Last month controversial reports appeared in Ria Novosti. On one side - reports of submarines that barely keep afloat (one remembers immediately Kursk, and the recent incident with Nerpa, forgetting these were not incidents as a result of technical malfunctioning. In the case of the newest Nerpa it was a human error. In the case of Kursk it is a mystery, and a second mystery why it didn't start the WW3). On the other hand there are reports of very sophisticated new and practically undetectable subs. A single one of them is more than enough for a first strike. Including the older but reliable Delta. Recently an older Delta spent more than a month under the polar ice - when they announced it at the end of the mission, the American side reacted angrily. Before that, another Delta tested another "older" missile from Barentz sea as far south as the equator.
There is a controversy between the statements and reports coming out from the Russian side, even within one same media. That all creates the delusional impression the forces are both sophisticated and not in combat readiness. Only the reports of the ICBMs are always praising - the message is clear - "we are ready with the ICBMs in a doomsday scenario, but we are not ready for a smaller war".
On the political front, it seems the controversy persists too. Generals and Putin himself make hawkish statements comparable to the darkest years of the Cold War. Recently, a top general said they are ready to fire missiles in one minute. The former chief of staff said they are ready to go on a preemptive strike, to defend not only themselves but also their allies. Sounds like the Cold War? Yes, and it is worse than the Cold War doctrine. At the same time, the young Western educated president Medvedev radiates sunshine policy. Russia supports USA in their efforts for North Korea disarmament. The recent North Korea test forced the Russian Far East to prepare for ...nuclear fallout! that means - they not only won't take the side of NK, but also try to protect their civilian population from the worst outcome of a nuclear war between NK and USA. Even the positions with Iran allow the door for compromise open - Russia is always maintaining Iran must not enrich Uranium, rather the Uranium must be enriched in Russia and given-spent-returned from the Iranian reactors. Or from any other country that wants to develop peaceful nuclear power plants. A better diplomacy of USA with other hot issues such as anti-missile shield could make the Russian push even harder. There could be no Iranian problem by now. One may say, USA does not want that to happen for unknown reasons (not unknown though).
This time I am not going to discuss US policy. This time I am going to discuss the delusion created by both political and military reports coming out of Russia. That is intentional: the Russian media present their country as peacemakers, sympathizing and defending the weaker ones (NK and Iran) but opposing their own push for WMD. The same is valid for the Russian relation with Venezuela and Cuba - Medvedev promised to both of them peaceful nuclear reactors, BUT NOT the missiles that once Khrushchev gave to Castro.
At the same time, the tensions between Iran and USA/Israel, between North Korea and USA/Japan/S.Korea grow rapidly. The chance of breaking out a war as a result of single strikes (Israel, or NK ships) is too big. Both scenarios could grow into local nuclear wars. Israel is the stronger and USA is the stronger in the case of NK, buth Both cannot win conventionally. Both could be tempted at one moment to use nuclear tactical weapons against military targets, to decide the successful outcome.
That will untie the hands of Russia. That is the perfect excuse to "defend the weak Third World". Russia cannot strike USA 'just a little". Russia cannot invade only Northern Israel (what benefit from Israel), cannot help North Korea to invade Seoul or Northern Japan. No profit of that, and the biggest problem is that Russia will become automatically an open enemy to USA, exposing itself to a first strike. What USA should fear most - a preemptive massive first nuclear strike, will become the same tool of retaliation against Russia. They cannot wage only a small war against USA even in a proxy location.
Georgia showed that perfectly. The Russian tanks could just roll through Tbilisi, thus creating a political outcome of the crisis - move out Saakashvili, put in the old very well known Shevarnadze. They did not do that. Despite of all talks on the western media, the Russians withdrew from the Georgian ethnic territory in only 2 months. Could we imagine such a withdrawal from Hungary in 1956 as a result of the Western media talks, or two visits of a French president to Moscow?
