Putin Trolls Trump
This is some high class trolling by Russia's President Vladimir Putin:
Putin said he offered U.S. President Donald Trump in a recent phone call the chance to buy one of the hypersonic nuclear weapons Moscow is developing. He said Trump spurned the offer and replied that Washington was making its own.
Hypersonic weapons fly faster than Mach 5 or five times the speed of sound. Their high speed leaves little warning time for the target. There are currently no practical defenses against them.
While the U.S. spent an enormous amount on developing large aircraft carriers, 'stealth' airplanes and useless missile defenses, Russia spent much less to developed weapons that can defeat all three. Carriers are today, at least for Russia, India and China, not threats but large and juicy targets.
Trump is wrong in claiming that the U.S. makes its own hypersonic weapons. While the U.S. has some in development none will be ready before 2022 and likely only much later. Hypersonic weapons are a Soviet/Russian invention. The ones Russia now puts into service are already the third generation. U.S. development of such missiles is at least two generations behind Russia's.
That Russian radar can 'see' stealth aircraft has been known since 1999 when a Yugoslav army unit shot down a U.S. F-117 Nighthawk stealth aircraft. Russian air and missile defense proved in Syria that it can defeat mass attacks by drones as well as by cruise missiles. U.S.-made air and missile defense in Saudi Arabia fails to take down even the primitive missiles Houthi forces fire against it.
The new weapons Russia announced in March 2018 make strategic missile defense useless.
The U.S. military and its weapons are regularly hyped in 'western' media. But it has long been clear to (non-U.S.) experts that U.S. military technology is not superior to that of other countries. In several important fields Russian, Chinese and even Indian weapons have much better capabilities. The reason is simple. U.S. weapons are not developed or built with a real strategic need in mind. They don't get developed for achieving the most effect in an existential war against a capable enemy but to create profit.
The last is probably the only thing Trump knows about them.
Posted by b on September 5, 2019 at 16:53 UTC | Permalink
next page »Posted by: Bruce | Sep 5 2019 17:15 utc | 2
Andrei Martyanov's book, Losing Military Supremacy, covers all of this in great detail. Highly recommended.
Posted by: geoerge | Sep 5 2019 17:29 utc | 3
"to create profit"
Meh. On the institutional level, it probably has more to do with military keynesianism. Millions of jobs, and not just 'statistically', but for real, and in specific politically prearranged locations. "In key states and congressional districts", as they say.
Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Sep 5 2019 17:38 utc | 4
The USA has had a deployed hypersonic spy-plane, which I'm sure can carry at least 1 or 2 cruise missiles within its body, since the late 1980s.
It's the replacement for the sustained Mach 3 SR (Strike + Reconnaissance) 71 developed by the USAF and CIA in the early 1960s, and deployed until the early 1990s.
Correct, the spy-plane flies very high, so as to sustain something like Mach 5 or 6, and perhaps the Russians have figured out how to keep up such a speed briefly in horizontal flight.
No, the US president doesn't likely have the clearance to order this plane even on a mission, even in just its spy-plane configuration.
Not really news that tech exists to jamb radar or GPS, and yes, various parts of the US military have that gear. However, for whatever reason, they seem to be under orders not to ever use it. Example, all Aegis class USN cruisers and destroyers carry beam weapons. That's 1980s tech.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 17:44 utc | 5
Seems the only thing the U$A excels at, are, exceptional nation propaganda, and economic terrorism...
Posted by: ben | Sep 5 2019 17:46 utc | 6
Well, as I recall, at about the same time President Putin publicly unveiled the new hypersonic missile systems (and that they were ready to be used)...
General 'Mad Dog' Mattis publicly declared that the U.S. military was officially allowing it's soldiers to chop their dongs off and grow boobs...
That just about sums things up in my opinion.
In reading this excellent brief analysis, I would suggest that followers read the also excellent books, Losing Military Supremacy "The Myopia of American Strategic Planning" by Andrei Martyanov and In the Shadows of the American Century "The Rise and Decline of US Global Power," by Alfred w. McCoy, to get an understanding of the minds of the Military Industrial Complex. The book by Mr. Martyanov provides examples of why the American military can't win battles against 2nd and 3rd peer adversaries (Vietnam (The American War as the Vietnamese call it), Korean War (The UN Police Action), Afghanistan War, and their future inability to win any future wars against a 1st peer adversary (Russia, China). The American military tells itself it is a great fighting force without peer but it also believes it's own press that the US military brought the German Werhmarcht to their knees, when we know the Russians won War World II. McCoy's book, which is well researched, also states the same premise but from an american perspective.
The MIC will be the downfall of the US and it the deepest of the Deep State. The 1 TRILLION dollar yearly military budget (minus the unknown Black budget) will bankrupt this country. It is also unfortunate that the noble peace prize winner Obama, authorized a Trillion dollar upgrade to the US nuclear arsenal, when he could have halved the number of warheads and still had plenty to destroy the planet a hundred times over. So much for the prince of peace.
We would also do well to stop giving other countries billions in military aid (israhell, saudi barbaria, UAE, etc) to drop bombs and snipe poor people attempting to live free. Hopefully the end is near.
PS: If you want to read a near term fictional book on the demise of the MIC and changes to the culture in America, the book "Twilight's Last Gleaming" by John Michael Greer is spellbinding and a great read. Interestingly enough, he has written over thirty books and writes about post industrial collapse and their outcomes.
Posted by: Tonymike | Sep 5 2019 17:54 utc | 8
Today Putin addressed the Eastern Economic Conference in Vladivostok in the manner of a skilled promoter with no mention of foreign policy, although there was one very noticeable change--all monetary amounts were made in Rubles, not dollars, which I saw as significant.
Pepe Escobar was on top of the affair and wrote a link-filled report focusing on the Putin-Modi Summit primarily because Putin-Abe's discussion wasn't to take place until today.
On the latest open thread, I posted this news that "Zvezda shipbuilding complex, Samsung Heavy Industries to build shuttle tankers together," which are Ice Breaker capable LNG tankers. I also posted this item that tangentially involves Russia in the latest BRI deal between Iran and China that will prove to be a game-changer.
So, despite its desperate attempts to destabilize Hong Kong to get at PRC and somehow slowdown the Russia-China Eurasian Integration Project, Trump and his Outlaw US Empire minions are badly failing. And Trump the bargain hunter passed up an excellent chance to save lots of money and time by taking Putin up on his offer--yet another big mistake by Trump!
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 18:04 utc | 9
thank you b! fascinating as always... ditto @8 ben, 9 josh and 10 tonymike... thanks for all that too...
