For the past 50 years, American leaders have been supremely confident that they could suffer military setbacks in places like Cuba or Vietnam without having their system of global hegemony, backed by the world’s wealthiest economy and finest military, affected. The country was, after all, the planet’s “indispensible nation,” as Secretary of State Madeleine Albright proclaimed in 1998 (and other presidents and politicians have insisted ever since). The U.S.
Now, I’m beginning to get scared.
“beginning to get scared”
Looks like the writer is persuading the US to start a war with China now instead of waiting till 2030, huh? Well, one “good” thing about having a war now, which was proposed in the neocons’ PNAC decades ago, is that a later war would involve even more fearsome weapons on both sides. A war now would mean only tens of American cities wiped out: Chinese cities would suffer at least ten times the amount of devastation. Of course, if what was said about the fantastic havoc that could result from an Indian-Pakistan nuclear exchange was true, a Sino-American one would be much worse. Yet I think the world would survive, though the new power centres would likely be Russia, Western Europe, and perhaps India. And I don’t think these new powers would behave worse than the US or China. So don’t be scared - let them kill each other if that’s what they want (might be wise to emigrate to more distant lands, though, if you’re Chinese or American).
I agree that the writer is sending a message to the Pentagon attacking China now or lose later.
Although i find his analysis well researched i disagree with the likelihood of war remaining in the cyber attack phase for any appreciable length of time. America will turn into a hot war and fire nukes at the earliest opportunity they can get. Electronic warfare will not be advancing by that much in a mere 13 years. The author is somewhat science fiction-inst about his predictions. China has already proven capable of disabling it’s own satellite with powerful laser weapons. Placing anything other than communications satellites in space is prohibited by international treaty. It is unlikely that either China or Russia will agree to weaponization of space.
As long as the people with the power, power of government, of the military, and even of the pen continue to think this way we will probably eventually wipe ourselves out, whatever the exact scenario turns out to be. The development of our technology is outpacing our development as a species.
A little too real McCoy, sheesh! This article is hard to take for many people. It wasn’t hyperbolic nor did it spend its time excoriating America out of habit. It just pointed out that we have lost WWIII. Now what?
Some think the piece urges us to attack China. America being the villain, of course. It does not. The piece warns us that the world is a different place than what we thought it was. There is no way to ‘start a war’ with China without it becoming a mutual nuclear murder-suicide in the very next moment. One wonders what our immense military is still good for in light of the very real risk of cyber warfare. What if they gave a war and…somebody turned off the lights?
My point is that WWIII has been fought already. It is only that the battles are yet to be waged that drags it out. The truth is that WWIII was fought in the preparation. Which country prepared best? It might take ten years or twenty even longer but which country can turn off the lights on the other? Which country will have the best electronic warfare, in short! This article drives its point home and hits its target!
Sooner or later, China will have better electronics than we will. The outrageous irony is that America has wasted trillions on amassing physical weapons that it never will use. The days of full out world war scenarios fought with tanks and soldiers are pretty much over. America’s giant military is designed to better fight a WWII type of world war and is therefore mostly outdated and wasted money. Therein lay the victory that escaped us. It wasn’t tanks and bombers anymore. It was who could control the electronic world around us.
We wasted our technological advantage (thanks to Bush/Cheney). Through arrogance or racism, we thought ourselves so far in the lead that no one could catch us. But they spent billions educating engineers while we spent our billions on new generation weapons and fighter jets etc. In the end, their engineers overwhelmed ours (to say nothing about our training and educating so many of theirs) but mainly their ability to realize new technology on a concrete real world level (think high speed trains) left us behind.
It seems to me that there is no way to win WWIII if we have to depend on WWII muscle weapons that are so expensive that they drain us of our real world economic vitality.
Our giant military was/is the reason we have already lost WWIII even though we haven’t fought any of its battles yet. We started WWIII broke!
“Spare any change?” Asked the outrageously expensive F-35 fighter jets and the B-2 bombers.
WWW III will be fought with nuclear missiles.
