The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
Why One War When We Can Have Two!
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_193853687

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

`We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists, but great-power competition – not terrorism – is now the primary focus of US national security.’ Henceforth Russia and China will be America’s main enemies, with Iran and North Korea thrown in for good measure.

So declared US Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, last week in a statement of profound importance for the world.

For the past seventeen years, the US military has been laying waste to the Muslim world in the faux `war on terrorism.’ Afghanistan, Iraq, much of Syria, Somalia, Pakistan – all have been heavily bombed. US B-52’s and B-1 heavy bombers have tried to pound those resisting American ‘guidance’ into submission.

In Afghanistan, America’s longest war, President Donald Trump ordered a doubling of bombing against Taliban forces battling US occupation. Now, the US is running very low on bombs, guided munitions and even air-to-air missiles for some reason. Stores of munitions are being rushed from the US Pacific command to the Mideast.

At the same time, the US is fast running out of Muslim targets to bomb, now that the bogeyman ISIS has vanished into thin air and US air attacks in Syria are being minimized for fear of clashing with Russia. Iran still remains on the US potential hit list.

Which brings us back to General ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis. He is quite right that so-called terrorists (that’s anyone who actively opposes the Lex Americana) pose no real life or death threat to the US mainland.

But if so, how then to maintain the $1 trillion US military budget? Well, of course, trot out those good old ‘Reds Under Our Beds.’ Actually, the Pentagon has been planning a new war with China for the past three years, a mainly air and naval conflict to dominate China’s coasts and seas. The Pentagon is loading up on new aircraft, missiles, satellites and naval craft for the next Pacific War, and trying to enlist India as an ally against China.

But what then about Russia? Not so easy. The likely theater for a US-Russia clash is on the Baltic coast, Ukraine, the Black Sea or Syria. In this case, the US would be confronted by the same problem that afflicted France in the fall of 1939.

Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around. Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany. French divisions began to invade Germany’s Rhineland. But after a few skirmishes the French high command, under the inept Gen. Maurice Gamelin, didn’t know what to do next. Germany was large, and the defensive-minded French did not anticipate occupying its entire country.

ORDER IT NOW

After a brief demonstration, the French Army withdrew behind the Maginot Line. Hitler did not counter-attack in hope he could forge a peace treaty with London and Paris. Winston Churchill and his fellow imperialists furiously sought to push Britain into war with Germany. But months of inactivity went by, known as the ‘Sitzkrieg’ or ‘drôle de guerre’ until Germany acted decisively.

This would also be America’s problem in a war against Russia. How deep into Russia to attack (assuming no use of nuclear weapons)? How to protect ever lengthening supply lines? Napoleon and Hitler faced the same challenges and failed.

Of course, this supposes the US is ready for war. In truth, neither the US and NATO nor Russia are in any way prepared to fight a real war on land, sea and air. Military forces on both sides have been so run down and depleted by little wars and budget cuts that there are serious shortages of war stocks and aging equipment.

Key NATO member Germany is in a shambles. Its feminized military, run by a nice but incompetent lady defense minister, could not fight its way out of a paper bag. France is not much better off. The US armed forces and Britain are critically short of spares, munitions, transport, and armor. Russia’s once mighty Red Army is short of everything. Both east and west are simply unready for a real war.

As if there is any reason for one. There is not. Those jackanapes in the US Congress and media trying to inflate online mischief by 20-something Russian hackers into a second Pearl Harbor are crying ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.

A final respectful note to Gen. Mattis (my dad was a marine): A good general does not pick a fight with two, far–away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another. Declaring a future war against China and Russia is a crazy idea. Only draft-dodgers and generals who lost the Vietnam War could come up with it.

(Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, China, Russia 
Hide 65 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Henceforth Russia and China will be America’s main enemies, with Iran and North Korea thrown in for good measure.

    Yes. This will not change until there is regime change in Washington or until the final collapse of the American economy.

    In Afghanistan, America’s longest war…..

    Actually, Nixon’s WAR ON DRUGS is our longest war. Cheney’s GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR comes in second I suppose. Both will continue until there is regime change in Washington or until the final collapse of the American economy.

    A good general does not pick a fight with two, far–away major powers at once.

    Who will join us in a war against Russia and China? Nobody that isn’t stupid. If the war is fought without nukes Washington will be crushed. So it probably won’t be fought without nukes. It seems a pity the whole of humanity is at the mercy of a hand full of lunatics in the Imperial City.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Dr. Doom says:

    Uncle Shammy is a Clown. E I E I blow. That affirmative action welfare queen hobo looks like a broke dick dog. His F-35 is a turkey that cannot fly. His F-15s and F-16s are now getting shot down by Russian made SAMs in Syria. You had to wonder how long Uncle Shammy could brown before becoming a sad old clown. About until a half black Akhanaten jr apparently.
    Look at a map of military bases. Its the STARBUCKS coffee global hegemony plan. That’s a lot of bases for a military of just over a Million. And not even a tenth combat ready due to “divershitty”.

    Marcus Aurelius had nothing on Uncle Shammy. His Turd Wurld Fantasy is about to hit the Ethnostates around the Real World. A bunch of half assed mountain boys in Afghanistan are kicking Uncle Shammy’s mercs all over the mountainside, and this washed up old man is picking fights with China and Russia.

    That #winning looks a lot like the Charlie Sheen Tiger Blood SUCK we saw before, Citizen Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. pyrrhus says:

    I generally respect Margolis’s reporting, but he has no idea of the military situation. America will never fight a conventional war against Russia (or China) because the Russians have superior technology, superior geography, and a very patriotic population that intensely dislikes the USA for what it did to Russia during the ’90s. Our white elephant carrier groups would be sunk within minutes if the got anywhere near the battlefield, and our air force would be of little use against 5th Gen SAM systems, Russia’s superior fighter planes, and the soon to be deployed energy weapons. Due to America’s infatuation with diversity, our land forces are at low levels of readiness, as the Pentagon well knows.
    A conventional land war would lead to disaster, while a nuclear war would obviously be the end, so nothing will happen except bluster from the idiots at the Pentagon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paw
    May be Jessica Lynch will win again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. “A final respectful note to Gen. Mattis (my dad was a marine): A good general does not pick a fight with two, far-away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another.”

    Another trick would be for the US to stop constantly trying to subvert other countries and foment conflict to destroy peace and constructive human collaboration.

    A respectful note to the American people: a good country does not subvert others and pit them against each other, like psychopaths do. The trick is to take back control of your hijacked democracy and sovereignty, and respect that of others.

    Read More
    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • Replies: @Moi
    I saw that once sentence too and threw up. Seems like we just gotta keep stirring the pot--because if we didn't, we'd have to confront our problems at home. And we're flat broke, largely because of our wars.
    , @yurivku

    A respectful note to the American people: a good country does not subvert others and pit them against each other, like psychopaths do. The trick is to take back control of your hijacked democracy and sovereignty, and respect that of others.
     
    Agree, but it's about good country, which ZUS never been and, I'm afraid, never will be.
    You can see it even in this article, the author regrets it's dangerous to go on war with Russia, if it was safe he wouldn't mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Ace says:

    ** The likely theater for a US-Russia clash is on the Baltic coast, Ukraine, the Black Sea or Syria. **

    That being the case it will be because the U.S. chose to enter or meddle in those very areas and for no known reason at all. If we’d stay out of those areas there would be no danger of some event precipitating a serious confrontation.

    The Chinese have no reason to have fortified those fly speck islands in the Pacific. More arrogance and setting themselves up for claiming whatever resources may be there than anything. Still, in the scale of “problems” or “threats” the U.S. has to solve or deal with these are minor initiatives. The Chinese have not interfered with shipping so provocative steam bys by the U.S. Navy seem of a piece with the mindless relocation of NATO ground troops to the Russian border.