Posted by: james | Sep 5 2019 18:06 utc | 10
In support of this post by “b” on Russian technology see Andrei Martyanov’s two books that contrast US vs Russia weapons development approaches:
“Losing Military Supremacy: The Myopia of American Strategic Planning” ( mentioned by geoerge@5)
“The (Real) Revolution in Military Affairs” (released 8/2019)
Both can be found at Clarity Press
https://www.claritypress.com/book-author/andrei-martyanov/
Posted by: Krollchem | Sep 5 2019 18:15 utc | 11
O@4
The Russian S-300 defense missile system is designed to shoot down planes, not Israeli or FUKUS missiles!
If you go back into the Zero Hedge archives you will find this topic has been addressed in detail...
Posted by: Krollchem | Sep 5 2019 18:31 utc | 12
Meanwhile Americans be like "Yeah? Well we have big frickin' laser beams!"
They know this is true because they saw it in a movie.
Americans' ability to kill is the only thing left that they can boast about so they cannot help but react this way when you troll them on the matter.
Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 5 2019 18:31 utc | 13
1 - What you said. So is France under Macron, Germany under Merkel, and India under Modi.
"I worked on Star Wars. Star Wars was my friend. You, sir, (Trump) are no Star Wars."
My experience was in Space Based Lasers, which was a fraud by simple thought experiment, and then later on the EKV, rebranded 'Patriot', which is also a fraud, deployed to save face. Reagon's 'Hypersonic Space Plane!' never even got out of super-computer modeling, much of which was diverted to other uses, I'm told by friends in that program, but billed to the HSP.
Congress finally forced Pentagon to test it, after it was converted to a MDA project. The first blew up. The second flew for less than a minute but hailed a 'success'. Then 9/11 quieted down the Congress peanut gallery about the $10Bs still being sqaundered on Star Wars, like the $5B a year still spend on the SSP, after SSP was terminated in 2012.
Congress just gave Pentagon a +16% budget increase, after double-digits YOY since 9/11. Why would they continue to do that? Pentagon was hacked of all its civilian and military PII in 2012, then again in 2013, the hackers got all the Pentagon's civilian contractors' PIIs. Pentagon has no stop-loss in place. They are bleeding out almost as fast as the Fed is bleeding deficits. DoDs +16% budget increase is to fill the deep space black hole in its procurement bucket.
The only thing 'hypersonic' at Pentagon now is the hypersonic rate of unaccounted-for losses.
All according to plan. See 1, above.
Posted by: Jarold Zimani | Sep 5 2019 18:41 utc | 14
@Jay The USA has had a deployed hypersonic spy-plane, which I'm sure can carry at least 1 or 2 cruise missiles within its body, since the late 1980s.
You obviously dank the kool aid. There is no such plane. Lockheed has a concept for a hypersonic spy plane. First production plane flight expected in 2030 (more likely 2050).
@ Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Sep 5 2019 17:38 utc | 6
Which is the same. Capitalism is always for profit. The only divergence between Keynesians and Monetarists is how this should be done in the long term: the former preaching for its sustenance through government spending and the latter through government not spending and letting the private sector to fill the gap (tax breaks, austerity).
It doesn't matter in the capitalist system who the consumer is: if it is the State, the household, the corporation, a pink unicorn etc. etc. The only prerequisite for its existence is the conversion of human labor into the value form.
State consumption is another private business' sales, which completes the cycle of capital, which makes it capitalism: there's no such a thing as "military keynesianism".
Signs of a professional hasbara troll:
- mostly hits the article within the first two or three comments to sow discord. It's not a coincidence. They have special software which alerts them right away when a new article appears. As one of the writers using that account is always on duty, someone is available to hit the article right away.
- Secondary message is consistent. In this case, it's that Putin is a pawn of the same people who control Trump and Netanyahu. Again and again we hear this refrain in different forms. This is the important message for casual visitors to get.
It's basically straight out of Lord of the Rings: The Eye of Sauron is all-seeing and all-powerful. Despair.
I.e. if Vladimir Putin is not on the side of justice, no substantial international leader is. If Vladimir Putin is afraid to face the power of Baal, how could such wretched and weak mortals dare to lift our heads.
The second comment brings up again an issue which has been addressed many times, the effectiveness of Russian arms. Since the Russians are not shooting Israeli planes out of the sky, it's because they can't. O understands no finesse, no diplomacy. Russia does not seek all out war nor does Syria (Syria lives in the neighbourhood, Russia knows the price of all-out war and has not brought enough assets to the theatre to take on Israel and the United States together). Russia is unlikely to put a full headlock on Israel until Turkey leaves NATO (more and more likely). Starting a fight without a plan to win it or without thinking through the consequences is just foolish (if Russia nukes Israel in relation for destroying Khmeimim, nuclear holocaust of sorts at least is on the horizon).
Ladies and gentleman, we have a professional troll in our midst, who has only one mission to disrupt and discredit. Just waiting for tag team partner Donkeytale to appear and reinforce existing disruptive messages. Ignoring them is supposed to help.
I can't really agree. It's like leaving litter on the ground. Litter begets more litter and finally walking through these woods is no longer a walk in the forest but a walk through a garbage dump.
The American military is advanced over both Russia and China in one sense - they have access to endless taxpayers' dollars to fund their programs, many of which are complete failures.
Posted by: Sally Snyder | Sep 5 2019 19:04 utc | 18
Hypersonic weapons are a Soviet/Russian invention. The ones Russia now puts into service are already the third generation.
Ah, how good it is to be on top of the carcass of an old superpower! Many toys to play with!
That's why, even as a Third World lump State, Russia is Russia (and Brazil is Brazil...)
@b:
"You obviously dank the kool aid. There is no such plane. Lockheed has a concept for a hypersonic spy plane. First production plane flight expected in 2030 (more likely 2050)."
Sorry, its contrails from southern Nevada to Africa in a hour have been captured by public satellite imaging.
It's been seen from the ground.
(Completely by accident, as a tourist I likely captured an image of its pulsed contrail spanning the entire sky over Utah's Canyon Lands in 2003.)
It's being acknowledged as a currently deployed system by various military types in the USA, kind of like the SR-71 circa 1970. But unlike the SR-71 in 1970, it's not based outside the USA.
Talk about cool aid, you fell for distraction about what could be possible.
You're confusing publicly acknowledged US (or Russian for that matter) military tech with fully deployed still slightly black project technology.
But as I say, it's not the kind of spy-plane that the likes of Trump can order on a mission.
"Do you really think they spend $400 on a hammer?"
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 19:24 utc | 20
It is almost beyond reason that anyone could fall for such utter bollocks! There is no hypersonic plane. It does not exist. Period! They just dont make face palms for these occasions......
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 5 2019 19:34 utc | 21
what did I just read:
"There is no hypersonic plane."
