...Its citizens ousted its corrupt leader, and then the Russians tried to undermine its new democracy with clandestinely funded insurgents. It then agreed to a peace accord which it is not following. Therefore the US and Europeans are showing the Russians they can't just take over other countries and get away with it, so sanctions were invoked. Meanwhile, Russia took over another country called Crimea and annexed it illegally. Their unlawful expansions are being dealt with by the brave Americans and Europeans.

But the rest of the world knows this side of it:
...Ukraine's leader lived no more opulently than any other head of state, and he was ousted by a known fascist party extremist with CIA backing. The new puppet regime with extensive fascist roots, received a day long visit from the head of the CIA, which was publicly admitted to by the American government. Since then, the new regime has stopped payments on money owed to Russia for natural gas deliveries (3.5 billion), actually cut off the water supply to Crimea, and stopped supplying its own troops (i.e.: no food for days at a time). They also invited American mercenaries in for unknown missions. Now, they are attacking Russian citizens with military helicopters in the city of Slaviansk. Meanwhile, Crimea, a former Soviet state, VOTED to rejoin with Russia and was annexed by internationally legal means. So now Russia's pleas for peace and warnings to not harm Russians in Ukraine are ignored.

light blue areas are ethnic Russians. they are oppressed minority in danger of genocidal acts.

America, and its European proxy army NATO, have placed troops in 4 countries directly bordering Russia (..Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland..). They also have placed naval flotillas in the Black and Baltic seas, on which they are practicing military exercises. NATO has officially declared Russia to be an enemy. Germany's leader Merkel has hinted at wanting a land war with Russia, releasing the statement recently, “Nobody should be deceived. We are willing to act.” Apparently their 'act' is to shoot down airliners and blame it on Russia- see list here of numerous non-Western articles on this.

So the question few are even asking is: can America even win a war with Russia? Even with NATO backing?? Let's think about that...

The Americans can win any war, through air superiority and high tech gadgets, plus worldwide presence. Right? They walked into Iraq and stomped them, right? Iraq's French made antiaircraft guns were fitted with targeting microchips that were hacked and defeated with American HARM missiles, so guess why the American invasion went so well? After ten years of enforcement of a no-fly zone and random bombings before this, how strong were they anyway? And this is the example of their power?..Regardless, how high tech are American weapons, compared to other countries, especially Russia? Who has more military might?

Russia has virtually all of its military in its homeland territory: Russia. The Americans are dispersed across the globe in bases all over the world. So the comparative totals of how many troops or jets or whatever becomes pointless. How many of those troops or tanks can America deliver onto Russian territory, without sacrificing the security of the bases they originated from? While tanks from Ft. Knox could be safely airlifted to Russia in the event of war, would they really want to move the tanks out of South Korea? Or if the equipment or men in Europe were moved on Russia, the French, German, and UK militaries would protect the landmass from invasion, right? If so- it is a distraction to keep them out of the conflict. If not, they would be tied up with NATO maneuvers and leave their home soil wide open. Either way, Europe is screwed. War in Eurasia will go very badly for the NATO puppets.

Can America take on such a large nation with so many frontiers at once? Russia is the largest country in the world. While their main enemy may be highly mobile and attempt to divide and conquer with numerous small fronts, their enormous landmass only aids their breathing room in event of war.

They are used to war and hardship, having suffered far greater than all other allies combined during world war two. If it were not for the Russians, we would probably be living under a nazi flag right now. They fought hard for their homeland before, and would again. Anyone fights harder to protect his home than anywhere else. Will they really just give up like the Iraqi army did? Doubtful. Here is what no Americans understand: they are not afraid of us, we do not intimidate them, and our 'hegemony' is a joke to them. They are also tired of us encircling their country with military bases.

So what would happen if America or its pet NATO were to try and invade them?

First of all, the Russian military is very serious and does not mess around. Unlike several movies, they are not a bunch of bumbling morons with junk weaponry. They are known to be very well trained and disciplined and have very advanced weapons. They also will be fighting for their homeland- not off playing soldier on some imperialistic jaunt on the other side of the world.

What kind of damage could they do to American technology and firepower though? Many of their systems are considered to be at least as advanced, if not much more so, than their American counterparts. Examples:
norad/SDI type base  (use google translate, or just peruse pics to get the idea...)

