Could Russia be preparing for a preemptive nuclear strike on the US? Part 1-4

Wars and rumors of war,these things must be, see that you are not in fear.
This has 4 parts I will put all four in one post.
 Sadly in this series it is a lot of USA spin. Look, if you kept shooting a BB gun at a large Bear what would happen, what would the Bear do? That is the case in a nut shell.

 August 2016 – MOSCOW – Troubling signs are emerging that Russia is preparing for a nuclear war with the U.S. Whether that war happens soon or sometime much later will depend on U.S. actions and the decisions made by Putin and key members of the Russian leadership if they interpret U.S. actions as a legitimate existential threat to the Russian Federation. A new cold war between the two countries is heating up. NATO troops are parked on Russia’s doorstep. A US-based missile shield is to be erected in Romania and Poland. The U.S. and Russia are engaged in a no-holds barred proxy war in the Ukraine and Syria. Russian jets are buzzing American ships in the Black Sea. Against American wishes, Russia is providing advanced anti-aircraft defensive systems to both Iran and Syria. Neither side really trusts each and what little, if any, trust there is left is rapidly eroding. We have all the makings of a potential nuclear conflict.

Strategic nuclear arsenals are like an advanced, dangerous chess game. However, like in any good chess match, we believe such an earth-shattering decision as a unilateral preemptive nuclear strike is more likely to be made when one side appears to have gained the strategic imperative and the other side is stealthily capable of exploiting his opponent’s vulnerability. Such a window to launch an attack may occur in 2017 and beyond, after the 2016 U.S. election (between Clinton and Trump) has been decided by American voters. Only by examining all the evidence collectively can we get a comprehensive picture of possible Russian intentions. One thing you’ll agree on is that this new cold war tension between Russia and the U.S. is much more dangerous than what the public, heretofore, has been led to believe.

Let’s begin our four-part series with the Russian military doctrinal belief that a preemptive nuclear strike is more likely to be launched when one side believes it has enough of a strategic advantage over the other side to tip the balance of power in its favor. We will hear this expressed from Vladimir Putin himself in an address recorded at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, which occurred from June 16–18,  of 2016.

Putin's Warning: Full Speech 2016 

 Many things emerged from Putin’s speech, particularly the candid admission that Russia was instrumental in negotiating or brokering Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran to stave off a potential war in the Middle East involving Israel. What Russia wanted in return for its cooperation on the Iranian deal and how that plays into the present cold-war dilemma with the U.S. will be discussed more at length later. For now – how dangerous is the Russian threat to the U.S.?

The answer is expressed by American military officials themselves: “Mark Milley, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, said that it was only the Russian army that could pose a threat to the United States of America. The official also said that Russia was the only country in the world that could destroy the United States.
Recently, top US officials have been pointing out the growth of Russia’s military power. The commander of US forces in Europe, Ben Hodges, said that Russia was capable of showing resistance even to a technologically superior enemy owing to its air defense system and anti-ship complexes.” –Pravda

Putin Russia greatest threat to USA national security 2015 Breaking News-(USA sy op bull )

Does Russia think their new nuclear weapons could win a war? A new round of Russian nuclear weapons development, their new aggressive posture and their new spurning of joint nuclear programs with the United States, all point to a disconcerting trend in Russian thinking amid a growing confidence in the nation’s military capabilities. Americans have short memories. Russians don’t. It’s only been 25 years since the Wall came down, but in Russia’s mind the Cold War didn’t end. If Russia’s invasion of Ukraine isn’t enough of a heads-up, then maybe their new generation of tactical nuclear weapons is.
On September 10, Putin said Russia will develop a new guaranteed nuclear deterrent to counter the United States and NATO. Actually, they already have. Russia reportedly thinks its tactical nukes are now better than both ours and NATO’s. NATO member countries have only 260 older tactical weapons. Sited in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Turkey, the U.S. has 200 nuclear bombs with an overall capacity of 18 megatons. France has 60 atomic bombs.

The US has 300 tactical B-61 bombs on its own territory, but this does not touch the imbalance. The United States cannot improve this situation as we have destroyed many of our Cold War tactical nuclear missiles, land-based missiles and sea-based Tomahawk cruise missiles. And we pinned ourselves with our own treaties. The recent START 3 treaty was overwhelmingly favorable to Russia. Russia has developed long-range cruise missiles of a new generation that will soon be deployed on submarines of the Black Sea Fleet and missile ships of the Caspian Flotilla. The U.S. State Department admitted as much in a report published at the beginning of September, stating that Russia has passed us in nuclear weapons capability for the first time in 40 years.