Sure there is, and it's existed as deployed technology for 30 years.
The US has also had clear (now very secret) radio communications with submarines since World War One--this was publicly acknowledged in the 1920s.
"It does not exist. Period! They just dont make face palms for these occasions."
Boring. The problem for your ilk, is you have to deal with the repeated sitings of it. And by the way, the admitted to exist for 55 years, SR-71 is already "hypersonic".
I see you also completely missed the "$400 hammer" reference.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 19:43 utc | 22
Putin can offer Trump hyper-sonic missiles knowing he cannot accept. To accept these would display the USA's technical military inferiority for all to see. The msm , Hollywood, etc. all sing from the same song-sheet. "USA is great", ignore all the wars they have lost, ignore the astronomical military financial expenditure (declared and hidden). Just like Reagan's star-wars program public perception is everything
Posted by: Ike | Sep 5 2019 19:45 utc | 23
Mm, someone is taking his Marvel flicks a little too seriously.
Posted by: p | Sep 5 2019 19:45 utc | 24
p:
"Mm, someone is taking his Marvel flicks a little too seriously."
Nada to do with "Marvel flicks", which didn't exist 30 years ago.
Ironically, your post reads much like those dismissing Putin's claims about developing a hypersonic missile. The NY Times has done much of that type of analysis. You're in "good" company.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 19:51 utc | 25
Sr-71 was not hypersonic, it topped out just above mach 3...and the rest of your nonsense is just plain tiring. Lets get this straight...you believe that murica has had the propulsion technology to fly a manned craft at mach 5+ (that is hypersonic btw) for the last 30 years or more but still they dont have hypersonic missiles???? 30 years of stagnation???? They solved all of the physiological problems associated with a living human (maybe they use aliens?) traveling at those speeds as well as flight control, no doubt AI courtesy of a commodore 64???!!!! Not a $400 hammer...but priceless agitprop!
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 5 2019 19:55 utc | 27
"Do you really think they spend $400 on a hammer?"
That line comes straight out of a movie. Didn't I tell you American get their reality from their Plato's Cave screens?
I briefly worked in a machine shop that did DoD contract work. We would buy washers by the pound from the hardware store down the street, heat seal them individually into little plastic baggies with the part number printed on them, and then sell them to the Navy for $50 each.
Yeah, the military pays $400 each, if not a good deal more, for their hammers.
Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 5 2019 20:00 utc | 28
Carriers are floating air bases for attacking weaker nations with miniscule inexperienced air forces and skimpy ground air defense. They are for force projection in wars of aggression, not general wars in defense of the nation. The only sense in which they are weaknesses is that high losses for the master race that expects easy victory are doubly shocking.
Stealth aircraft are equally first strike weapons aimed at knocking out radar, hitting enemy planes on the ground and sowing confusion. As they are not tactical aircraft such flaws as rain shadow, etc. that render them unfit combat aircraft against an enemy in the air may be irrelevant.
Missile defenses have a lousy record against missiles in flight, but the radar targeting makes them very adaptable as first strike weapons against enemy launch sites. All "antimissile" missile defense systems should be regarded as being an effort in that direction. Air defense systems that concentrate on electronic warfare, confusing the air with flak, taking down manned aircraft, camouflage, etc. are something else, unromantic but vital.
Nobody can effectively use mass drone attacks or cruise missile attacks for strategic victory, because strategic bombing does not actually work without ground attacks interdicting supplies and/or actively preventing rebuilding/reorganization. Thus it is not a meaningful failure for US air defenses to fail against Houthi air attacks. The Houthi air attacks are also not going to win the war. The inability of the Saudis to win ground loses it for them, meaning endless war is financially debilitating, plus, again, self-sacrifice is not something the Saudi monarchy can call upon.
Lastly, the Russians do no have hypersonic weapons. Even if they did, the notion that weapon systems largely useful in first strikes indicates a horrible misreading of Russia's military situation. There is no reasonable strategy for them that involves a first strike.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 5 2019 20:01 utc | 29
steven t johnson
Hypersonic begins at mach 5. A number of Russian surface to air missiles are up around mach 7.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 5 2019 20:11 utc | 30
There is no reason to doubt the existence of the various Russian hypersonic weapons systems. There is nothing even remotely unbelievable about them...unlike claims of a manned hypersonic plane from the 80's for example. We in fact know already about three, Zircon, Kinzhal and avangard. The first two are missiles with chemical propulsion and the last is a hyperglide reentry vehicle for ballistic missiles. All are either in service or about to enter. And no, they are not primarily for first strike. They are pure deterrent.
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 5 2019 20:14 utc | 31
Peter AU 1 is correct. I was thinking of the hypersonic cruise missiles, especially the nuclear ones that will circumnavigate the globe to attack from the rear, etc. Also, bullets are hypersonic. The superweapons touted by Putin, no, they aren't. Even if they ever get them to work as advertised they are badly conceived. Putin was flattering Trump in the sincerest way possible: Imitation.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 5 2019 20:16 utc | 32
what did I just read:
Oh, I don't suppose this hypersonic technology limited to the USA over the last 30 years.
You really suppose that Putin is disclosing new gear?
Yes, ram jet engines have been a thing for 50+ years. What's not admitted is how successful they'be been. The story upto Putin's announcement has been "they fail".
Don't think these planes are being turned sharply. Why imply I said that? Oh because you can't deal with the already existing 55+ year old SR-71.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 20:17 utc | 33
@William Gruff:
So that's "because I engaged in corrupt+dishonest billing" everyone else is doing it.
Now, if you'd stuck with something like the pallets of cash shipped to Iraq you'd have a point.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 20:20 utc | 34
To focus exclusively on weapons is to focus on the wrong aspect of a nation's strength. I always find it funny in a very sadistic manner that the Outlaw US Empire is constantly declared to be the richest nation on the planet when it has at minimum 30 Million people well below the far too low poverty line, millions more mal-nourished, millions more kept in a state of ignorance, and with a wealth disparity problem of an enormous magnitude where 3 men own as much wealth as the bottom 50% of the population, or @165 Million people. What all that and more not included spells out to me is that the Outlaw US Empire is the planet's most Dysfunctional nation. Russia in stark contrast as clearly shown by Putin's speech I linked to above is striving very hard to overcome the dysfunctions applied to it by outside actors and the previous system in ways only Bernie Sanders is promoting while Trump and the neoliberals from both political parties continue to do the exact opposite by striving to escalate the dysfunctions. The message being sent to Americans by the Current Neoliberal Oligarchy is Get Out; We Don't Need You! as they fight tooth & nail to destroy what little remains of the pathetic to begin with welfare state, while dumbing-down education and promoting carcinogenic foodstuffs. Putin's contrasting message: Come Here! I Welcome You! Here are the many inducements to become Russian and fulfill your abilities and destiny! No! It's not a pipe dream; read his speech! One of the most important factors in a nation's strength is the opportunities it provides for its citizens and how well that collective cares for itself via the mediums of government and culture. In that respect, IMO, the USA is in the worst shape its ever been due to its insane level of moral corruption.