    I’m no admirer of the U.N. but that may be for the same reason the U.S. Constitution has become a joke. No one pays it serious attention so it’s just sitting there unused. It was however the state of the art solution to what the world had just gone through in 1914-1945. It was supposed to be a big deal but now it’s an afterthought if even that. Appointing Haley’s Comet as the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. should be considered a deliberate insult by the rest of the world.

    Overall, I feel like we’re all passengers on a bus moving down the highway where the steering wheel came off in the driver’s hands. This chest bumping with the Russians and gratuitous insulting of the Chinese feels like the premise of a cheap science fiction novel involving zombies and female ninja Shopping Channel hostesses. Don’t anyone steal this idea. I’m pretty sure I could turn it into a page turner.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. The next wars will be civil.

    Read More
    • Agree: bluedog
    • LOL: MEexpert
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    You mean, without strong language and expletives?
    , @yurivku

    The next wars will be civil.
     
    It could be nice 'cause ZUS is a world problem and until she changes the danger for human beings will exist.
    But I don't believe it, US citizens with brains washed will pinch until too late.
    , @Joe Wong
    Which side shall we finance, the Confederacy or the Yankee?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. @The Anti-Gnostic
    The next wars will be civil.

    You mean, without strong language and expletives?

    Read More
    • LOL: The Anti-Gnostic
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. I second pyrrhus’ observations. Plus, not many recall that about a year ago at a security conference Putin declared in forthright language that Russia will never again fight a war in its homeland. The implications are obvious.
    The Bear should not be provoked any more.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    I will second that, Chinese will never again fight a war in its homeland. Bomb the unrepentant war criminal Japanese out of the face of the earth first no matter what.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Duglarri says:

    I think you’re being unambitious, Eric. I see a simple strategic plan that could be easily executed to correct the American strategic position in the world. First, a lightning descent on Sevastopol, liberating both Crimea and NovoRussia, followed by the capture and completion of the land bridge over the Kerch peninsula. Then, a quick dash across Russia to Siberia to surprise the North Koreans by invading on the landward side, occupying Pyongyang and eliminating their nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, a secondary thrust from the new Crimean base into Iran from the north would likewise take the Iranians completely by surprise. And the new Korean base would permit the US to dominate the South China Sea, which is only, what, 2000 kilometres away?

    You see? All very simple.

    Wait, I forgot Syria. Let’s see…

    Read More
    • LOL: yurivku, Alden
    • Replies: @El Dato
    Unfortunately, Erwin Rommel has been logged off and cannot participate.
    , @Bill Pilgrim
    @Duglarri,

    I didn't realize comedy writers are commenters on this site.

    The only way the US might prevail anywhere is by 'boots on the ground.'
    We're seeing how well THAT works in Afghanistan.
    The air superiority has evaporated.
    Ground invasions are so 20th century...and are over.

    Carrier task forces can be decimated in 15 minutes.

    "The rest is silence..."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. El Dato says:

    Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around. Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany. French divisions began to invade Germany’s Rhineland. But after a few skirmishes the French high command, under the inept Gen. Maurice Gamelin, didn’t know what to do next. Germany was large, and the defensive-minded French did not anticipate occupying its entire country.

    Interesting. But hype. There was indeed a little symbolic push into the Saarland, and the French got themselves a forest and a few villages. Forces far below “french division” were involved.

    From Janusz Piekalkiewicz’s anthology (a bit ancient, 1985):

    “Im Vorfeld des Westwalls kommt es am nächsten Abend zu einer eher symbolischen Offensive von schwachen Teilkräften der französischen 4. Armee (Gen. Réquin) bei Saarbrücken, um auf diese Weise die Bereitschaft Frankreichs anzudeuten, seinen vertraglichen Bündnispflichten gegenüber Polen nachzukommen.

    In der Nacht vom 7./8. September 1939 besetzen französische Vorhuten and der Nahtstelle zwischen der französischen 4. und 3. Armee einen Teil des Warndtwaldes und eine Anhöhe im Raum Auersmacher. Sie überschreiten die Grenze und dringen auf deutsches Gebiet vor. Daraufhin weichen die deutschen Verteidigungskräfte auf die Hauptstellungen der “Siegfriedlinie” zurück.”

    Translation:

    Ahead of the Westwall, the French stage a rather symbolic attack by weak elements of the French 4th Army, (Gen. Réquin) near Saarbrücken, in order to indicate the willingness of France to honour its contractual obligations towards Poland.

    In the night of 7./8. In September 1939 French forward forces positioned between the French 4th and 3rd Army occupy part of the forest of Warndtwald and a hill in the Auersmacher area. They cross the border and penetrate into German territory. Following this, German defense pull back to the main positions of the “Siegfried Line”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    Question: Why does France have tree-lined roads and boulevards? Answer: Because German troops like marching in the shade.
    , @Wally
    Actually, 40 French divisions were involved. Get your facts straight.

    So then, the French did attack first.

    Also recall that England & France declared war on Germany for invading Poland, but did not declare war against the communist USSR who also invaded Poland.

    www.codoh.com

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Renoman says:

    The Anti-Gnostic is correct, a Civil war is close at hand, it’s the Niggas, Fags, Feminists and the 1% against everyone else. Bloody and quick I’d say. I look forward to the mansion burnings.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. El Dato says:
    @Duglarri
    I think you're being unambitious, Eric. I see a simple strategic plan that could be easily executed to correct the American strategic position in the world. First, a lightning descent on Sevastopol, liberating both Crimea and NovoRussia, followed by the capture and completion of the land bridge over the Kerch peninsula. Then, a quick dash across Russia to Siberia to surprise the North Koreans by invading on the landward side, occupying Pyongyang and eliminating their nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, a secondary thrust from the new Crimean base into Iran from the north would likewise take the Iranians completely by surprise. And the new Korean base would permit the US to dominate the South China Sea, which is only, what, 2000 kilometres away?

    You see? All very simple.

    Wait, I forgot Syria. Let's see...

    Unfortunately, Erwin Rommel has been logged off and cannot participate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @Duglarri
    I think you're being unambitious, Eric. I see a simple strategic plan that could be easily executed to correct the American strategic position in the world. First, a lightning descent on Sevastopol, liberating both Crimea and NovoRussia, followed by the capture and completion of the land bridge over the Kerch peninsula. Then, a quick dash across Russia to Siberia to surprise the North Koreans by invading on the landward side, occupying Pyongyang and eliminating their nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, a secondary thrust from the new Crimean base into Iran from the north would likewise take the Iranians completely by surprise. And the new Korean base would permit the US to dominate the South China Sea, which is only, what, 2000 kilometres away?

    You see? All very simple.

    Wait, I forgot Syria. Let's see...

    ,

    I didn’t realize comedy writers are commenters on this site.

    The only way the US might prevail anywhere is by ‘boots on the ground.’
    We’re seeing how well THAT works in Afghanistan.
    The air superiority has evaporated.
    Ground invasions are so 20th century…and are over.

    Carrier task forces can be decimated in 15 minutes.

    “The rest is silence…”

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkU
    Re: "Carrier task forces can be decimated in 15 minutes"

    Pedantic I know but I really hate the word decimated being used in this (incorrect) way. Decimation was a Roman punishment for military units that had disgraced themselves, every 10th man was killed. Properly used, the word decimated would mean that 10% of the forces were destroyed, I doubt that is what you meant. Since we already have more than enough words to describe destruction, annihilation, devastation, elimination etc I really do object to yet another nuance being eliminated, destroyed, removed, annihilated, obliterated, nullified etc

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Very valid point from Margolis. Washington’s long-term strategy sounds muddled.
    The way things are shaping up, from a strategic perspective, one of the missed opportunities of the Trump presidency will have been the detente with Russia. Trump wanted to play tough with China and nice with Russia. A simple and sensible strategy. Looks like it was not meant to be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @myself
    Trump wanted to play tough with China and nice with Russia. A simple and sensible strategy. Looks like it was not meant to be.
    _____________________________________________________________________
    Britain played nice with France in the post-Napoleon period in order to form a common front against Germany. It worked because the British were sincere and skillful, and German diplomacy was inept.