Could Russia be preparing for a preemptive nuclear strike on the US? Part 2

August 2016 – WASHINGTON – With tensions between Russia and the West at post-cold war highs, a former NATO deputy military chief is now saying that a nuclear war with Russia over the Baltic nations in 2017 is “entirely plausible” according to RT. General Sir Richard Shirreff, from Britain, served at the second highest NATO military office in Europe between 2011 and 2014, has written a fictional book about a nuclear war with Russia in 2017 triggered by a dispute of the Baltic nations. While the story is indeed fictional, Shirreff said the story is based on an “entirely plausible” scenario.  –Zero Hedge

How did it come to this? The balance of power involving the nuclear arms race between Russia and the U.S. is a chess game. If you’re going to play the game, you not only have to know the rules of the games involving the movement of the chess pieces – you have to also understand your opponent’s strategy. In order to win, you have to be smart enough to exploit your opponent’s blunders. Unfortunately, when it comes to chess – Russia has a long undisputed history of producing undefeatable grand chess-masters. Therefore, it can be said, Russia approaches the nuclear arms race with the U.S. as if it was just that – a chess game, whose every move the Russian nation’s entire existence depended upon.

The U.S. on the other hand, particularly under the Obama administration, has seen America’s nuclear arsenal as a bargaining chip for peace moreso than as a deterrence to prevent an unthinkable mutually assured holocaust. The elimination of nuclear weapons can only be be approached by the same “paradox” as M.A.D., that is M.D.S., or mutual dilution in strength. However, in this chess game, Russia took advantage of two things – America’s push to reduce its nuclear stock piles under the START treaties, and Barack Obama’s naiveté  and inexperience as a seasoned politician to know the stark difference between chess and checkers. Obama wanted to rid the world of nuclear weapons at almost any cost rather than face the daunting task of staring down his Russian counterparts into the abyss until both sides reached a congenial and verifiable agreement on the mutual reduction of nuclear arms.

In the end, Obama was more concerned with short-term fixes and resolutions that would hold-up during his administration than he was about securing long-term solutions that would eradicate nuclear weapons from the face of the planet once and for all. A series of blunders was enacted by President Obama that, in our estimation, tipped the balance of power in Russia’s favor. This would lead to more aggressive military action by Russia in the Baltic region and call for a complete reordering of Russia’s nuclear forces  by Putin to attain a strategic advantage over the U.S. and its NATO allies. Remember, this is the same president that told our number one ally, Great Britain, if its own people made the sovereign decision to leave the EU (BREXIT), he would put them at the back of the trade queue.

Via The Huffington Post/Reuters: “In March of 2012, President Barack Obama was caught on camera on Monday assuring outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev he will have “more flexibility” to deal with contentious issues like missile defense after the U.S. presidential election. Obama, during talks in Seoul, urged Moscow to give him “space” until after the November ballot, and Medvedev said he would relay the message to incoming Russian president Vladimir Putin. The unusually frank exchange came as Obama and Medvedev huddled together on the eve of a global nuclear security summit in the South Korean capital, unaware their words were being picked up by microphones as reporters were led into the room…”  –Huffington Post – Below: A clip from a CNN news cast with then presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney.

Note Mitt is one of the global elite and not trusted at ALL.

Could Russia be preparing for a preemptive nuclear strike on the US? Part 3

Russia used Iranian crisis to outwit Obama: In particular, Obama needed Russia’s help on Iran, whose nuclear program the West did see as a major security threat. “So to me there was a very clear quid pro quo,” Samore says. “We very consciously and deliberately were prepared to give the Russians strategic parity in exchange for cooperation on other key issues, Iran being the most important.”

The treaty does not prevent you from modernizing,” says McFaul, who went on to become the U.S. ambassador in Moscow from 2011 to 2013. “In terms of parity, they felt like they needed to modernize, whereas we didn’t feel that way.”  –Time     —- Now here’s where the Time article Why Russia is rebuilding is nuclear arsenal gets particularly alarming...the article continues:

Notice the USA spin, look the USA is provoking Russia every day. Sooner or later Russia will not take anymore, they are being demonized and they are being set up.
I posted how Putin banded Evangelism , home churches, so I am not happy with that one. I could never support any country, USA as well, that bans Christian free speech, freedom to worship, but all this is allowed as our lord is using as,his rod of correction, USA, Russia, China, Iran, UN Troops these are the God given, ordained rods of correction on the USA and the E.U.