Putin's trolling points directly at that last sentence. It's his way of pounding his shoe on the podium and saying We'll bury you all while smiling wryly. Moreover, other national leaders are beginning to abandon the dysfunctional Outlaw US Empire as they find it irrational and impossible to deal with. The same goes for the EU with its similar domineering neoliberal nature. Putin was correct about the demise of Liberalism. What needs to rise up and replace it is a mother-like humanistic social order that cares for and provides opportunities to fulfill one's abilities while also paying close attention to the condition of the planet that supports us.
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 20:23 utc | 35
@what did I just read:
"There is no reason to doubt the existence of the various Russian hypersonic weapons systems."
Nor have I implied there's any reason to doubt the Russian claim, but it's 30+ year old tech--just in this case from Russia.
"They are pure deterrent."
Yeah, right, you read like those Reagan era defenders of the "star wars" system. Not a surprise.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 20:23 utc | 36
@steven t:
"Lastly, the Russians do no have hypersonic weapons."
And why do you make that assertion?
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 20:25 utc | 37
Ok, lets clear this misunderstanding up. The nuclear missile is not hypersonic and Putin never sold these weapons as "super weapons" ala Trump. That's an ungenerous reading. A while back, Putin gave a speech before the parliament in which he detailed some new weapons systems. The point of it all was to highlight the foolish and dangerous assumptions on which aggressive Western policy towards Russia rest. One of these assumptions is that the US could launch a first strike against Russia and be safe from retaliation behind it's ABM screen. In reality, that system is incapable of stopping any significant number of current ballistic warheads and that further, Russia was now fielding systems that can circumvent or penetrate that defense easily. He listed several of these systems. Two were hypersonic, the kinzhal and avangard. Another was the new ICBM, RS-28 Sarmat. It is powerful enough to send the warheads into orbit. From there they no longer follow a strict ballistic path and can circle the earth to any target they choose, making them impossible to predict and defend against. It is a concept tried in the early 70's but then withdrawn called fobos. The last of the strategic weapons were based around the new miniaturized nuclear reactor that had just been perfected. It is being applied to a cruise missile and a sub-torpedo concept. The nuclear cruise missile will have practically unlimited range, but it will be subsonic not hypersonic.
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 5 2019 20:32 utc | 38
Going back to the '80's and the Reagan Star Wars debates, this was Always the argument against spending billions on missile defenses. That the countermeasures the attackers could take were much cheaper than the expensive missile defenses. Gee, turns out we were right! People who think and reason logically were right, while the corrupt fools who only wanted to steal a lot of the public purse were wrong. Surprise, Surprise, Surprise.
America should file treason charges against those who steal and misdirect public monies meant to defend the nation.
Posted by: Broadway | Sep 5 2019 20:37 utc | 39
Clue for the clueless: "Secret weapons" are only useful for surprise attacks... sucker punches. Defensive weapons intended to deter attacks only work as a deterrence if they are advertised. The very fact that Putin announced the existence of the new weapons is in and of itself proof that those weapons are intended to deter aggression, not be used aggressively.
The corollary to this fact is that if the United States really does have secret weapons like attack sharks with frickin` laser beams on their heads, then those are intended as offensive first strike weaponry.
Why is it that Americans are proud of being seen as the most offensive people on the planet? Arguing for the existence of super secret weapons is arguing for Americans being the biggest scumbag villains alive. It is strange that many Americans don't get that. Super-secret weapons don't deter and defend, their secrecy can only surprise America's victims.
This is part and parcel of why I am always arguing that Americans are literally mentally ill.
Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 5 2019 20:44 utc | 40
Jay@43 asks "And why do you make that assertion?" Because Putin is Yeltsin's successor, albeit a sober one who's presiding over the wreckage. Putin has no more restored industry in Russia than Trump has in the US. Without a genuinely widespread, in depth industrial economy there will be no overtaking the US on the cheap. (Yes, Russia and China both spend much less on the military than the US.) SARMAT is probably the closest to achievable in technical terms, as it builds on Soviet achievements in space. It is also the most dubious. The command and control issues, particularly after weather satellites are silenced, in a south polar route are completely underestimated. The longer the missile is in flight the longer for any kind of countermeasures, from simply littering the air with chaff to EMP attacks, to take effect. Status-6/Kanyon, quite aside from being of dubious value---seriously, how do you win a war rendering harbors radioactive when a desperate opponent will still simply herd the workers into the harbor?---have even worse command and control problems. The recent experience with the nuclear cruise missile speaks for itself.
Further, the US has its own version of magic superweapons, space warfare. Not Star Wars/SDI, but Space Force taking out satellites. Coupled with cutting fiber optic cables the effects on targeting will be devastating. Worse, nukes in orbit. If anyone cares to (correctly) object to the notion that nukes in orbit are magic, yes, but they aren't for the same kinds of reasons Putin's alleged toys wouldn't be either.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 5 2019 20:45 utc | 41
Thank you Steven T J #35, one excellent example this very day of "strategic bombing not actually work without ground attacks" can be seen in the village of Kabani in Latakia province in Syria. This place and surrounds has been bombed shitless for months and who knows how many Syrian soldiers have died in this repetitive assault. Kabani is still in terrorist/Turkish hands.
The air assaults continue, the ground assaults continue and still it cant be taken.
Thanks b for a good post and many diamonds in the dust from contributers.
spudski "O no" brilliant!
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 5 2019 20:47 utc | 42
In Pepe's report, he links to an 80 page pdf research paper done by Russians examining China's BRI, "Chinese Grand Strategy in the Eurasian Heartland," as it goes through its start-up phase. Yes, as with any human designed project, it has flaws, but they're fixable. It was completed well prior to the recent announcement of the Major Deal between China and Iran I linked above, while mostly omitting Iran since it isn't a FSU nation. The BRI also shows how dysfunctional the Outlaw US Empire's policies have become as it doesn't even attempt to compete, but rather disrupt the project in a manner that also damages its own interests.
The global mantra seems to be: Don't interrupt your enemy when he's busy making mistakes. IMO, there's nothing to worry about Putin's trolling as Trump's too busy planning his next series of gaffs.
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 20:53 utc | 43
This is all nice and dandy, and one may add there $15B contracts rumoured to be fleshed out betqeen Russia and India.