...'But we have advanced pilots, as shown by the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds'. Yes- and they do too: the Swifts and Russian Knights. ...'But we have exotic weapons to use when needed.' And they have screw drive vehicles, full auto pistols, full auto shotguns, full auto grenade launchers, the 'heavy flamethrower systems', the 'father of all bombs', the S-400 anti-missile systems, self-propelled coastal artillery, and don't forget the Topols.


A Topol is a nuclear missile mounted onto a giant truck. It drives around in the Siberian woods at random, so Americans are unable to target its location. As good as submarine based nukes, and they have them- we don't! All of our land based nukes are in silos...While scattered over large areas, their locations are known and the Russians have more than enough warheads to cover them all many times over.

Regarding the nukes, they have more. At least 300 more. And they also have extensive civil defense shelters. America stopped maintaining their shelters after protests in 1961. The govt. did not want to pay for it anyway- even though the scientific studies show you could survive a nuclear war if prepared properly. Funny how Russia and China have extensive plans/shelters in place, and America has nothing at all. What this means to us is that they know they can survive a nuclear war and while dreading it, fear it less than we do. They know that most of them will survive. Couple that with the fact that Russians would never give up and submit to American invaders, a conventional defeat would trigger the nuclear menace as an obvious next step for them to cut the head off the snake of the imperialists.

What if they joined forces with another country, instead of, or before resorting to, nukes? While they are not military allies with China, they have common interests and a common foe. China knows full well that America is encircling them too with the so-called “pivot to Asia” policy. If Russia were crippled, they would surely be next, and they would want to prevent that. Russia and China are both part of an economic alliance with increasing military ties called the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, which includes them and four other Asian countries as members, six observer states, six dialogue partners, plus two groups of countries as observers. India and Iran are expected to become full members soon. Would this group morph into a true military alliance if America starts invading Asian nations? This blogger posits that it is very likely the SCO will become NATO's counterbalance. 

A military alliance between the Russians and Chinese would spell doom for American forces. While either of them could in theory win a war with us, both together almost surely would. America fought two fronts before, such as in WWII, in the Pacific and in Europe, and this time we have NATO and ANZUS and the Philippines and Japan....But this time nukes are a big factor, and extensive sea mining, and enormous armies. Tactical nukes, long range weaponry, and stealth jets and boats are all in the mix this time.

Contrary to popular belief, Americans have no monopoly on stealth technology. Russians and the Chinese have this as well. The Chinese are especially keen on the stealth boats, and are developing stealth choppers. Russia is making stealth fighter jets and bombers. Iran and India also claim to have stealth jets.

What if a war did occur, what could the Russians do- besides run from us as Americans predict? They have several strengths and a few weaknesses:

-their army is very well trained, loyal, and will have no trouble gaining virtually all possible conscripts if war began.
-they have a lot of superb tanks, excellent rifles, more missiles, better anti-missile systems
-their aircraft are superior in most every way
-most of their nukes are mobile.
-they have powerful friends in strategic places: China, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and others.
-their country is large and hard to patrol all borders. There are too many invasion points to prepare for.
-their navy has only one aircraft carrier so projecting their power is not easy.
-already surrounded by American bases and sea flotillas, they would have many fronts in all directions.

Let us compare a few things directly as well:
America has more (than Russia)- current troops and total population; aircraft, helicopters, airports, major ports, aircraft carriers, subs, frigates, and destroyers; and less coastlines and shared borders to cover.
Russia has more (than America)- active military reserves, tanks, armored fighting vehicles, self propelled guns, towed artillery, multiple rocket launchers, merchant marine strength, corvette class vessels, mine warfare craft, patrol craft; and, less external debt and more foreign exchange currency(more money), and much more oil reserves and production with less consumption.
China has more (than America)- troops, reserves, and population; tanks, towed artillery, multiple rocket launchers, merchant marine strength, total naval vessels, frigates, mine warfare vessels, patrol craft, and possibly more subs; and less debt and more foreign reserves (more money), and more oil reserves and less consumption.