Back to the post;

April 4, 2016 – MOSCOW – (Time) Vladimir Putin skipped the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington in April of 2016 —one more sign that Russia isn’t interested in cutting its arms. Over the course of Obama’s presidency, Russia has managed to negotiate deep cuts to the U.S. arsenal while substantially strengthening of its own. It has allegedly violated the treaty that limits the deployment of nuclear weapons in Europe and, in the last few years, it has brought disarmament talks with the U.S. to a complete standstill for the first time since the 1960s. In its rhetoric, Moscow has also returned to a habit of nuclear threats, while in its military exercises, it has begun to practice for a nuclear strike, according to the NATO military alliance.
A few days after that statement, the world got a more colorful reminder of Putin’s position on nuclear disarmament. During a meeting at the Kremlin with his top generals on Nov. 10, he accused the U.S. of trying to “neutralize” Russia’s nuclear arsenal by building a missile shield over Europe, one that could knock Russian rockets out of the sky. In response, he said, Russia would have to “strengthen the potential of its strategic nuclear forces,” including the deployment of “attack systems” capable of piercing any missile shield.

As if on cue, a state television camera then zoomed in on a piece of paper that one of the generals was holding in his hand. It showed the plans for a nuclear device code named Status-6, complete with a curt definition of its purpose: “to create an extensive zone of radioactive contamination” along the enemy’s coast, rendering it uninhabitable “for a long time.” Asked to comment the following day, Putin’s spokesman claimed the image had appeared in the nightly news by mistake. But the Kremlin’s mouthpiece newspaper then followed up with details. The warhead inside Status-6, it said, would likely be covered in cobalt, an element which would “guarantee the destruction of all living things” once it was irradiated and scattered by a nuclear explosion.

The reemergence of Status-6—even if more as a propaganda ploy than as an actual weapon—shows just how far relations have fallen since then. “The idea is to creep up on the seaboard of the United States and set off a massive nuclear explosion,” says Dvorkin. “It’s being revived in order to spook the West.”  –Time

Could Russia be preparing for a preemptive nuclear strike on the US? Part 4

August 2016 – EUROPE – For the first time in a quarter-century, the prospect of war—real war, war between the major powers—will be on the agenda of Western leaders when they meet at the NATO Summit in Warsaw, Poland, on July 8 and 9. Dominating the agenda in Warsaw (aside, of course, from the “Brexit” vote in the UK) will be discussion of plans to reinforce NATO’s “eastern flank”—the arc of former Soviet partners stretching from the Baltic states to the Black Sea that are now allied with the West but fear military assault by Moscow. Until recently, the prospect of such an attack was given little credence in strategic circles, but now many in NATO believe a major war is possible and that robust defensive measures are required.

In what is likely to be its most significant move, the Warsaw summit is expected to give formal approval to a plan to deploy four multinational battalions along the eastern flank—one each in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Although not deemed sufficient to stop a determined Russian assault, the four battalions would act as a “tripwire,” thrusting soldiers from numerous NATO countries into the line of fire and so ensuring a full-scale, alliance-wide response. This, it is claimed, will deter Russia from undertaking such a move in the first place or ensure its defeat should it be foolhardy enough to start a war.

The United States, of course, is deeply involved in these initiatives. Not only will it supply many of the troops for the four multinational battalions, but it is also taking many steps of its own to bolster NATO’s eastern flank. Spending on the Pentagon’s “European Reassurance Initiative” will quadruple, climbing from $789 million in 2016 to $3.4 billion in 2017. Much of this additional funding will go to the deployment, on a rotating basis, of an additional armored-brigade combat team in northern Europe.

As a further indication of US and NATO determination to prepare for a possible war with Russia, the alliance recently conducted the largest war games in Eastern Europe since the end of the Cold War. Known as Anakonda 2016, the exercise involved some 31,000 troops (about half of them Americans) and thousands of combat vehicles from 24 nations in simulated battle maneuvers across the breadth of Poland. A parallel naval exercise, BALTOPS 16, simulated “high-end maritime war-fighting” in the Baltic Sea, including in waters near Kaliningrad, a heavily defended Russian enclave wedged between Poland and Lithuania. All of this—the aggressive exercises, the NATO buildup, the added US troop deployments—reflects a new and dangerous strategic outlook in Washington. Whereas previously the strategic focus had been on terrorism and counterinsurgency, it has now shifted to conventional warfare among the major powers.  –The Nation

U.S. officials continue to play down the nuclear threat imposed from Russia due to the strategic advantage the U.S. sacrificed under the Obama administration. 
The chess board is widening and the potential contentious areas where Russia and the U.S. can now, accidentally or intentionally, be drawn into a hostile conflict involving a nuclear exchange are increasing: Syria, Europe, the Baltic States, Iran, and even the continental U.S. The U.S. was outmaneuvered by the Russians in Syria, on Iran, and now U.S. policy under President Obama is reactionary, as both sides posture and escalates the dangerous art of saber-rattling. Hillary Clinton’s policy of Russian containment in Europe differs very little from Obama’s. The slightest miscalculation between these two super-powers could lead to war and could unleash a furious storm of nuclear fireballs thundering across the planet. The situation has become that volatile and dangerous.