However at the same time Russian military talking heads started talking about "breakthrough" in partnership with Chinese army.
Until 2016 both Russia and China great lengths to avoid making and binding alliances. They worked on making their armies compatible so they can fight together if need be, but kept politic decision making totally separated.
China never crossed Western spin, not even a single veto in UN SC until recent.
Russia probably remembered well how "wag the dog" worked out in 1914, pulling Russia into WW1 at behalf of a small radical Serbian group.
After 2016 first Chinese media and then Chinese politicians too started speculating what a hypothetic alliance with Russia could be. Russia kept silent. It is always good to listen to smart people and learn new things. However sovereign decision making is good too.
And now Russian military circles answered... One might think Moscow decided that international situation worsened so deeply, that constraining oneself by some binding alliance with Beijing would be net positive, rather than keeping flexibility of sharing same interests while retaining independent reactions.
Posted by: Arioch | Sep 5 2019 20:59 utc | 44
@14
The Russian S-300 defense missile system is designed to shoot down planes, not Israeli or FUKUS missiles! If you go back into the Zero Hedge archives you will find this topic has been addressed in detail...
Before writing anything on the matter of which you, obviously, have zero understanding (especially referencing ZH) you should at least try to learn some basic facts about S-300 family of AD/AM complexes (yes, there are many varieties of those) and ask yourself a question: what does the negative elevation (-7 degrees) of S-300 radar at the "lower edge" mean and why it is so. I will simply omit here elaborating on this whole pseudo-geopolitical mambo-jumbo of Russia and Israel's relations.
Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Sep 5 2019 21:09 utc | 45
SmoothieX12
From what I have read, S-300 was designed to counter both aircraft and cruise missiles. Were ballistic missiles in there as a priority too. I'm not sure on that one.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 5 2019 21:23 utc | 46
steven t:
"Because Putin is Yeltsin's successor, albeit a sober one who's presiding over the wreckage. Putin has no more restored industry in Russia than Trump has in the US. "
And which rockets convey men and women to the International Space Station?
Now, I agree Trump has no interest in industrial policy, or helping the long term development of such in the USA.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 21:25 utc | 47
In yet another sign of desperation, Outlaw US Empire charges Russian national for stealing "trade secrets." Putin had the following comments:
"[It's] 'a really bad practice.
"'In this case we're dealing with attempts at dishonest competition,' he told reporters at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, noting the contract between the two firms is 'a normal global practice. It's open commercial work with European partners.'"
Meanwhile, the world awaits the arrest of Boeing and related government officials for knowingly approving of a faulty design capable of crashing its product. Yet another indication of the ultra deep morass of corruption the US government and its leading business people share and wallow within. Clearly, until the corruption is vanquished, the Outlaw US Empire will continue to fall behind those it would like to compete with in most every technical and intellectual field.
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 21:38 utc | 48
Thanks SmoothieX12 #55, minus 7 degrees at lower edge? I would immediately think over (below) horizon capability. what is your guess?
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 5 2019 21:39 utc | 49
Yes there are s300 systems that can engage cruise missiles and small munitions. But Syria will not waste its costly missiles on the pin prick swarms of glide bombs Israel routinely lobs across the Lebanese border in its usual lo-hi-lo pattern. That is what point defense systems are for. These attacks are nothing but propaganda for internal consumption and achieve nothing of military value. Watching western kiddies do a cock strut when they dont use the s300 is priceless though! They are so cute!
Posted by: What did I just read | Sep 5 2019 21:45 utc | 50
@Jay #7
If you're referring to the SR71, it only achieved Machine 3.32 (I.e. not hyper sonic which is Mach 5 or 6).
If you mean the X15 - it was hypersonic but had to be carried to high altitude by a B52 bomber. And it had no payload or range, or really, steering.
Posted by: C1ue | Sep 5 2019 21:48 utc | 51
Thought I'd share this comment about us commentators I found on Twitter:
"Putin Trolls Trump https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/putin-trolls-trump.html … ✅ Worth reading. I skipped the replies [waste of time]"
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 22:03 utc | 52
Here's an excellent 30sec vid break for everyone's edification.
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 22:07 utc | 53
Steven t johnson has yet to show any skill in anything I've read to date. This thread shows the latest examples.
A cruise missile is not hyper sonic. It flies low and slow so as to be difficult to detect. A cruise missile with unlimited range could come from anywhere. It could sit on station for days or weeks - with the attendant problem of radiation release.
A hypersonic missile is simply one which attains super high speeds without going to the extra altitude of a ballistic missile. A mach 5 missile fired at something 100 miles away would reach its target in about 96 seconds.
Systems designed to attack ballistic missiles have a lot longer time to prepare and are working against a predictable, I.e. ballistic, path. A hypersonic missile would have similar high speed but could maneuver.
Are the Russian new weapons 60so technology?
No.
Russia/Putin have said they're due to the development of a new nuclear engine. High speed planes and missiles in the 1960s were all about burning super high octane fossil fuels, really fast.
Is what Putin said accurate? Time will tell.
Posted by: C1ue | Sep 5 2019 22:09 utc | 54
The Russians do not have hypersonic weapons and the US has had a hypersonic plane for 30 years.
LOL
damn there are a lot of trolls here today.
Posted by: Perimetr | Sep 5 2019 22:13 utc | 55
C1ue
I'm not sure that the jet engines of the era had the compression ratio to require a super high octane fuel. Perhaps fuels containing more energy.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 5 2019 22:25 utc | 56
You can tell which posters have an agenda by their broad brush emotional appeals and their aversion to facts and the dissecting of their phoney arguments. Noted for later.
Posted by: What did I just read | Sep 5 2019 22:27 utc | 57
You can see which posters have an agenda by the broad brush emotional appeals they make and by their aversion to facts and the dissection of their phoney arguements. Noted for later.
Posted by: What did I just read | Sep 5 2019 22:32 utc | 58
I see Vladimir Putin has added a new victim to his ever-growing list of things, objects and phenomena he weaponises ... the Art of the Deal.
Posted by: Jen | Sep 5 2019 22:35 utc | 59
O @1--
posted this line--
""The growing naval and aerial threat of the Chinese military has US technology to thank,"
If thanks are in order. The growing threat of weapons everywhere have the US to thank. If it wasn't for their never ending threats of armed aggression than most countries would rather make better use of their money.
Posted by: arby | Sep 5 2019 22:36 utc | 60
To judge by a few of the posters here, the west is weaponizing ignorance and paranoia. Probably their best bet as we have it by the bucket load.