Worthy of special mention here are aircraft carriers. Used to project American imperialism worldwide, they intimidate the smaller countries as they rove the high seas. Russia and China each has only one apiece currently, though both are building more. This means they cannot as easily project their power to other places and their wars will have to be fought at home, on their turf. Unfortunately for the West, defenses have been constructed against them. The Chinese have a ballistic anti-ship missile called the DF-21D. It  can drop straight down onto a carrier from space up to 1200 miles away. The Russians have the Onyx 'Sunburn' anti-ship missile, which is so low flying and fast its sheer kinetic energy can literally capsize a large vessel. Three can sink a carrier. They also have a lot of 130mm coastal artillery guns

A few other factors to consider are not just numbers, but how the battles would be fought...
An American flotilla with its aircraft carrier is very formidable, but so is a Sunburn missile.
High tech ranging devices and other gadgets are pretty handy, but not when you are inside a wall of fire.
The UK and France are powerful friends, but not so much when China and Iran has the enemy's back.
Many vaunted weapons systems of America are really not so great. Prime example is the M1 Abrams tank. Weighing 20 tons more than the Russian T90, it has 125 km less range, much slower reload time, and 1/2 to 1/4 the firing range, depending on types of shells used. Besides the fact that the Houthi rebels are using 1970s Soviet shoulder fired ATGM missiles to destroy Saudi operated M1 tanks- see this video...Other examples abound but are beyond the scope of this piece.

They have been preparing for war with us for decades. Do you really think they are going to roll over and beg for mercy while we blast their infrastructure to bits and kill thousands of their civilians? Just because Iraq did, it doesn't mean the Russians will. Encircling and threatening them is playing with fire, to put it mildly.

One thing Americans very rarely do is empathize: putting themselves in someone else's shoes. Their imperialistic adventures and corporate oil grabs are just a game to them. They haven't experienced war at home and think it is just a news clip that need not be worried about. So let us turn the tables to make people understand a little better. Here is an accurate analogy of what we are doing to them:

The United States of America has a federal govt. breakdown. It reorganizes as a new country, called the Commonwealth of Independent States. Then after a time becomes simply the American Federation with several states choosing to become their own nations. All is well with these states at first, but then Russia decides to use CIA style regime change tactics in say, our new country-former-state of Georgia. The new government has disagreements with the people of say, Savannah. So the Atlantans threaten them. The UN sets up observers to watch. Sure enough, Atlanta attacks Savannah and starts killing hundreds of its civilians despite UN orders. So the American Federation invades just long enough to save the Savannans, then withdraws. During this incident they find entire warehouses full of Russian weapons stockpiled. So the Russians were setting up a base on our border. Hmmm. Now, four years later, the nation-former-state of say, New York has a similar political upset and the KGB is all over it. There are also Cuban mercenaries sneaking around. We plead for peace but the new Communist govt. of New York is killing civilians in Albany with helicopter gunships. The UN orders peace terms, and no one follows them. Next, Russia sends a military flotilla up the Hudson River and has live fire naval exercises in the Great Lakes. They also anchor their aircraft carrier off Staten Island. Apparently, something is up. Especially since they have placed troops in five Caribbean nations and have declared us to be an enemy. What would Americans think, who would they blame; what would they do? New York is a very strategic place to put a base near DC, after all. We aren't stupid, right?

And do you think Russians are stupid???

Couldn't America just fly in and bomb away like they do everywhere else?

Addendum: is the US Air Force unmatched- or outmatched? 

Trying to compare Russian and American military jets is tricky to put it mildly. There are so many specs and uses for each jet. Should one compare size, shape, “generation”, role/s, ranges, types of armaments it carries- or what combinations of these??

America has many more aircraft– in sheer numbers- than Russia. But then Russia does not need to stock 128 foreign bases and 12 aircraft carriers like America does. Where are they, and at what times; how soon can they be transported to the Eurasian theater (where any war with Russia would occur)? Also, how many are used at domestic bases, parked in North America and out of range of Eurasia? Counting off all of these plus the where-are-they-now factor for the carrier based ones and the how-far-away-are-they-without-refueling factor of the ones at foreign bases, I suspect not too many will be able to approach Russia at the outbreak of any hostilities, and more would arrive sporadically. So tallying means little in reality. 
Here is a listing of active military crafts, and their basics:
[includes bombers, fighters, strike craft, gunships, and attack choppers. not included here are ASW, EW, cargo, transport, command, trainers, and miscellaneous crafts.]