We don’t really need those jet fighters, navy, 100,000s of troops , thousands of military bases.
… but then they all drive our economy. War is the business of the USA !
In John Michael Greer’s novel, Twilight’s Last Gleaming, he suggests a different, even more plausible scenario with current missile technology. And the American military isn’t even ready for that. In any case there is too much corruption and waste in the wholly intertwined U.S. military and weapons industry to keep up with the current technological developments already in play. The four stars and corporate leadership don’t really care anyway because the money is flowing to corporate and the four stars (and lesser stars) are guaranteed seven figure salaries after retirement. Time to wage peace instead.
Here is some of what is going on with your taxpayers dollars.
I know, I got this piece from Sputnik so that makes me a Kremlin stooge and Putin lover. Read it anyway.
It’s always infuriated me that persons think we must stop China expanding into the S. China Sea or anyplace else half way around the planet.
Putting it simplistically, it is after all the S ‘China’ sea, not the Amerikan Ocean.
One thing that gives me the creeping horrors is that people seem to forget that ICBM means Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile.
*At one time, they were all ICBMs, fired from the ground or other launch sites, they were programmed to launch, go into a pre-programmed ballistic curve, the other end of which was the target area. Sort of like a hunter’s rifle. He calculates the elevation and windage, then pulls the trigger. The only thing that stops it is the deer in the sights.
*As I read the article, with all the electronic imagery, my thoughts jumped to a scene where they are manually targeted and fired. The only way to stop them is by being able to shoot the bullet enroute. Star Wars showed the near impossibility of doing that successfully. Especially if there were a mass launch.
*I worried for years, as we had loads of nuclear missiles located near the East/West border of the Soviet Union. At that time, use of nuclear weapons was directly controlled by the President and could only be used in response to a nuclear attack on the US.
*What I really feared was a successful ground attack by the CCCP, overrunning NATO’s defense line. Some commander would decide it was a “Use it or lose it” situation and launch their missiles. That would initiate a launch of Soviet missiles at the continental US, instantly responded to by the US. The end of the world as we know it about thirty minutes later.
*Then the policy was revised to where it is up to the judgement of field commanders whether to use nuclear weapons. Same scenario.
*In this electronic pissing contest laid out in the article, I’m sure that some backup plan is there for manual targeting and launch. That is not the pinpoint accuracy that the electronically launched and guided missiles get, but how accurate do you have to be with a multi-megaton H-Bomb?
*If we all don’t relearn diplomacy, to negotiate and compromise, to have feeling for people not our own and nations not our own, any survivors will be reduced to very sick stone age tribes. Nuclear Winter, no global warming, no sunlight, no crops, radiation sickness and death.
*Even the cocksure trillionaires, Generals, Senators and Congressmen in their underground shelters will run out of supplies, drinkable water, and the air filtration filters will eventually fail.
*I guess the only winner in all this will be the last trillionaire, gasping out his last breath of polluted air, screaming, “I’ve won! I’ve won! I’ve got it all!”
*"Abidia, abidia, eh, That’s all folks!"
Thank you! Why isn’t it ever questioned and/or explained exactly why the US thinks that every place in the world somehow belongs to us. You don’t see China claiming the Gulf of Mexico. You don’t see Russia claiming the Gulf of Maine.
I can’t help but wonder where you and I fit into this “integrated kill chain”?
The people of both the US and China are insane to allow this crap to continue.
Amen brother. Blaming the governments gets us where, exactly? Unfortunately, too many of the people are in support of their governments to allow for grassroots change, currently. The fact that the people DO allow these things to take place is symptomatic of a very sick world. Or, even worse, an apathetic one.
Wiping out tens of cities would likley cause a nuclear winter, the threshold for which is much less than commonly thought.
The “last winner” will be Mother Nature murmuring: “Thank God that disastrous period of experimental life is over!”