    America is trying to pull the wool over Russia's eyes with nice words while deploying troops on its border and pushing NATO westward, and hoping Russia will be so stupid as to fall into an anti-China coalition. Meanwhile, unlike Germany and France post-1870, there are no outstanding territorial disputes between China and Russia, plus quite a lot of mutually beneficial interaction.

    Chances of America getting Russia on-board: ZERO.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Yee says:

    jimbojones,

    “Trump wanted to play tough with China and nice with Russia. A simple and sensible strategy. Looks like it was not meant to be.”

    That looks nice, but problem is, China doesn’t have much military and political interests aboard, only North Korea and a lesser one, Pakistan. China’s overseas interests are mainly economic.

    Of course you can still hit China’s overseas investments. But then you have to replace them with yours, otherwise China could come back after awhile and the locals would be more firmly on China’s side, because, who wants to be your whore without pay? Oh, wait, perhaps only India and Australia would.

    And Trade War with China? Europe, Japan and Southeast Asia would be so happy, because 2 top markets of the world clear their competitor for them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Apparently Mr Margolis missed the blistering pace of modernisation of the Russian military in the last ten years. While letting everyone point and laugh at the shambolic Admiral Kuznetsov (it’s a good idea to have something to distract one’s enemies by), the Russian land and missile forces are now extremely advanced, and armoured strike forces have been re established for the first time since the fall of the USSR. This modernisation has reached everything from the T14 Armata tank to modern helmets and body armour for the combat troops (who for the first time are all volunteers; the conscripts are now strictly line of communication and back up troops). And Russia knows that any war Amerikastan starts will be an existential crisis for their country; they will fight like they fought Hitler, but with far better equipment.

    As for the NATO/ EU slaves? Fuck the EU.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. MarkU says:
    @Bill Pilgrim
    @Duglarri,

    I didn't realize comedy writers are commenters on this site.

    The only way the US might prevail anywhere is by 'boots on the ground.'
    We're seeing how well THAT works in Afghanistan.
    The air superiority has evaporated.
    Ground invasions are so 20th century...and are over.

    Carrier task forces can be decimated in 15 minutes.

    "The rest is silence..."

    Re: “Carrier task forces can be decimated in 15 minutes”

    Pedantic I know but I really hate the word decimated being used in this (incorrect) way. Decimation was a Roman punishment for military units that had disgraced themselves, every 10th man was killed. Properly used, the word decimated would mean that 10% of the forces were destroyed, I doubt that is what you meant. Since we already have more than enough words to describe destruction, annihilation, devastation, elimination etc I really do object to yet another nuance being eliminated, destroyed, removed, annihilated, obliterated, nullified etc

    Read More
    • Agree: CanSpeccy, Sollipsist
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. With the US Defense Department being the largest employee in the world, maintaining plans for starting not less than 3 wars at any given time becomes a necessity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. @El Dato

    Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around. Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany. French divisions began to invade Germany’s Rhineland. But after a few skirmishes the French high command, under the inept Gen. Maurice Gamelin, didn’t know what to do next. Germany was large, and the defensive-minded French did not anticipate occupying its entire country.
     
    Interesting. But hype. There was indeed a little symbolic push into the Saarland, and the French got themselves a forest and a few villages. Forces far below "french division" were involved.

    From Janusz Piekalkiewicz's anthology (a bit ancient, 1985):

    "Im Vorfeld des Westwalls kommt es am nächsten Abend zu einer eher symbolischen Offensive von schwachen Teilkräften der französischen 4. Armee (Gen. Réquin) bei Saarbrücken, um auf diese Weise die Bereitschaft Frankreichs anzudeuten, seinen vertraglichen Bündnispflichten gegenüber Polen nachzukommen.

    In der Nacht vom 7./8. September 1939 besetzen französische Vorhuten and der Nahtstelle zwischen der französischen 4. und 3. Armee einen Teil des Warndtwaldes und eine Anhöhe im Raum Auersmacher. Sie überschreiten die Grenze und dringen auf deutsches Gebiet vor. Daraufhin weichen die deutschen Verteidigungskräfte auf die Hauptstellungen der "Siegfriedlinie" zurück."

     

    Translation:

    Ahead of the Westwall, the French stage a rather symbolic attack by weak elements of the French 4th Army, (Gen. Réquin) near Saarbrücken, in order to indicate the willingness of France to honour its contractual obligations towards Poland.

    In the night of 7./8. In September 1939 French forward forces positioned between the French 4th and 3rd Army occupy part of the forest of Warndtwald and a hill in the Auersmacher area. They cross the border and penetrate into German territory. Following this, German defense pull back to the main positions of the "Siegfried Line".
     

    Question: Why does France have tree-lined roads and boulevards? Answer: Because German troops like marching in the shade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. freebird says:

    Trump is the Commander In Chief. I believe he is smart enough politically to understand that an all out war with either China or Russia would effectively doom any prospect of a second term he might hope for. One of the main reasons people voted for him in 2016 is that he espoused a America first agenda with non-intervention and massive boots on the ground conflict out of the question unless we are directly attacked. The vast majority of Americans do not want a massive all out war with either Russia or China or for that matter North Korea. There would be no winner it would effectively be WWIII and the entire world would crumble. Hopefully Trump understands that and he keeps the crazy Neoconservatives at bay and does not listen to them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    Trump is smart...all out war with either China or Russia would effectively doom any prospect of a second term
     
    Hmm, among other things. Maybe who wins the second term is not the big problem with having that 'war'...
    , @jilles dykstra
    " effectively doom any prospect of a second term he might hope for. "

    Sure, nobody on this earth will survive.
    For a great description, read the 1953 novel by Nevill Shute 'On the Beach'.
    New Zealand, the last place where anyone dies.
    , @jacques sheete

    I believe he is smart enough politically ...
     
    On what basis do people keep making that and similar claims?

    No one with a lick of sense would want the position he strove for.

    Why?:


    If any man be so happily born, so carefully educated, so established in virtue, that no storm can shake him, nor any poison corrupt him, yet he will consider he is mortal; and knowing no more than Solomon, whether his son shall be a wise man or a fool, he will always fear to take upon him a power, which must prove a most pestilent evil both to the person that has it, and to those that are under it...

    - Algernon Sidney, Discourses Concerning Government, ed. Thomas G. West (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund 1996). 2/28/2018. http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/223#Sidney_0019_961
     
    Sidney was born into an aristocratic family, so had an intimate view of power, which he came to despise and for good reason. Like Socrates and JC, and many other good men, he was murdered for his beliefs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. rta says:

    “run down and depleted by little wars and budget cuts” Budget cuts? Seriously?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. Tenet says:

    I agree with this article, except two things:

    1. “How to protect ever lengthening supply lines? Napoleon and Hitler faced the same challenges and failed.”

    This hasn’t been relevant since the 1980s. Today’s war machines can easily move long distances in open landscapes, so Russia’s geography is no longer much of a defense. Furthermore, with Ukraine in neocon-loyal hands there is no way to defend Russia in a real land war. Russia’s border defense was dependent on a loyal or neutral Ukraine, with its fortified mountains in the west making tanks take another route. Now Russia suddenly has far more border to defend, and they simply can’t. (Except with nukes, of course.)

    2. Germany’s “feminized military”? Yeah, they have a leftist-minded female minister of defense. How typical of Americans/Canadians to take a single fact and spin a story around it, with the American audience eating it up. “Look, there are facts to back it up!”

    Is Germany’s military any more feminized than the American one? The U.S. allows homosexuals in the military, proudly displays them. They are PAID to have a “sex change,” with taxpayers’ money. Veterans turn transvestite more than other people, as they want to escape the responsibility of what they have done in Iraq and Afghanistan. As one veteran said, “I have never seen so many transvestites as in the VA office”.