Posted by: What did I just read | Sep 5 2019 22:40 utc | 61
Yet another reason the Outlaw US Empire's falling further behind is provided within this tweet:
"Russia sacrificed 27 million people to defeat the Third Reich while the US gave less than half a million, then installed prominent Nazi officials in top NATO positions and used them for its missile program after World War 2. When will the US have an honest reckoning with that?"
Discovering who it was made in reply to and the resulting thread is educational. NASA stopped being a top-notch engineering and design agency when its Nazi engineers died and its worthy parts were privatized during Reagan/Bush. Recall JFK had to lie--the Missile Gap--to motivate more Americans to become engineers. That effort didn't last long enough and the Outlaw US Empire had to resort to industrial espionage--Project Echelon--to stay ahead technologically until that effort too Petered out.
And it's not just the corruption; it's also the lack of properly trained people to create functioning systems. Most every new weapon system rolled out has massive numbers of bugs, some of which are huge like the aircraft carrier whose elevators don't function properly and the other recent commissioning of ships that can't fight. Then there's the military-wide lack of readiness issue that relates to lacking enough trained technicians to do the work. IMO, that issue more than any other makes the US Military a laughingstock. So what's being done to rectify the situation? Worsening the public schools while dumbing down and making universities even more expensive! And doing just about everything possible to weaken the nation's human capital.
The bottom line is that Putin, Xi, Russia, China, Iran, etc., aren't the problem. The problem is what I already wrote about above--the great morass of corruption and its philosophical system: Neoliberalism. And it's no longer the Missile Gap; its the growing gap between functional and dysfunctional nations--and it grows greater daily.
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 22:50 utc | 62
Lozion @ 44:
O doesn't look like Craig Summers to me. At least we can depend on O to be succinct and not waste the space and generate unnecessary carbon dioxide gas emissions by repeating endless MSM propaganda.
Posted by: Jen | Sep 5 2019 23:03 utc | 63
75 Cont'd--
USAF Readiness Report: Readiness project failed to meet goal as spin applied to pig in attempt to beautify. Nuclear Bombs Delivery Delayed and will likely be delayed again.
It's a good thing the Outlaw US Empire really doesn't have any enemies that want to attack it and engage it in a serious war. And if that's the case, then why the wasted Trillions?
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5 2019 23:07 utc | 64
C1ue@66 keeps ignoring the issue of how the cruise missile sits on station for weeks and then gets sent on target. I also wonder how weeks of search time don't compensate for flying low and slow, especially if repetitive circling keeps bringing the missile in detection range. Also, drones testing for radioactive exhaust would have time to work. Why are weeks too late for battlefield advantage even a good thing? Because Putin said so.
Not good enough. It's one thing to respect Putin as a conservative leader of an independent nation but it's another to kiss his ass.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 5 2019 23:08 utc | 65
Perimetr:
Sorry, it's acknowledged that the USA has a hypersonic spy-plane and has and for approximately 30 years.
You may not have heard of it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 23:21 utc | 66
Invincible ignorance will destroy the internet faster than censorship.
Posted by: What did I just read | Sep 5 2019 23:29 utc | 67
karlof1
Trickle down economics. Perhaps better named 'trickle down corruption' as that is what is occuring in the US.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 5 2019 23:31 utc | 68
@C1ue:
Nope, not referencing the SR-71. Which I pointed out is 55+ year old tech that the US denied existed for 25 years at least.
Nor is the X15 a hypersonic ram jet spy-plane. And it hasn't flown in 50+ years, though I'm sure its technologies have some relevance to the US hypersonic spy-plane that has been in service since about the late 1980s. (But I'll speculate that the current US hypersonic spy-plane does NOT solve the overheating problem with conventionally more heat resistant alloys.)
I suggest that you read my posts next time. Except for the point about the X15 not having flown in 50 years and the one about overheating, I'd already addressed each one of your "but you're thinking of" points.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 23:35 utc | 69
Jay
Why would the US build super secret super expensive spy planes when they have satellites.
The blackbird filled in the last couple of years until us got spy sats in orbit (just before or just after the soviets fielded the Mig 25). Even Larry Johnston could not build an aircraft that soviet radar could not see.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 5 2019 23:41 utc | 70
uncle tungsten... follow smoothie's link
https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
Posted by: goldhoarder | Sep 5 2019 23:51 utc | 71
Peter AU 1:
"Why would the US build super secret super expensive spy planes when they have satellites."
Because satellites need to orbit into the right range. Also visible light doesn't penetrate clouds. The you forgot the "strike" part of the SR-71 name. It started life as an A series plane, that's "attack".
"Even Larry Johnston could not build an aircraft that soviet radar could not see."
Kelly not Larry, and I didn't claim the current US hypersonic spy-plane is invisible to radar, nor really was the SR-71.
"The blackbird filled in the last couple of years until us got spy sats in orbit (just before or just after the soviets fielded the Mig 25)."
The SR-71 flew (as in was used) until at least 1990. That's long after spy satellites became real good.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 5 2019 23:54 utc | 72
Jay
The US does have the X-37B but that operates in space.
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-mco.s3.amazonaws.com/public/GA7QO5H5NREBBJQZMGVVXBJUZA.JPG){kind=link}
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 5 2019 23:56 utc | 74
@Jay (passim)
Please provide us some url to this mysterious US aeroplane thou speakest of.
Posted by: bjd | Sep 6 2019 0:02 utc | 75
Jay 87
The blackbird did not fly over the soviet union after they fielded the Mig 25. Converging mig 25's would have taken it down.
It was the successor to the U2. Johnston built the U2 to CIA specifications and it was promptly shot down. Johnston was pushing for a fast high flying aircraft and after the U2 shootdown he was given the go ahead.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 6 2019 0:05 utc | 76
Thanks bjd #90, THAT is the only call that counts in this volley.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 6 2019 0:07 utc | 77
I thought hypersonics were noisy, sonic booms, I wouldn't think they would be good for spying. They eat a lot of gas too.
Posted by: Bemildred | Sep 6 2019 0:12 utc | 78
I think evidence for that hypersonic plane can be found in Area 51. Maybe he will fly in like Nurato and get it...and bring us a ham sammich.
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 6 2019 0:13 utc | 79
This thread arose a very important aspect of History as a science (specially, Contemporary History): how to separate propaganda from reality? Put it another way: how can we know one side is the "correct" one (i.e. "on the right side of History") or if both are wrong?
Apart from all the documental evidence, we can always rely, in this case (Russia vs USA) on Sun Tzu's old adage: "know your enemy to know yourself".
Assume Putin's Russia is a complete farce, that it doesn't have any hypersonic weapons, that it cannot build a floating nuclear power plant, that its economy is on the verge of collapse and all other bad things the Western propaganda states it is. In this situation, how would the USA -- which would be "on the right side of History" -- behave?
