Why is the US increasingly talking about a preventive nuclear strike
The world is rapidly changing and becoming more dangerous before our eyes. Five years ago, the topic of nuclear war was a real “taboo”. Now, more and more senior US military officials are directly talking about the possibility of a preventive nuclear strike. Everyone understands who they are talking about.
US Navy Admiral John Richardson said a while ago:
The American general Curtis Scaparotti, commander of NATO forces in Europe, said that it turns out that the Russian Federation could be the first to use nuclear weapons, since it will not pull a long conflict with the powerful US army. Well, of course, it is necessary to preempt the Kremlin in this matter.
And on the eve of being able to “work ahead of schedule” across Russia, Joseph Dunford, chief of staff of all US forces, spoke out. He did this in the Senate of the United States, which, by the way, gives an affirmation of the state of war. A peace-loving senator named Adam Smith promoted the concept that the US should not be the first to use its nuclear arsenal, which, in its opinion, is a means of deterrence, but not aggression.
To this General Danford objected to him:
So, we see that the top of the American military wants politicians to untie their hands in the ability to press the red button proactively, at their discretion. Why is that?
In recent ARTICLES we came to the surprising conclusion that the American army in its present form is not so dangerous when confronted with a large systemic adversary with nuclear weapons, such as China or Russia. Analysts of "near the Crusader" RAND summarized:
As you might guess, the “blue asses” are American. The reasons are quite simple: neither Russia nor China intends to invade the United States, on the contrary, it is the Pentagon that has surrounded the military bases of its main rivals and threatens them in the zone of their vital interests. For our country, this is the Baltic states and Kaliningrad, for the PRC - the Pacific region. But in these regional conflicts “on the threshold”, the Russian and Chinese armies will have a priori advantage.
It turns out that the myth of the invincibility of the US military can be destroyed with a bang, and they cannot allow something like that in the USA, since the dominance of the dollar in the world the economy based only on the strength of American weapons. The foregoing may be one of the main reasons that led Washington to withdraw from the INF Treaty and, in the future, START-3. The Pentagon wants to have the largest "nuclear club" in the world and surround its main rivals with a picket fence from missile defense systems in order to maintain the unquestioned hegemonic status.
US Navy Admiral John Richardson said a while ago:
I think it would be great if we could force the Russians, our competitors, to respond to our first steps.
The American general Curtis Scaparotti, commander of NATO forces in Europe, said that it turns out that the Russian Federation could be the first to use nuclear weapons, since it will not pull a long conflict with the powerful US army. Well, of course, it is necessary to preempt the Kremlin in this matter.
And on the eve of being able to “work ahead of schedule” across Russia, Joseph Dunford, chief of staff of all US forces, spoke out. He did this in the Senate of the United States, which, by the way, gives an affirmation of the state of war. A peace-loving senator named Adam Smith promoted the concept that the US should not be the first to use its nuclear arsenal, which, in its opinion, is a means of deterrence, but not aggression.
To this General Danford objected to him:
It seems to me that our current policy complicates the decision-making process. I would not recommend making a decision that will facilitate this process.
So, we see that the top of the American military wants politicians to untie their hands in the ability to press the red button proactively, at their discretion. Why is that?
In recent ARTICLES we came to the surprising conclusion that the American army in its present form is not so dangerous when confronted with a large systemic adversary with nuclear weapons, such as China or Russia. Analysts of "near the Crusader" RAND summarized:
In our games, when we fight with the red Russia and China, they kick the ass blue.
As you might guess, the “blue asses” are American. The reasons are quite simple: neither Russia nor China intends to invade the United States, on the contrary, it is the Pentagon that has surrounded the military bases of its main rivals and threatens them in the zone of their vital interests. For our country, this is the Baltic states and Kaliningrad, for the PRC - the Pacific region. But in these regional conflicts “on the threshold”, the Russian and Chinese armies will have a priori advantage.
It turns out that the myth of the invincibility of the US military can be destroyed with a bang, and they cannot allow something like that in the USA, since the dominance of the dollar in the world the economy based only on the strength of American weapons. The foregoing may be one of the main reasons that led Washington to withdraw from the INF Treaty and, in the future, START-3. The Pentagon wants to have the largest "nuclear club" in the world and surround its main rivals with a picket fence from missile defense systems in order to maintain the unquestioned hegemonic status.
Information