    The Marines recently decided to lower qualifications that only one woman had passed. This pro-women weakening props up all the time. And there aren’t enough young people to fill the ranks, because too many are obese, as the military’s research shows.

    So, mentioning the German military as “feminized” but not the U.S. military, which is also brought up? You can do better. A real view of the German military: They could certainly defend Germany from eastern invasion, but could not occupy Russia, which is not in the plans either.

    Read More
    • Replies: @1rw
    Germany has 250 main battle tanks. Russia has well over 10,000. Approaching 20k if reserves have to be activated. Advantages in artillery, Naval forces, Aviation and air defense are similar. Therefore the German military is hopelessly outclassed by Russia’s.

    As to modern machines moving long distances - don’t kid yourself, long distances under combat conditions aren’t that long.
    , @Joe Wong
    Napoleon and Hitler also believed Russian geography was Russian burden not advantage. You are as smart as the French and German. Besides Ukrainian not only was not neutral, they were part of the Nazi attacking the Russian; Nazi even is thriving in Ukraine today.
    , @Kimppis

    Today’s war machines can easily move long distances in open landscapes, so Russia’s geography is no longer much of a defense.
     
    That is simply nonsense.

    Also, those "war machines" (and logistical capabilities) simply don't exist in large enough numbers, that was the author's point.

    There are reports that only 1/3 of Luftwaffe's planes are in operational condition, etc. So being feminized is not their only - or really even the main - problem.

    So while even some Western European nations have impressive budgets (in $ or €) and even impressive militaries overall on paper, they are not actually... in any way built to fight a war against a peer or a near-peer opponent.

    Most importantly, Russia is not going to wait and let the US/NATO build and concentrate an invasion force in peace, it will obviously strike first.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Beckow says:
    @freebird
    Trump is the Commander In Chief. I believe he is smart enough politically to understand that an all out war with either China or Russia would effectively doom any prospect of a second term he might hope for. One of the main reasons people voted for him in 2016 is that he espoused a America first agenda with non-intervention and massive boots on the ground conflict out of the question unless we are directly attacked. The vast majority of Americans do not want a massive all out war with either Russia or China or for that matter North Korea. There would be no winner it would effectively be WWIII and the entire world would crumble. Hopefully Trump understands that and he keeps the crazy Neoconservatives at bay and does not listen to them.

    Trump is smart…all out war with either China or Russia would effectively doom any prospect of a second term

    Hmm, among other things. Maybe who wins the second term is not the big problem with having that ‘war’…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Moi says:
    @Canadian Cents

    "A final respectful note to Gen. Mattis (my dad was a marine): A good general does not pick a fight with two, far-away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another."
     
    Another trick would be for the US to stop constantly trying to subvert other countries and foment conflict to destroy peace and constructive human collaboration.

    A respectful note to the American people: a good country does not subvert others and pit them against each other, like psychopaths do. The trick is to take back control of your hijacked democracy and sovereignty, and respect that of others.

    I saw that once sentence too and threw up. Seems like we just gotta keep stirring the pot–because if we didn’t, we’d have to confront our problems at home. And we’re flat broke, largely because of our wars.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    re “nice but incompetent lady defense minister” better leave out “lady” so as not to give the impression of relating competence to gender

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. anon • Disclaimer says:

    “The likely theatre is the Baltic coast, Ukraine, the Black Sea and Syria”…

    At least three of theses areas can be considered very important, if not vital interests for Russia.

    None of them can be considered important to the USA or its security.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. there will be neither a US-China war or a US-Russia war in the near-distant future.

    Mattis was simply stoking the budget:

    more red high-heels for the boy-soldiers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Paw says:
    @pyrrhus
    I generally respect Margolis's reporting, but he has no idea of the military situation. America will never fight a conventional war against Russia (or China) because the Russians have superior technology, superior geography, and a very patriotic population that intensely dislikes the USA for what it did to Russia during the '90s. Our white elephant carrier groups would be sunk within minutes if the got anywhere near the battlefield, and our air force would be of little use against 5th Gen SAM systems, Russia's superior fighter planes, and the soon to be deployed energy weapons. Due to America's infatuation with diversity, our land forces are at low levels of readiness, as the Pentagon well knows.
    A conventional land war would lead to disaster, while a nuclear war would obviously be the end, so nothing will happen except bluster from the idiots at the Pentagon.

    May be Jessica Lynch will win again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. 1rw says:
    @Tenet
    I agree with this article, except two things:

    1. "How to protect ever lengthening supply lines? Napoleon and Hitler faced the same challenges and failed."

    This hasn't been relevant since the 1980s. Today's war machines can easily move long distances in open landscapes, so Russia's geography is no longer much of a defense. Furthermore, with Ukraine in neocon-loyal hands there is no way to defend Russia in a real land war. Russia's border defense was dependent on a loyal or neutral Ukraine, with its fortified mountains in the west making tanks take another route. Now Russia suddenly has far more border to defend, and they simply can't. (Except with nukes, of course.)

    2. Germany's "feminized military"? Yeah, they have a leftist-minded female minister of defense. How typical of Americans/Canadians to take a single fact and spin a story around it, with the American audience eating it up. "Look, there are facts to back it up!"

    Is Germany's military any more feminized than the American one? The U.S. allows homosexuals in the military, proudly displays them. They are PAID to have a "sex change," with taxpayers' money. Veterans turn transvestite more than other people, as they want to escape the responsibility of what they have done in Iraq and Afghanistan. As one veteran said, "I have never seen so many transvestites as in the VA office".

    The Marines recently decided to lower qualifications that only one woman had passed. This pro-women weakening props up all the time. And there aren't enough young people to fill the ranks, because too many are obese, as the military's research shows.

    So, mentioning the German military as "feminized" but not the U.S. military, which is also brought up? You can do better. A real view of the German military: They could certainly defend Germany from eastern invasion, but could not occupy Russia, which is not in the plans either.

    Germany has 250 main battle tanks. Russia has well over 10,000. Approaching 20k if reserves have to be activated. Advantages in artillery, Naval forces, Aviation and air defense are similar. Therefore the German military is hopelessly outclassed by Russia’s.

    As to modern machines moving long distances – don’t kid yourself, long distances under combat conditions aren’t that long.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. After Britain and France in Sept 1939 declared war both countries did not know what to do.
    Until Hitler overran the Netherlands, there was the phoney war, nothing much happened.

    There of course was the German occupation of Denmark and Norway, but this again was defensive.
    The German troops entered Norway just a few days before the planned British French occupation.
    This planned British French occupation was planned to go even further, in also neutral Sweden.
    The iron ore of Galliväre Sweden was the objective.

    Hitler occupied France in order to force peace with GB.
    Churchill refused.
    But in any case the German occupation of the whole Atlantic coast made sure that Germany would not be attacked from that direction, for a long time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. @freebird
    Trump is the Commander In Chief. I believe he is smart enough politically to understand that an all out war with either China or Russia would effectively doom any prospect of a second term he might hope for. One of the main reasons people voted for him in 2016 is that he espoused a America first agenda with non-intervention and massive boots on the ground conflict out of the question unless we are directly attacked. The vast majority of Americans do not want a massive all out war with either Russia or China or for that matter North Korea. There would be no winner it would effectively be WWIII and the entire world would crumble. Hopefully Trump understands that and he keeps the crazy Neoconservatives at bay and does not listen to them.

    ” effectively doom any prospect of a second term he might hope for. ”

    Sure, nobody on this earth will survive.
    For a great description, read the 1953 novel by Nevill Shute ‘On the Beach’.
    New Zealand, the last place where anyone dies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. yurivku says:
    @Canadian Cents

    "A final respectful note to Gen. Mattis (my dad was a marine): A good general does not pick a fight with two, far-away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another."
     
    Another trick would be for the US to stop constantly trying to subvert other countries and foment conflict to destroy peace and constructive human collaboration.