Well, if the USA is right on its anti-Russia propaganda, then we can assume they are on a superior position of intelligence, so they know this information as facts. It would have geopolitical "omniscience", so it would, theoretically, take all the correct tactical decisions when engaging Russia.
If that's the case, then how would we expect the Americans to behave?
Well, in the first place, I don't even think Russiagate would exist if the Western propaganda against Russia was telling the truth. I also don't think the Wolfowitz Doctrine would've ever been written. I also don't think the Russophobia doctrine would be so dominant among the American elite.
On the other side, if the USA was all that, why would Russia behave the way it behaves now? Why did Yeltsin fell? Why would Putin, with his curriculum, boast about new weapons the way he did last year and, therefore, gaming with his own country and his reputation?
That's why, alongside the pile of evidence and solid economic theory, I tend to believe the USA is slowly -- but inexorably -- declining and is now first among equals (multipolar order), and not the "king of nations" (unipolar order) as it was during the 1990s-2008.
Peter AU 1:
"The US does have the X-37B but that operates in space."
That's one rumored name for craft like that. But that's a few steps of classification beyond a hypersonic spy-plane, if such as the X-73B exists.
"The blackbird did not fly over the soviet union after they fielded the Mig 25. Converging mig 25's would have taken it down."
Not sure about that, and the SR 71 certainly flew along the edges of the Soviet Union, while it existed. Right, fast, a high climbing jet + plus fast missile perhaps could have shot the SR-71 down, but it didn't happen. And you've explained the justification for building and fielding a replacement that is much faster.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 0:15 utc | 81
steven t johnson @79 demonstrating his delusion of exceptionalism while failing to understand the point of defensive weapon systems.
Sure, stevie, a nuclear powered cruise missile doesn't make much sense as a first strike weapon, but first strike has never been Russia's military posture anyway (and China's neither, but that is not the point here). It is part of a variety of retaliatory strike weapons that are intended to dissuade the sick psychos (which apparently includes yourself) in America (which DOES maintain a first strike posture) from launching an attack.
Quick question stevie: How well are your gee-whiz, super-duper, Windoze/Intel controlled, Boing/GE manufactured detectors and interceptors going to be working after they get hit by the first couple electromagnetic pulses from large stratospheric air bursts? Not real good, huh?
So here is the deal, after you launch a preemptive nuclear attack on Russia (because of course it will be you Americans since you are stupid and psychotic and are busy convincing yourself that you're just too awesome for Russian atom bombs to hurt) and the first wave of Russia's retaliation winds down (all of your major cities reduced to glowing craters), just think, you'll have at least a week more of big "BOOM"s to go before you get peace and quiet.
It would be better, though, if you could climb down from your exceptional psychosis, can the crappy jingoism, and stop trying to convince yourself and others that it would actually be OK for you to attack Russia.
Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 6 2019 0:20 utc | 82
Jay
I provided a photo of the X-73B and there are plenty more pics and news reports on the internet.
Dates when the blackbird flew in soviet airspace are available along with the date when the mig 25 was fielded.
You though have provided nothing but your own imagination for your claims.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 6 2019 0:23 utc | 83
@what did I just read:
So you gots nothing.
I already wrote southern Nevada, you really need to pay attention.
The thing about food pick up and delivery, you have to be able to land. I didn't say the USA is operating a Mach 5+ Santa's sleigh out of southern Nevada.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 0:30 utc | 84
Lets try this. What do the internuts call that super duper hypersonic plane? They give names to all sorts of iffy claims. Does this have a name? If not, why?
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 6 2019 0:34 utc | 85
@95 vk.. thanks... no bullshit in your post, but conjecture which i happen to agree with... for anyone who knows how to play poker - i read it the same way as you here, but it is much like a game of poker.. who is bluffing who here? i see it as you do..
Posted by: james | Sep 6 2019 0:35 utc | 86
Peter AU 1:
Carefully reread my phrasing in response to your first comment, the one with the link, about the purported X-73B. Nowhere did I dispute that rumors of such craft exist.
"Dates when the blackbird flew in soviet airspace are available along with the date when the mig 25 was fielded.
You though have provided nothing but your own imagination for your claims."
You're the party citing rumors about a Lockheed developed flying disc or triangle for use in space.
I'd not put too much credence in official records of SR-71 flights.
You also forgot my point about satellite image/s of contrail going from southern Nevada to Africa in say an hour.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 0:39 utc | 87
@Bemildred:
The sonic booms are a twice a flight thing--perhaps 4 times if the a cruise missile is to be fired. I suspect the booms are limited to very rural Nevada, where the US already flies all sorts of supersonic aircraft.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 0:42 utc | 88
bjd and uncle tungsten:
Right, because the USAF, National Reconnaissance Office, and the manufacturer just a a PDF for the plane on their websites. /s
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 0:46 utc | 89
what did I just read:
Yes, the spy-plane has a rumored name, not number. It's been the same since the 1980s.
It's staggering ignorance that none who have pretended to challenge me here know that rumored name.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 0:49 utc | 90
The comments on this thread are strange and out of character for this site..
Did B insult closet US flag waivers? They are out in force proclaiming Russia lacks hypersonic weapons and claiming all kinds of things to prove US military supremacy. Some of the claims are out there at best and the language being used is what id expect from a US military fan boy site. Maybe some people came over from “Naked Capitalism.”
Posted by: Alaric | Sep 6 2019 0:51 utc | 91
Ok, Aurora is the name. It was never a manned plane, only a research project like many others. It is largely myth. While wikedpedia is mostly a mess, the final sentence is a must hear for you.
"In June 2017, Aviation Week reported that Rob Weiss, the General Manager of the Skunk Works, provided some confirmation of a research project and stated that hypersonic technology was now mature, and efforts were underway to fly an aircraft with it."
In a nutshell, no plane ever existed if they are only ready to fly one now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(aircraft)
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 6 2019 0:54 utc | 92
A good indicator of the kinds of people who make claims about that plane....
"In February 1994, a former resident of Rachel, Nevada, and Area 51 enthusiast, Chuck Clark, claimed to have filmed the Aurora taking off from the Groom Lake facility. In the David Darlington book Area 51: The Dreamland Chronicles, he said:
I even saw the Aurora take off one night – or an aircraft that matched the Aurora's reputed configuration, a sharp delta with twin tails about a hundred and thirty feet long. It taxied out of a lighted hangar at two-thirty A.M. and used a lot of runway to take off. It had one red light on top, but the minute the wheels left the runway, the light went off and that was the last I saw of it. I didn't hear it because the wind was blowing from behind me toward the base." I asked when this had taken place. "February 1994. Obviously they didn't think anybody was out there. It was thirty below zero – probably ninety below with the wind chill factor. I had hiked into White Sides from a different, harder way than usual, and stayed there two or three days among the rocks, under a camouflage tarp with six layers of clothes on. I had an insulated face mask and two sleeping bags, so I didn't present a heat signature. I videotaped the aircraft through a telescope with a five-hundred-millimeter f4 lens coupled via a C-ring to a high-eight digital video camera with five hundred and twenty scan lines of resolution, which is better than TV." The author then asked, "Where's the tape?" "Locked away. That's a legitimate spyplane; my purpose is not to give away legitimate national defense. When they get ready to unveil it, I'll probably release the tape."[16]"
Sure you dont want to head out to area 51? Eh?