I’m quite aware of the findings, dog paddle, but think that there would still be survivors, though some might say that the living would envy the dead. Past American leaders had said that nuclear wars could never be won and must never be fought, but some neocons are actually contemplating such a scenario, especially with Russia and also, to some extent, with China. A more recent study found that even the relatively limited nuclear exchanges between India and Pakistan could result in catastrophic consequences, so sane people might hope that talks of nuclear war are merely hot air, much like what has been going on between North Korea and Trump. But the neocons are not necessarily sane, and we cannot assume that the people they’re trying to frighten are (sane) either. In fact, I’m almost certain that any war between the nuclear powers would involve an all-out nuclear exchange, especially when a conventional defeat stares at the weaker party. That was why Russia changed their policy on the first use of nuclear weapons, and for all of China’s “no first use” policy, that assurance is as believable as a capitalist saying he has no use for profits.
There are a handful of people left who have experienced what nuclear warfare is. Most have died from the effects of radiation exposure, with cancers and other problems. The rest of us are in our seventies and eighties so, soon, there will be no direct witnesses, which will serve the PTB as they proceed with this insanity.
*In actuality, WW-III was fought from 1945 through 1999, and a few others who have joined the club since then. The world tested 2,053 A and H-Bombs. The US led the pack with 1,032; Russia was second with 715; France 210; Britain 45; China 45; India 4 and Pakistan 2. The only difference is that we didn’t throw them at each other, we all just kept shooting ourselves in the foot. The fallout, however, was world wide. The level of cancers and other such diseases has increased, world wide.This in addition to the contamination by Chernobyl, Fukushima and other nuclear “accidents.”.
*Now, we are at the point of wholesale bombing of any nation that doesn’t agree with us.You can read all about the plan if you can get a copy of the PNAC (Project for the New American Century). In essence, it is a carefully laid out plan for the US to be the one dominant power in the world through military and financial means. That new paper from the Pentagon, Risk Assessment in a Post-Primacy World, analyzing our situation reads like an update of the PNAC.
*In short, with the nuclear clock at a few seconds to midnight, we are looking at a holocaust in the making. The idea of an exchange of nuclear weaponry consisting of one bomb, or one bomb each, is a fallacy. An exchange of nuclear weapons may well be complicated by many launches from several countries. If one of these countries sees a launch in their general direction, they will respond. That will start a chain reaction of responses lest they lose their nuclear capability.
*There are plenty of studies of the result of a nuclear war. The Ozone layer destroyed, a cloud cover that would literally freeze much of the world. Starvation if no crops can be raised. Unprotected from the UV spectrum which is shielded by the Ozone layer, massive blindness.
*Hell, I didn’t start out to write a book, there are plenty of them out there, but I am just saying that any nuclear exchange is going to result in a holocaust for much or all of the world. I love this planet and it breaks my heart to see species destroyed, forests cut down, eliminating natural carbon traps, pollution of aquifers around the world through contamination, drilling, fracking, etc.
*A definition of cancer is an organism that has one job, to grow and consume (Sounds like a corporation). When it reaches a critical point, the host dies. It seems that is what we are doing to this beautiful planet. If we can’t find a cure, like returning to love, respect, diplomacy, empathy, working with Nature rather than exploiting Her, then probably sooner rather than later, there will exist a dead planet, possibly alone in a vast universe. This link will give you an idea of what I am writing about http://www.ctbto.org/specials/1945-1998-by-isao-hashimoto/
Dear minitrue: thanks for your informative, detailed posting. I do know the horrors of nuclear war, and in my first posting above did mention the PNAC. You may think I’m making light of nuclear war, but in reality I’m doing that because the neocons and their ilk should know that no nation is afraid of their threats, direct or otherwise. Kim whatshisname is merely expressing what most other nations feel when confronting nuclear blackmail. I’m pretty sure that NK would reply any attack on their territory with whatever they have in their arsenal, even if they’ve only ONE nuclear bomb. If Japan had nuclear bombs in 1945, they too would’ve retaliated in kind, come what may (and despite their many obvious war crimes).
I’m also in my seventies.