    A respectful note to the American people: a good country does not subvert others and pit them against each other, like psychopaths do. The trick is to take back control of your hijacked democracy and sovereignty, and respect that of others.

    A respectful note to the American people: a good country does not subvert others and pit them against each other, like psychopaths do. The trick is to take back control of your hijacked democracy and sovereignty, and respect that of others.

    Agree, but it’s about good country, which ZUS never been and, I’m afraid, never will be.
    You can see it even in this article, the author regrets it’s dangerous to go on war with Russia, if it was safe he wouldn’t mind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. yurivku says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic
    The next wars will be civil.

    The next wars will be civil.

    It could be nice ’cause ZUS is a world problem and until she changes the danger for human beings will exist.
    But I don’t believe it, US citizens with brains washed will pinch until too late.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. The war on terror is a lie designed to destroy what little freedom we have left by trying to keep we Americans in a state of perpetual fear and giving the
    state more and more control over our lives in the guise of national security.

    The fact is that AL CIADA aka ISIS and all of its offshoots were created by the U.S. and ISRAEL and BRITAIN via the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI6 with the help of FRANCE and TURKEY and SAUDI ARABIA. They have created the terror that is being used to instill fear in the people and to destroy America for their goal of a NWO.

    The major players behind this drive for a NWO are the Israelis and their dual citizen neocons who control every facet of the U.S. government, and the fact that they did 911 and got away with it proves that the ZIONISTS control America.

    THE WAR ON TERROR IS A LIE.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. This is essentially the usual “let Putin win in Ukraine” propaganda. Why would the US want to attack into Russia? That makes no military sense in today’s world. A war with Russia would be predominantly an air war, as in ex-Yugoslavia. Given its shape, the Russian Federation is almost invulnerable to a land attack from east or west. It could be attacked northward from Belarus or Ukraine (or China!) but it’s unlikely that the Russians would just sit and wait for that to happen. That, of course, also begs the question whether young Russians would fight for Putin and the gangsters behind him who have been robbing them blind for 25 years. However, the first step in any modern war is control of the airspace over the battlefield and the very same shape which makes Russia invulnerable to land attack makes it very vulnerable to air attack. Russia is Canada’s northern neighbour. It would be very easy for NATO so strike at the Arctic coast, along which are strung out most of Russia’s natural resources, including oil and gas. Given the lack of infrastructure, it would be relatively easy to cripple the Russian air force in that area by simply depriving them of supplies. Similarly, Eastern Siberia could be attacked from Japan or South Korea, and the south could be attacked from Romania, Bulgaria or Turkey. Essentially, the Russian Federation is surrounded, which is why Putin’s American supporters are so frantically trying to torpedo NATO! Moreover, the “war on Putin” can easily be carried on in Syria. A defeat in Syria would probably destroy Putin in the eyes of his elderly Soviet generation supporters back home. Putin has challenged US global hegemony and, so far has been allowed to get away with it. If the US doesn’t destroy Putin, there’s really no point in fighting a war with China because China will have already defeated the US without firing a shot. Thus, the priority is Putin first, then China.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Thank you for your contribution to Unz comedy.
    , @1RW
    Sure Russia is surrounded. But it’s also the biggest country in the world. Good luck starving them out. And it’s not like they can’t hit back - in the world of ICBMs, strategic bombers with 12,000 km range, and cruise missiles everyone is always surrounded. Want to tell me I’m wrong? Show me a place on the US map Russia can’t hit with something. What’s worse - US assets are concentrated on the coasts, therefore reachable from a thousand miles into the ocean, where subs and bombers roam free. Russia is actually a tougher target because it’s strategic objects are deep in the interior.

    The youth of Russia will surely fight against a foreign enemy attacking Russia. The war in Donbas showed that there were plenty who took up arms to protect the Russian world.

    Your airwar over the arctic fantasy is absurd. The Arctic Ocean is the one ocean that Russia can call its own due to its large fleet of Icebreakers, many of them nuclear. Russia can deploy air defense, both SAM and fighters across the arctic far better than the US/Canada. The US would have to rely on air tankers and AWACS while Russia would have land based radar, supply points, search and rescue, shorter flight time, actual interceptors - Mig31. Meanwhile, in response Russia can sortie with its Mach2 capable, largest bomber in the world that carries long range cruise missiles. Good luck catching it as it fires 12 missiles 3000 km from target and zooms away at Mach 2

    America’s fantasy football hobby has percolated to military strategy. Except fantasy football is better connected to reality.
    , @bluedog
    Maybe could be possible but we heard all of that before in another time, in another land called Vietnam,and we know how that turned out, and only a fool would rush in where angels fear to tread,well unless your an American as*hole that is...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Z-man says:

    Or as I call him, ‘Slurpy Dog’ hee hee. He follows a long line of Western leaders without any offspring, Merkel, May, Macron, those dweebs in the EU, the cup cake PM of Italy, etc., etc. Making them all double cucks who have no vested interests in the future. I have a special ire for ‘Linda’ Graham of South Carolina. The Zionist must have pictures of her with young boys because she is more NEOCON that the jewest of them out there, Kristol and Duche-a-witz. A pox on him/her. Hopefully he’ll meet his maker soon after ‘Nuts’ McCain. Is he still alive???
    Russia is a natural ally of America, but because of the long lost (actually won by us) ‘Cold War’ there is a perceived animus by many of the masses. But this animus is stoked by the controlled media and ‘think tanks’ ‘disproportionally’ lol, populated by the ‘chosen ones’. The tribesmen hate Putin for reintroducing Christian Orthodoxy into the Russian blood. Let me repeat myself, ‘They’ HATE this development. ‘They’ want nothing less than the desruction of Christianity in the West and that starts with the big bad boogie man in the east, Russia. (Smile)
    China is another matter, but in a similar vein. We should have a ‘gran bargain’ with them for the unification of a nuclear free Korea. We should get them to stop building islands off the Philippines and show them whose boss by arresting and sanctioning industrial spies and reducing the number of students studing here. (Fat chance)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    You called unification of a nuclear free Korea, and stop building islands off the Philippines a 'gran bargain'? You are a mom and pop shop, and penny pincher. To the Chinese the USN needing a visa from China to cross the International Date Line is the minimum for the 'gran bargain'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Jake says:

    Margolis’s final sentence is a master stroke.

    He just needs to add Neocon to the mix.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. Pandos says:

    Target israel. Checkmate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around.

    Attack by one or another or no, war was declared on Germany by segments of New York Jews in 1933, the same year that FDR recognized the bloody totalitarian terror state, the USSR and thereby appeased and supported the Red menace.

    Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany.

    Bullshit. They were responding as they would have no matter the pretext.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    " war was declared on Germany by segments of New York Jews in 1933, "
    WJC in Amsterdam, chairman Samuel Untermeyer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @freebird
    Trump is the Commander In Chief. I believe he is smart enough politically to understand that an all out war with either China or Russia would effectively doom any prospect of a second term he might hope for. One of the main reasons people voted for him in 2016 is that he espoused a America first agenda with non-intervention and massive boots on the ground conflict out of the question unless we are directly attacked. The vast majority of Americans do not want a massive all out war with either Russia or China or for that matter North Korea. There would be no winner it would effectively be WWIII and the entire world would crumble. Hopefully Trump understands that and he keeps the crazy Neoconservatives at bay and does not listen to them.

    I believe he is smart enough politically …

    On what basis do people keep making that and similar claims?

    No one with a lick of sense would want the position he strove for.