New Weapons: Russia is bringing a host of new weapon systems online in 2017, making it the perfect time to strike at the heart of the U.S. or NATO – while America is somewhat strategically off-balance with it nuclear forces. One such weapon is the RT-2PM2 TOPOL M missile.

TOPOL M: Russia’s ‎ RT-2PM2 is the fastest nuclear ICBM in the world. Putin said the TOPOL was one such “strike system capable of penetrating any missile defenses” in the world. The missile can travel at speeds of up to 7,320 meters per second (26,400 km/h). The TOPOL-M missile was designed to penetrate an American anti-ballistic missile shield by leveraging high-speed, a relatively small infrared signature during its boost phase, advanced decoys (as many as ten carried on a single missile), maneuvering mid-course capability, and maneuvering independently targeted reentry vehicles, of which it can carry up to six, although they are said to carry just one operationally… All these features come together to make a missile that is probably outside of America’s missile defense capabilities today, and the sheer number of them that exists makes the idea of defending against anything but a limited barrage totally invalid. –Foxtrotalpha

The S-500 is another such weapon. The S-500 is a new generation surface-to-air missile system. It is designed for intercepting and destroying intercontinental ballistic missiles as well as hypersonic cruise missiles and aircraft and for air defense against Airborne Early Warning and Control and jamming aircraft. With a planned range of 600 km (370 mi) for Anti Ballistic Missile (ABM) and 400 km (250 mi) for the air defense, the S-500 would be able to detect and simultaneously engage up to 10 ballistic supersonic targets flying at a speed of 5 kilometers per second.

S500The S500, an impenetrable air-defense system? “Russia’s S-500 anti-missile missiles and anti-aircraft missiles can intercept any existing ICBM, cruise missile, or aircraft. S-500s travel at 15,480 miles an hour; reach an altitude of 115 miles; travel horizontally 2,174 miles; and can intercept up to ten incoming missiles. They simply cannot be stopped by any American anti-missile system. Some on the U.S. side say the S-500 system is being rolled out in a crash program, as an American Intel source told Asia Times. There’s been no Russian confirmation. Officially, Moscow says the system is slated to be rolled out in 2017. End result, now or later: it will seal Russian airspace. It’s easy to draw the necessary conclusions.That makes the Obama administration’s “policy” of promoting war hysteria, coupled with unleashing a sanction, ruble and oil war against Russia, the work of a bunch of sub-zoology specimens. Some adults in the EU have already seen the writing on the (nuclear) wall. NATO’s conventional defenses are a joke. Any military buildup – as is happening now – is also a joke, as it could be demolished by the 5,000 tactical nuclear weapons Moscow would be able to use.” –Russian Insider

Russia rushes the development of the next generation doomsday plane after just one year. On July 27 Voronezh Aircraft Factory finally presented Russia’s Ministry of Defense the new specialized airborne  command system also known as the ‘doomsday plane.’ The new third-generation airborne command post is based on a modified Ilyushin Il-96-400 wide-body aircraft. It should be noted that late in 2015 the Russian military has already received a second-generation ‘doomsday plane’ based on an Ilyushin Il-80 aircraft. “This (aircraft) is a full-fledged command post that allows coordinating the actions of ground forces and navy during both conventional and nuclear war,” Korotchenko concluded.  –Sputnik

Another warning: NATO risks a nuclear war with Russia within a year if it does not increase its defense capabilities in the Baltic States, one of the alliance’s most senior retired generals has said. General Sir Richard Shirreff, who served as NATO’s Deputy Supreme Allied Commander in Europe between 2011 and 2014, said that an attack on Estonia, Lithuania or Latvia – all NATO members – was a serious possibility and that the West should act now to avert “potential catastrophe.”
General Shirreff said: “The chilling fact is that because Russia hard-wires nuclear thinking and capability to every aspect of their defense capability, this would be a nuclear war.”  –Independent

Let’s hope cooler heads will prevail and the dangerous “hot war” currently raging between Russia and the U.S. will deescalate. With each approaching year, the world will only grow much dangerous due to nuclear proliferation as these weapons spread to the Third World and possibility into the hands of Islamic terrorists bent on annhilating the West. The fact that nuclear weapons are out there only increases the impetus to use them. Two hundred years after Jane Austen, a restless world intoxicated with the technical prowess of how to destroy itself is still staggering as it walks the fine line between sense and sensibility, between reason and madness, between hope and fear. In 1945, 226,000 people died from the atomic bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What lessons have we learned from this? There will be no tomorrow unless we decide there will never be another today, like yesterday.  –Alvin Conway