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 6 2019 0:59 utc | 93
'trickle down corruption' .. in the US..Peter AU 1 @ 83
I agree Trump has no interest in industrial policy, or ..the LT development of such in the USA. Jay @57
@William Gruff: So that's "because I engaged in corrupt+dishonest billing" everyone else is doing it. Jay @ 40
Nobody can effectively use mass drone attacks or cruise missile attacks for strategic victory Steven t Johnson @ 35
the military pays $400 each, if not a good deal more, for their hammers.by: William Gruff @ 34
Then 9/11 quieted Congress <= $10Bs still being sqaundered on Star Wars, like the $5B a year still spend on the SSP, after SSP was terminated in 2012. Congress just gave Pentagon a +16% budget increase, after double-digits YOY since 9/11. Why would they[congress] continue to [expand the debt in fake, made up and usless expenses] ... ? by: Jarold Zimani @ 16 <= very good question..
the answer is the bankers and their high powered corporations cannot roll America with IMF, worldbank, fed debt as it does to foreign nations because its script is the reserve capital of the world.. so the criminals that run those who run the governments, devised another way to bring the government that governs Americans (USA) into sufficient debt to bankrupt America
<==. the question is what is the reason to bankrupt America, Americans and the debt holders of the debts of the USA.. the answer, just as is now occurring in Britain, is privatization. Economic Zionism condones no competition, allows no prisoners and either takes or destroys all likely elements (persons, corporations, or nations) that might someday become competitive. Economic Zionism demands the government that governs Americans(USA), and the governed Americans, must be rendered broke, before the principles of EZ c/b applied to scoop up the goodies to be had in America.. In America there is much very-productive farm land, millions of tons of minerals, very productive seaports, tons and tons of money making monopolies (patents, copyrights, royalties, government franchised goodies, lucrative government contracts, and plenty of government services and resources to be privatized for profit). The goodies are located in thousands of acres of rich farmland, the major ports, and in little Domestic American companies which the USA debt will eventually force into bankruptcy. After all "scalping a bankruptcy" is historically a speciality of economic zionism.
Posted by: snake | Sep 6 2019 1:01 utc | 94
William Gruff@97 "Quick question stevie: How well are your gee-whiz, super-duper, Windoze/Intel controlled, Boing/GE manufactured detectors and interceptors going to be working after they get hit by the first couple electromagnetic pulses from large stratospheric air bursts? Not real good, huh?" Why they will work as badly as the SARMAT, the Status-6/Kanyon and the nuclear cruise missile, which is to say, not as advertised. At a guess, if it came to a US first strike, the ICBMs will only occasionally hit their targets, yields will be shockingly variable including outright duds, the results will not be so decisive as predicted, some will fail to launch at all and there may even be premature detonation on launch. The Trident targeting will be even worse, few or none of sub-launched missiles will follow any plan and one or more Trident subs will fail to launch because they're sinking. The bombers will launch late, miss targets and some airmen will defy orders to sortie. There will be no successful defense against Russian retaliation, only random survival because their response will be even more disjointed. The US will not be able to launch any meaningful second strike even if they had any sensible reason to do so.
But all the command and control problems will be even worse for Russia. The only way it mounts any retaliation to speak of is if it launches before what the US does manage to get to Russia in approximately the right place. Nuclear exchange is a great video game. Anything else is stupid. None of this is pro-American.
The abuse is about not blindly accepting Putin, even when he spouts nonsense that would do Trump proud.
Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 6 2019 1:12 utc | 95
what did I just read:
Finally, you got the name. And then you cite Wikipedia completely undermining yourself. Of course.
Look the best internet rumor is that it was a Mach 6 RS-85 (recon and strike) plane that flew (manned) until 2018. It looks to have been retired. Meaning the US is fielding something better.
Nope, have no interest in being in the cold Nevada desert trying to photograph 1980s jets.
"In a nutshell, no plane ever existed if they are only ready to fly one now."
Keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel more comfortable.
Ya know, other comments not by me have already brought up far more radical flying craft the USA ostensibly has.
Since you ignored this point, I'll repeat it: It's very unlikely that Trump can order missions with such craft, he's barely been read into such programs.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 1:14 utc | 96
snake:
"Economic Zionism condones no competition, allows no prisoners and either takes or destroys all likely elements (persons, corporations, or nations) that might someday become competitive."
And out comes that garbage.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 6 2019 1:18 utc | 97
Jay, seriously! I knew what the damned plane was called. It is legendary in UFO enthusiast circles. Remember, there is a trap behind every word. It is not a real plane. Get over it. The other radical plane you are talking about is just a mini space shuttle, the x-37. Not radical at all, and unlike your aurora it actually exists. Because dude, the best internet rumor is still only a rumor....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37
Posted by: what did I just read | Sep 6 2019 1:20 utc | 98
Jay "about the purported X-73B. Nowhere did I dispute that rumors of such craft exist."
Purported .. rumors.... News articles on how many days it is in space, record number of days ect, photograghs on the occasions it comes into land... seems a bit more than rumors.
"Look the best internet rumor is that it was a Mach 6 RS-85" So this is the rock solid evidence for your super duper plane. Your world seems to be inverted.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 6 2019 1:37 utc | 99
I remember some spy novel from the 70's, where the Russian says to the American; When we want power, we go to where the power is. When you want power, you go to the money.
Posted by: John Merryman | Sep 6 2019 1:49 utc | 100
The comments to this entry are closed.
"U.S. weapons are not developed or built with a real strategic need in mind. They don't get developed for achieving the most effect in an existential war against a capable enemy but to create profit."
Post-Vietnam, weapons manufacture became focused on corporate profit, rather than the military effectiveness. Profit for the defense industry became the be all and end all. With a fixed percentage profit, the more expensive the development the better. again, profit was everything.
Not only does it create an ineffective military, but the vast expense is hollowing out the country. Finally, neoliberalism is plundering the country itself.
The American experiment is over.
Posted by: Jeff Davis | Sep 5 2019 17:08 utc | 1