    Why?:

    If any man be so happily born, so carefully educated, so established in virtue, that no storm can shake him, nor any poison corrupt him, yet he will consider he is mortal; and knowing no more than Solomon, whether his son shall be a wise man or a fool, he will always fear to take upon him a power, which must prove a most pestilent evil both to the person that has it, and to those that are under it…

    - Algernon Sidney, Discourses Concerning Government, ed. Thomas G. West (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund 1996). 2/28/2018. http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/223#Sidney_0019_961

    Sidney was born into an aristocratic family, so had an intimate view of power, which he came to despise and for good reason. Like Socrates and JC, and many other good men, he was murdered for his beliefs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Michael Kenny
    This is essentially the usual “let Putin win in Ukraine” propaganda. Why would the US want to attack into Russia? That makes no military sense in today’s world. A war with Russia would be predominantly an air war, as in ex-Yugoslavia. Given its shape, the Russian Federation is almost invulnerable to a land attack from east or west. It could be attacked northward from Belarus or Ukraine (or China!) but it’s unlikely that the Russians would just sit and wait for that to happen. That, of course, also begs the question whether young Russians would fight for Putin and the gangsters behind him who have been robbing them blind for 25 years. However, the first step in any modern war is control of the airspace over the battlefield and the very same shape which makes Russia invulnerable to land attack makes it very vulnerable to air attack. Russia is Canada’s northern neighbour. It would be very easy for NATO so strike at the Arctic coast, along which are strung out most of Russia’s natural resources, including oil and gas. Given the lack of infrastructure, it would be relatively easy to cripple the Russian air force in that area by simply depriving them of supplies. Similarly, Eastern Siberia could be attacked from Japan or South Korea, and the south could be attacked from Romania, Bulgaria or Turkey. Essentially, the Russian Federation is surrounded, which is why Putin’s American supporters are so frantically trying to torpedo NATO! Moreover, the “war on Putin” can easily be carried on in Syria. A defeat in Syria would probably destroy Putin in the eyes of his elderly Soviet generation supporters back home. Putin has challenged US global hegemony and, so far has been allowed to get away with it. If the US doesn’t destroy Putin, there’s really no point in fighting a war with China because China will have already defeated the US without firing a shot. Thus, the priority is Putin first, then China.

    Thank you for your contribution to Unz comedy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Russia’s once mighty Red Army is short of everything.

    That is rather a dubious statement, but then again–issues with situational awareness in US started not yesterday. This has nothing to do with “Russia Strong!” crowd, but it has everything to do with many (and I even know names) trying to test this grossly incorrect thesis and then suddenly encountering a very different reality and losing it. That IS the danger.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    Chuckle. The moment I read that I knew you would come
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. myself says:
    @jimbojones
    Very valid point from Margolis. Washington's long-term strategy sounds muddled.
    The way things are shaping up, from a strategic perspective, one of the missed opportunities of the Trump presidency will have been the detente with Russia. Trump wanted to play tough with China and nice with Russia. A simple and sensible strategy. Looks like it was not meant to be.

    Trump wanted to play tough with China and nice with Russia. A simple and sensible strategy. Looks like it was not meant to be.
    _____________________________________________________________________
    Britain played nice with France in the post-Napoleon period in order to form a common front against Germany. It worked because the British were sincere and skillful, and German diplomacy was inept.

    America is trying to pull the wool over Russia’s eyes with nice words while deploying troops on its border and pushing NATO westward, and hoping Russia will be so stupid as to fall into an anti-China coalition. Meanwhile, unlike Germany and France post-1870, there are no outstanding territorial disputes between China and Russia, plus quite a lot of mutually beneficial interaction.

    Chances of America getting Russia on-board: ZERO.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @jacques sheete

    Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around.
     
    Attack by one or another or no, war was declared on Germany by segments of New York Jews in 1933, the same year that FDR recognized the bloody totalitarian terror state, the USSR and thereby appeased and supported the Red menace.

    Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany.
     
    Bullshit. They were responding as they would have no matter the pretext.

    ” war was declared on Germany by segments of New York Jews in 1933, ”
    WJC in Amsterdam, chairman Samuel Untermeyer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Yogoslavia would not have been bombed in 1999 if it had had nuclear weapons.
    Iraq might have become a glass desert in 1991 if it had threatened with a nuclear strike, it was the agressor.
    NK is too smart for that, and Iran has no nuclear weapons, but are under the Russian and Chinese umbrella, if it behaves, which it has done.
    Russian interests lie in Russia. China’s lie in South East asia, and theirs is trade. Not conquest.
    So the Imperialists in Washington D.C and the Fascistic Zionists in Israel are the only beating the war drum. The EU are just mouthing. No public support for war, anywhere in Europe, even Poland is not on that bandwagon.
    The US and idiotic five eyes are on their own. Go die imperialists.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. Joe Wong says:
    @Bill Pilgrim
    I second pyrrhus' observations. Plus, not many recall that about a year ago at a security conference Putin declared in forthright language that Russia will never again fight a war in its homeland. The implications are obvious.
    The Bear should not be provoked any more.

    I will second that, Chinese will never again fight a war in its homeland. Bomb the unrepentant war criminal Japanese out of the face of the earth first no matter what.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Anything like a conventional war between great powers seems inconceivable.

    How do they get the troops and equipment to the enemy’s shore?

    In the age of the missile, navies and overseas airbases are obsolete except for policing action against poverty-stricken countries without defensive missile forces.

    Should the US attempt anything around the borders of China or Russia, first, its fleet or air armada delivering the men and weapons would be sunk or blown out of the sky by missiles; second, any remnant of the hostile forces arriving at or near the enemy’s shore would be obliterated with, if necesary, tactical nukes.

    Future wars will thus be limited to proxy wars in places where the Empires clash over resources: Ukraine, the ME, and Africa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Should the US attempt anything around the borders of China or Russia, first, its fleet or air armada delivering the men and weapons would be sunk or blown out of the sky by missiles
     
    Here is a small "review" I gave to some RAND's "calculations" on Air Power required to "deal" with Russia's VKS in Baltic States, where, as we all know, Russians just itching to get to, as well as to... Europe. You know to subjugate and do the Russian "thing" there, whatever this Russian "thing" might be.

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2017/12/rands-wet-dreams.html

    In 2020 first S-500 will start to arrive to front line units (the series production has already started)--it is usually not in my rules to say such things but after that that will be a turkey shoot in Russia's vicinity. This is not even fair. Yet, people continue to live in a bubble and avoid facts.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Joe Wong says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic
    The next wars will be civil.

    Which side shall we finance, the Confederacy or the Yankee?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. MEexpert says:

    A note to General Mattis:

    A good General tries to avoid war not start one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. @CanSpeccy
    Anything like a conventional war between great powers seems inconceivable.

    How do they get the troops and equipment to the enemy's shore?

    In the age of the missile, navies and overseas airbases are obsolete except for policing action against poverty-stricken countries without defensive missile forces.

    Should the US attempt anything around the borders of China or Russia, first, its fleet or air armada delivering the men and weapons would be sunk or blown out of the sky by missiles; second, any remnant of the hostile forces arriving at or near the enemy's shore would be obliterated with, if necesary, tactical nukes.

    Future wars will thus be limited to proxy wars in places where the Empires clash over resources: Ukraine, the ME, and Africa.

    Should the US attempt anything around the borders of China or Russia, first, its fleet or air armada delivering the men and weapons would be sunk or blown out of the sky by missiles

    Here is a small “review” I gave to some RAND’s “calculations” on Air Power required to “deal” with Russia’s VKS in Baltic States, where, as we all know, Russians just itching to get to, as well as to… Europe. You know to subjugate and do the Russian “thing” there, whatever this Russian “thing” might be.

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2017/12/rands-wet-dreams.html

    In 2020 first S-500 will start to arrive to front line units (the series production has already started)–it is usually not in my rules to say such things but after that that will be a turkey shoot in Russia’s vicinity. This is not even fair. Yet, people continue to live in a bubble and avoid facts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Joe Wong says:
    @Tenet
    I agree with this article, except two things:

    1. "How to protect ever lengthening supply lines? Napoleon and Hitler faced the same challenges and failed."