The delusion is just perfect. Even the sail of the 500+ nuclear missiles in two ships in November to the shores of Texas was done in such a way to bring very little military trouble to USA. The political impact was great though. The trip was postponed for a month, with stopovers in French riviera. US intelligence, planes etc had the perfect opportunity to track everything and even to train on screens potential combats with the best naval group Russia posses. What danger, if Russia doesn't want to start a Doomsday scenario? The delusion was so strong that Condy Rice said self-confidently: two ships do not change the situation who is in control here (in Caribbean). And the speaker of the Pentagon said: so they found two ships to make it that far...
Indeed Russia won't attack with two ships or two planes detected on the screen. It will attack massively. Whether that will be preceded by terrorist attack in one or more cities, is still an open question. Perhaps it will, to afflict chaos among the civilian population days before the attack. But the main cause of the fall of Babylon won't be a single terrorist attack. It will be a massive strike against the US nuclear forces. And the excuse is there - USA will be tempted to use first nuclear weapons in either Iran or North Korea. No matter how small and secure for the civilians they are (nuclear bunker busters explode underground), that will be the third explosion after Hiroshima. The perfect excuse for Putin to attack the Beast.
I use both the words Beast and Babylon, and for Russia - Monster. I do not know who is who. I do not know how the events will evolve after the first strike. Whether USA will disintegrate, whether the generals will revolt and governors will declare "neutrality" to save their states, or Obama will raise as a result? Many prophecies say New York is doomed as being Babylon the Great harlot of the Revelation. From that point on, after the destruction of Babylon, I have only clues. It is possible Obama to afflict first strike damage to the Russian forces. But it is unlikely to happen this year. America plans it for 2012 using hi-tech non-nuclear weapons. Only the Russian strategists know that and write that in their media. That is a terrible game. Whatever the outcome, it won't be easier for the population in the hit areas.
Advice: if you live near areas of military bases that you suppose to have stationed nuclear missiles or bombers, move away now! It will be too late when the events start overnight. They will be hit first. Don't say: "But it is good to die and be with the Lord". If you are not close enough, you won't die, you will be radiated and your children too. Food, water, air - everything will bear "hot particles" radiating outside and inside your bodies! Chemical and biological weapons are not ruled out.
The smallest conflict in NK or Iran could trigger it, because it is the long awaited perfect excuse for Russia. And they know they cannot afford to strike a little, or they will die first.
To prove all those fears and to build upon them, Bush did the most stupid and dangerous thing in his whole 8 year controversial reign. He sent nuclear armed destroyer into the Black Sea - a closed pool of water next to Russia, at the time when both president and prime minister resided in the coastal residence of Sochi. I do not know what bunkers are there in Sochi, but it is obvious that unexpected attack with tomahawks would leave a very little chance for Putin and Medvedev to escape an assured death by Bush. And Bush was in that residence as a guest the previous year. That was the same if Bush put a gun to the head of Putin. The psychological effect of that ship with 96 missiles capable of reaching both Moscow and Petersburg, was bigger than the capacity of the missiles themselves. That was a brutal ultimatum expressed not in words but in actions. We usually say it is Putin who speaks like that. In August 2008 it was Bush who did that in practice.
Putin cannot send a ship to Hudson river. He tested enough missiles capable of destroying much of USA, with practically no political effect on the US behavior. What more warning could he give to the Americans to STOP AND TURN, BEFORE HE SHOOTS? How more clearly and loudly could he say it? He already warned of a preemptive strike. Obama was elected, giving some delusional hopes, but it seems Obama differs very little from Bush doctrine until now. Not in his words that are accepted well, but in his deeds. Putin can attack only once. And he will attack at a maximum power.
Who of the nowadays prophets said that 1 billion people will die BEFORE the Great Warning? I think it was Littlest of Servants. But Little Mary has similar messages from Our Lady. So has Our Lady in Bayside, N.Y.
The previous posts of coming Russian and Chinese drills this Summer are also a delusion. Let America thinks so and prepares for those drills! Yes there will be drills. But the real attack may come before them. Or during them from a surprising side. Or after them. The real problem is not the existing perfect capability of Russia to attack at anytime. The real problem is that America doesn't care. "I sit as a queen..." we read in revelation. Until the beast on which America sits, eats her up. Notice - one of the heads could be America or only part of it, and Obama could theoretically play a role. We do not know how the things will evolve on the Day After.