America has three long range bombers. There is the old but trusty B52, scheduled to be used until 2045. Then there is the B1 variable swept wing, and the B2 stealth bomber. 

They also have the F22 fighter- an advanced jet that is no longer in production though still in use, the F18 E/F fighter, and several jets which will in time be replaced by the new F35 multirole jet. These include: the A10 ground attack, AC130 gunship, AV8 VSTOL attack(Harrier), and the F15/F16/F18 fighters. The F35 has a marine version with a VTOL horizontal turbofan (the fans are from the failed Avrocar of the 50s). 

The F35 is considered to be a lemon and a boondoggle. It would be wiser to keep the A10 and F16 in foreign bases/carriers, put all of the F18s and F15s on domestic bases, and discontinue the AC130. Then use the AV8 for the marines. 
{ The A10 is perfect for land bases to be available at any front lines. The F16 is small and fits on carriers better than the bulky old F15s, and would serve fine in those duties. The F18, very small and nimble would be ideal for domestic borders, while the F15 would be fine as a backbone craft to defend the home front if invaded. The AC130s are cargo planes with weaponry attached: monstrosities. Useless when A10s are available. The Harriers are fine for use on the marine landing crafts- which are basically small aircraft carriers. Reshuffling these jets to smarter uses in an organized way like this would make more sense and save a fortune by not having to buy the F35 junkers. } 

As far as attack choppers, America has 3: the AH6, AH64, and AH1. The 64 is the Apache. The other two are smaller.

The Russians also have three bombers: the Tu22- similar to the discontinued F111, the Tu95- a massive turboprop similar to the B52 but larger, and the Tu160, which is similar to the B1 but much larger; also a variable swept wing craft. 

They also have the MiG39 interceptor/fighter, the Su33 naval fighter (designed for their carriers), the Su27 fighter, and the multirole fighters Mig29, Su30, and Su35. They also have three strike specific jets- the Su34, the Su25 (also for close air support), and the Su24 (also for recon, and with a naval version). They are developing now a multirole fighter called the PAK-FA or T-50. 

All Russian strike and fighter jets -except the Su24 and Su25- are supermaneuverable. This means they are capable of amazing maneuvers, controlled stalls, and sudden changes in direction and orientation. (Only one American jet can do this to some degree- the F22). 

They have only two types of attack choppers- the Ka-50 and the Ka-52. They have double-stacked top rotors and no tail rotors, which makes them very maneuverable, quiet, and fast.

Overall, if you look up the specs (ranges, firepower, speeds, etc.) it is very clear the Russians have superior air power. Maybe not in sheer numbers of craft, but as far as qualities, capabilities, and ranges- absolutely. Please do look up on Youtube or other sites' videos of both sides' maneuvers and it will be clear.

Moreover, the same can be said for their tanks, subs, missiles, air defense systems, and coastal defenses. They are very significantly advanced in air defense, specialized equipment and weaponry, electronic warfare, special forces organization and training, and arctic climate warfare. Their navy is smaller but is a green water navy- not blue water as America's is- and has more icebreakers, subs, and minelayers. They also have much more experience in actual battle in urban and mountain terrains, from Chechnya, Georgia, and Afghanistan (as opposed to Americans mainly doing air bombings). The Russian armed forces also partake in frequent, massive live fire drills of 100,000 troops or more- in rotating districts, sometimes with China or other nations joining in. America has no exercises on this scale.


This should open the eyes of a few at least, who believe baseless lies repeated by the MSM to make them think America could ever successfully invade Russia. The whole idea is impossible, suicidal, unnecessary, and insane. While America and its toy soldiers from their vassal states (NATO) encircle both Russia and China with bases, insurmountable defenses are already waiting that will simply destroy the modern American (Roman) Empire.

Ukrainian maps

Note: the news in the US is extremely biased and lacking. NBC is the worst, next to fox of course which isn't real news anyway. What they do not say is the most telling.
Please seek out-of-country info for all subjects and current events! You will be amazed at what was simply not being mentioned before.

{map: blackseagrain.net}
sorry map is inaccurate. just an overview of area for now. 

File:Baltic Sea map.png

{map: normaneinstein}

©james platt 2014

No comments:

Post a Comment

constructive comments appreciated. name calling and links deleted.