    This hasn't been relevant since the 1980s. Today's war machines can easily move long distances in open landscapes, so Russia's geography is no longer much of a defense. Furthermore, with Ukraine in neocon-loyal hands there is no way to defend Russia in a real land war. Russia's border defense was dependent on a loyal or neutral Ukraine, with its fortified mountains in the west making tanks take another route. Now Russia suddenly has far more border to defend, and they simply can't. (Except with nukes, of course.)

    2. Germany's "feminized military"? Yeah, they have a leftist-minded female minister of defense. How typical of Americans/Canadians to take a single fact and spin a story around it, with the American audience eating it up. "Look, there are facts to back it up!"

    Is Germany's military any more feminized than the American one? The U.S. allows homosexuals in the military, proudly displays them. They are PAID to have a "sex change," with taxpayers' money. Veterans turn transvestite more than other people, as they want to escape the responsibility of what they have done in Iraq and Afghanistan. As one veteran said, "I have never seen so many transvestites as in the VA office".

    The Marines recently decided to lower qualifications that only one woman had passed. This pro-women weakening props up all the time. And there aren't enough young people to fill the ranks, because too many are obese, as the military's research shows.

    So, mentioning the German military as "feminized" but not the U.S. military, which is also brought up? You can do better. A real view of the German military: They could certainly defend Germany from eastern invasion, but could not occupy Russia, which is not in the plans either.

    Napoleon and Hitler also believed Russian geography was Russian burden not advantage. You are as smart as the French and German. Besides Ukrainian not only was not neutral, they were part of the Nazi attacking the Russian; Nazi even is thriving in Ukraine today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. tac [AKA "jsb"] says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. Joe Wong says:
    @Z-man
    Or as I call him, 'Slurpy Dog' hee hee. He follows a long line of Western leaders without any offspring, Merkel, May, Macron, those dweebs in the EU, the cup cake PM of Italy, etc., etc. Making them all double cucks who have no vested interests in the future. I have a special ire for 'Linda' Graham of South Carolina. The Zionist must have pictures of her with young boys because she is more NEOCON that the jewest of them out there, Kristol and Duche-a-witz. A pox on him/her. Hopefully he'll meet his maker soon after 'Nuts' McCain. Is he still alive???
    Russia is a natural ally of America, but because of the long lost (actually won by us) 'Cold War' there is a perceived animus by many of the masses. But this animus is stoked by the controlled media and 'think tanks' 'disproportionally' lol, populated by the 'chosen ones'. The tribesmen hate Putin for reintroducing Christian Orthodoxy into the Russian blood. Let me repeat myself, 'They' HATE this development. 'They' want nothing less than the desruction of Christianity in the West and that starts with the big bad boogie man in the east, Russia. (Smile)
    China is another matter, but in a similar vein. We should have a 'gran bargain' with them for the unification of a nuclear free Korea. We should get them to stop building islands off the Philippines and show them whose boss by arresting and sanctioning industrial spies and reducing the number of students studing here. (Fat chance)

    You called unification of a nuclear free Korea, and stop building islands off the Philippines a ‘gran bargain’? You are a mom and pop shop, and penny pincher. To the Chinese the USN needing a visa from China to cross the International Date Line is the minimum for the ‘gran bargain’.

    Read More
    • LOL: Z-man
    • Replies: @denk
    good idea !

    Better still, the WHO should slap a quarantine order on USA,
    to prevent the shit stirrer from clapping all over the place !

    hehehehe
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia’s once mighty Red Army is short of everything.
     
    That is rather a dubious statement, but then again--issues with situational awareness in US started not yesterday. This has nothing to do with "Russia Strong!" crowd, but it has everything to do with many (and I even know names) trying to test this grossly incorrect thesis and then suddenly encountering a very different reality and losing it. That IS the danger.

    Chuckle. The moment I read that I knew you would come

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. 1RW says:
    @Michael Kenny
    This is essentially the usual “let Putin win in Ukraine” propaganda. Why would the US want to attack into Russia? That makes no military sense in today’s world. A war with Russia would be predominantly an air war, as in ex-Yugoslavia. Given its shape, the Russian Federation is almost invulnerable to a land attack from east or west. It could be attacked northward from Belarus or Ukraine (or China!) but it’s unlikely that the Russians would just sit and wait for that to happen. That, of course, also begs the question whether young Russians would fight for Putin and the gangsters behind him who have been robbing them blind for 25 years. However, the first step in any modern war is control of the airspace over the battlefield and the very same shape which makes Russia invulnerable to land attack makes it very vulnerable to air attack. Russia is Canada’s northern neighbour. It would be very easy for NATO so strike at the Arctic coast, along which are strung out most of Russia’s natural resources, including oil and gas. Given the lack of infrastructure, it would be relatively easy to cripple the Russian air force in that area by simply depriving them of supplies. Similarly, Eastern Siberia could be attacked from Japan or South Korea, and the south could be attacked from Romania, Bulgaria or Turkey. Essentially, the Russian Federation is surrounded, which is why Putin’s American supporters are so frantically trying to torpedo NATO! Moreover, the “war on Putin” can easily be carried on in Syria. A defeat in Syria would probably destroy Putin in the eyes of his elderly Soviet generation supporters back home. Putin has challenged US global hegemony and, so far has been allowed to get away with it. If the US doesn’t destroy Putin, there’s really no point in fighting a war with China because China will have already defeated the US without firing a shot. Thus, the priority is Putin first, then China.

    Sure Russia is surrounded. But it’s also the biggest country in the world. Good luck starving them out. And it’s not like they can’t hit back – in the world of ICBMs, strategic bombers with 12,000 km range, and cruise missiles everyone is always surrounded. Want to tell me I’m wrong? Show me a place on the US map Russia can’t hit with something. What’s worse – US assets are concentrated on the coasts, therefore reachable from a thousand miles into the ocean, where subs and bombers roam free. Russia is actually a tougher target because it’s strategic objects are deep in the interior.

    The youth of Russia will surely fight against a foreign enemy attacking Russia. The war in Donbas showed that there were plenty who took up arms to protect the Russian world.

    Your airwar over the arctic fantasy is absurd. The Arctic Ocean is the one ocean that Russia can call its own due to its large fleet of Icebreakers, many of them nuclear. Russia can deploy air defense, both SAM and fighters across the arctic far better than the US/Canada. The US would have to rely on air tankers and AWACS while Russia would have land based radar, supply points, search and rescue, shorter flight time, actual interceptors – Mig31. Meanwhile, in response Russia can sortie with its Mach2 capable, largest bomber in the world that carries long range cruise missiles. Good luck catching it as it fires 12 missiles 3000 km from target and zooms away at Mach 2

    America’s fantasy football hobby has percolated to military strategy. Except fantasy football is better connected to reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. N. B. says:

    ”But what then about Russia? Not so easy. The likely theater for a US-Russia clash is on the Baltic coast, Ukraine, the Black Sea or Syria. In this case, the US would be confronted by the same problem that afflicted France in the fall of 1939.

    A long (and therefore lucrative) war for the US-UK-France bankers would start at sea (i.e., in the Black Sea as stated a decade ago:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_Delimitation_in_the_Black_Sea_case

    After a brief demonstration, the French Army withdrew behind the Maginot Line. Hitler did not counter-attack in hope he could forge a peace treaty with London and Paris. Winston Churchill and his fellow imperialists furiously sought to push Britain into war with Germany. But months of inactivity went by, known as the ‘Sitzkrieg’ or ‘drôle de guerre’ until Germany acted decisively.

    Great to read this here, as Churchill is venerated and depicted as a hero in NATOCanada.

    Key NATO member Germany is in a shambles.

    Mr. Wimmer and Mr Muller are not very optimistic:

    History is kicked aside in preparation for next catastrophe
    by Willy Wimmer, former State Secretary in the German Ministry of Defence

    It’s about our dignity
    Fundamentals of the stock market and preparation for war | by Karl Müller:
    War propaganda of the British Chief of the General Staff

    https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/de

    In truth, neither the US and NATO nor Russia are in any way prepared to fight a real war on land, sea and air.

    I hope so. US-NATO tried to use Canada for a war against Russia in August 200, with Canada’s friend Georgia’s Mikaiil Sakashviili.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. bluedog says:
    @Michael Kenny
    This is essentially the usual “let Putin win in Ukraine” propaganda. Why would the US want to attack into Russia? That makes no military sense in today’s world. A war with Russia would be predominantly an air war, as in ex-Yugoslavia. Given its shape, the Russian Federation is almost invulnerable to a land attack from east or west. It could be attacked northward from Belarus or Ukraine (or China!) but it’s unlikely that the Russians would just sit and wait for that to happen. That, of course, also begs the question whether young Russians would fight for Putin and the gangsters behind him who have been robbing them blind for 25 years. However, the first step in any modern war is control of the airspace over the battlefield and the very same shape which makes Russia invulnerable to land attack makes it very vulnerable to air attack. Russia is Canada’s northern neighbour. It would be very easy for NATO so strike at the Arctic coast, along which are strung out most of Russia’s natural resources, including oil and gas. Given the lack of infrastructure, it would be relatively easy to cripple the Russian air force in that area by simply depriving them of supplies. Similarly, Eastern Siberia could be attacked from Japan or South Korea, and the south could be attacked from Romania, Bulgaria or Turkey. Essentially, the Russian Federation is surrounded, which is why Putin’s American supporters are so frantically trying to torpedo NATO! Moreover, the “war on Putin” can easily be carried on in Syria. A defeat in Syria would probably destroy Putin in the eyes of his elderly Soviet generation supporters back home. Putin has challenged US global hegemony and, so far has been allowed to get away with it. If the US doesn’t destroy Putin, there’s really no point in fighting a war with China because China will have already defeated the US without firing a shot. Thus, the priority is Putin first, then China.

    Maybe could be possible but we heard all of that before in another time, in another land called Vietnam,and we know how that turned out, and only a fool would rush in where angels fear to tread,well unless your an American as*hole that is…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. The trick is to turn them against one another.

    Uh, Washington has been trying to do that since the 1970s. It failed. Plan B?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. Wally says:
    @El Dato

    Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around. Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany. French divisions began to invade Germany’s Rhineland. But after a few skirmishes the French high command, under the inept Gen. Maurice Gamelin, didn’t know what to do next. Germany was large, and the defensive-minded French did not anticipate occupying its entire country.
     
    Interesting. But hype. There was indeed a little symbolic push into the Saarland, and the French got themselves a forest and a few villages. Forces far below "french division" were involved.

    From Janusz Piekalkiewicz's anthology (a bit ancient, 1985):

    "Im Vorfeld des Westwalls kommt es am nächsten Abend zu einer eher symbolischen Offensive von schwachen Teilkräften der französischen 4. Armee (Gen. Réquin) bei Saarbrücken, um auf diese Weise die Bereitschaft Frankreichs anzudeuten, seinen vertraglichen Bündnispflichten gegenüber Polen nachzukommen.

    In der Nacht vom 7./8. September 1939 besetzen französische Vorhuten and der Nahtstelle zwischen der französischen 4. und 3. Armee einen Teil des Warndtwaldes und eine Anhöhe im Raum Auersmacher. Sie überschreiten die Grenze und dringen auf deutsches Gebiet vor. Daraufhin weichen die deutschen Verteidigungskräfte auf die Hauptstellungen der "Siegfriedlinie" zurück."

     

    Translation:

    Ahead of the Westwall, the French stage a rather symbolic attack by weak elements of the French 4th Army, (Gen. Réquin) near Saarbrücken, in order to indicate the willingness of France to honour its contractual obligations towards Poland.

    In the night of 7./8. In September 1939 French forward forces positioned between the French 4th and 3rd Army occupy part of the forest of Warndtwald and a hill in the Auersmacher area. They cross the border and penetrate into German territory. Following this, German defense pull back to the main positions of the "Siegfried Line".
     

    Actually, 40 French divisions were involved. Get your facts straight.

    So then, the French did attack first.

    Also recall that England & France declared war on Germany for invading Poland, but did not declare war against the communist USSR who also invaded Poland.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. denk says:
    @Joe Wong
    You called unification of a nuclear free Korea, and stop building islands off the Philippines a 'gran bargain'? You are a mom and pop shop, and penny pincher. To the Chinese the USN needing a visa from China to cross the International Date Line is the minimum for the 'gran bargain'.

    good idea !

    Better still, the WHO should slap a quarantine order on USA,
    to prevent the shit stirrer from clapping all over the place !

    hehehehe

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. jinks says:

    Most of me really thinks your right that we won’t have a war with Russia or China, but I do think there are certain contingents who do want one. I don’t think I’ve been reading the stories wrong about the provocations in Syria by groups that parties in the US government have been arming and “encouraging” against “Syrian” (read Russian) forces. However, an analyst some time ago pointed out that Putin’s strategy is about patience, about waiting out the stupidity reigning in certain western countries geopolitical “policies”, and the fact they will one day consume themselves. Which considering the atmosphere in our country right now is a very logical conclusion.

    I think we have relegated ourselves internationally as a hypocritical evangelist with really dangerous weapons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  62. ve1 says:

    us can do 100 wars at once if they want. its because they have henchmen like sweden, and south korea stiring up trouble on their behalf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. ve1 says:

    even china has become a pawn of the us. look at how china imposed sanctions on the dprk

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. Kimppis says:
    @Tenet
    I agree with this article, except two things:

    1. "How to protect ever lengthening supply lines? Napoleon and Hitler faced the same challenges and failed."

    This hasn't been relevant since the 1980s. Today's war machines can easily move long distances in open landscapes, so Russia's geography is no longer much of a defense. Furthermore, with Ukraine in neocon-loyal hands there is no way to defend Russia in a real land war. Russia's border defense was dependent on a loyal or neutral Ukraine, with its fortified mountains in the west making tanks take another route. Now Russia suddenly has far more border to defend, and they simply can't. (Except with nukes, of course.)

    2. Germany's "feminized military"? Yeah, they have a leftist-minded female minister of defense. How typical of Americans/Canadians to take a single fact and spin a story around it, with the American audience eating it up. "Look, there are facts to back it up!"

    Is Germany's military any more feminized than the American one? The U.S. allows homosexuals in the military, proudly displays them. They are PAID to have a "sex change," with taxpayers' money. Veterans turn transvestite more than other people, as they want to escape the responsibility of what they have done in Iraq and Afghanistan. As one veteran said, "I have never seen so many transvestites as in the VA office".

    The Marines recently decided to lower qualifications that only one woman had passed. This pro-women weakening props up all the time. And there aren't enough young people to fill the ranks, because too many are obese, as the military's research shows.

    So, mentioning the German military as "feminized" but not the U.S. military, which is also brought up? You can do better. A real view of the German military: They could certainly defend Germany from eastern invasion, but could not occupy Russia, which is not in the plans either.

    Today’s war machines can easily move long distances in open landscapes, so Russia’s geography is no longer much of a defense.

    That is simply nonsense.

    Also, those “war machines” (and logistical capabilities) simply don’t exist in large enough numbers, that was the author’s point.

    There are reports that only 1/3 of Luftwaffe’s planes are in operational condition, etc. So being feminized is not their only – or really even the main – problem.

    So while even some Western European nations have impressive budgets (in $ or €) and even impressive militaries overall on paper, they are not actually… in any way built to fight a war against a peer or a near-peer opponent.

    Most importantly, Russia is not going to wait and let the US/NATO build and concentrate an invasion force in peace, it will obviously strike first.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Quaker says:

    “A good general does not pick a fight with two, far–away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another”

    I think that’s already happening, the two don’t seem to be particularly in love with each other.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.