angelburst29
The Living Force
Right after the announcement of the US National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) of the final development phase for upgraded B61-12 thermonuclear bomb came another one about a new intercontinental ballistic missile. One Russian military observer has explained why such ambiguous and vague statements have been made here and now.
Nuclear-Active: The Real Reason Behind Recent Pentagon’s Announcements
http://sputniknews.com/us/20160806/1044006438/us-announcements-nuclear-weapons.html
On Monday, the NNSA announced the final development phase of the upgraded airborne nuclear bomb B61-12 prior to production, the first version of which is to be completed by 2020.
On Tuesday, Pentagon announced that it “is preparing to approve development and production of a new intercontinental ballistic missile, opening competition between three top defense contractors and rekindling debate over whether the US can afford to modernize its triad of nuclear weapons.”
The announcement was even more ambiguous and vague than the previous one, according to RIA Novosti reporter Mikhail Sheinkman.
“While it is just words, the point is made. If it is not a demonstration of force, then, absolutely clearly, a reminder of it,” the author writes in his article for the RIA Novosti website.
And first of all, it is a reminder for Americans itself, as it seemingly “begins to languish” without evident military technical achievements.
The announcements are of particular importance right now when the only ones who are talking about the US might and superiority are the country’s politicians running for office.
When even the local media are reporting about Russian and Chinese success more often than providing a weather forecast.
“With such announcements Washington has apparently taken a solemn oath that it will be the same as it emerged back in 1945: nuclear. Nuclear-active. Or rather radioactive,” the author states.
And to reach this goal, it doesn’t matter whether Hillary Clinton takes the top job or not, the author states.
'Right Person at the Right Time': Why President Putin 'Dream Candidate' for US (Photos)
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160806/1044004233/us-military-putin.html
“Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the conclusion of the Cold War (“the end of history,” as Francis Fukuyama called it), there was no global enemy for America to face down,” Van Buren who served in the US State Department for 24 years and the author of several book writes in his article for The Irish Examiner.
“No big nasty to spur weapons procurement, to justify a huge standing military with hundreds of bases around the world, or to pick fights with to allow a president down in the polls to morph into a superhero,” he further explains.
A lot of people had a lot of power and money in play that demanded some bad guys, however all their previous attempts to find “the right candidate” have somehow failed.
An attempt was made in the 1980s to make drug lords the new major threat, but they were too few in number to sustain the media campaign, the author explains.
Similar failures happened with “the terrorists” who were "found" around the world right after the 9/11.
Saddam Hussein, “appointed” by the George W Bush administration as a weapons-of-mass-destruction threat, “turned out to be a bust.”
Tagging Iran and North Korea as members of an “axis of evil” also failed, because neither one “seemed able to do real harm to America” despite “making a lot of noise.”
“Osama bin Laden never launched a second attack on the US, and the Taliban was dragged down by a war that seemed to lose its focus after 15 years,” the author says.
“The US made a good-faith effort trying to label all sorts of others — Gaddafi, Assad, Islamic State — as global enemies worthy of perpetual war, but the Middle East in general has turned into a quagmire,” he further notes, adding that meanwhile “America likes a winner, or at least the appearance of winning.”
So why then President Putin and why now?
“Ahead of the next administration, Washington really needs an arch enemy, a poster-child kind of guy who looks like a James Bond villain. And preferably one with nuclear weapons he’ll brandish but never use,” Peter Van Buren explains.
Secondly, he says, Americans are “already well-prepared by the old Cold War to see Russia again as an evil empire, and Vladimir Putin looks the part.”
Besides, the “Russians are involved in Syria’s civil war, so there is some sense of continuity.”
A new Cold War with Russia, in turn, would require America to buy more expensive military hardware, and find new areas of Europe, such as the Baltic states, to garrison.
“It might even breathe new life into a North Atlantic Treaty Organization that is confused about its role vis-a-vis terrorism.”
The Muslim threat however “has proved to have downsides”: it has inflamed many Muslims, perhaps pushing them toward radicalization.
“In addition, it turns out there are Muslim voters in the US, and people who respect Muslims,” the author noted.
Vladimir Putin however doesn’t vote and not many in the present-day America “think he’s a good guy,” hence “he can be slapped around in soundbites without risk that he will actually launch a war against the US.”
Besides, he can even “be accused, without penalty, of meddling in the US democratic processes.”
All the above make the Russian “a political-military-industrial-complex dream candidate.”
“Expect him to feature heavily in the next administration’s foreign policy,” the author forecasts.
Left Dissatisfied, Disappointed by Washington, Syrian Rebels Turn to Russia
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160806/1043994952/stria-rebels-us-russia.html
The US-backed Syrian rebels, trained and armed by Washington, are now blaming their patrons for betrayal.
The leader of one of one of Pentagon-backed brigades stationed in the Syrian Governorate of Aleppo has revealed to the US-based news website The Daily Beast the payment agreements for their fight on the Syrian soil and complained of the US neglect to keep up to its promises.
In an exclusive interview with the website, Mustafa Sejry of the Liwa al-Mu’tasim Brigade stationed in the town of Marea, 25 km north of Aleppo, has revealed why he is considering “transferring of loyalties from Washington to Moscow.”
“When we signed our contract with the Americans, we had initially asked for $500 per fighter in addition to getting support for injured and killed soldiers,” he told the website.
“They agreed to $250 for the first half year, and said that we’d get an additional $250 per man after six months. We only ever got $250 and never any money for our injured or killed. And that’s when they did pay us, which was rare,” the rebel revealed.
“During the entirety of their year-and-a-half enlistment with the United States military, Sejry claims, his fighters have been paid infrequently and sporadically,” the outlet describes.
“We’ve received only one month worth of salaries in the last three months,” it quotes the rebel as saying.
As the town where his brigade has been based was besieged by Daesh in June, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) airdropped ammunition and supplies to the Mu’tasim fighters, “enabling the brigade to break the siege and mount a moderately successful counteroffensive against ISIS (Daesh) in other outlying villages.”
Sejry, the website says, had hoped that 11th-hour bailout, attended also by US airstrikes on ISIS positions around Marea, would set a precedent for more constant and steady support. Instead it appears to have been a one-off.
He also complained that since breaking the ISIS siege two months ago, the Mu’tasim Brigade hasn’t received replacement hardware for what it lost battling the jihadists.
“We lost a lot of vehicles and mounted machine guns. We can’t fix or replace broken ones,” he said.
Meanwhile the rebel, the website says, was among 1,000 other affiliated rebels — then only applicants to the Pentagon’s train and equip program.
And was described by Nicholas A. Heras in a policy brief for the Washington, D.C.-based Jamestown Foundation as a “rising leader within the Syrian armed opposition who has adroitly brokered his contacts both among the anti-Assad insurgents and the anti-ISIS coalition to make the Mu’tasim Brigade one of the most reputable in the country.”
Sejry now claims that he was approached by some “Moscow representative” at the Syrian-Turkish border 10 days ago and was offered “unlimited amounts of weaponry and close air support” to fight both ISIS and Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, (the rebranded al-Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria), in “exchange for the Mu’tasim Brigade’s transfer of loyalties from Washington to Moscow.”
Sejry also claimed that he is scheduled to “have follow-up discussions with the Russians” in Istanbul, “quietly facilitated by the Turkish government”.
The rebel says that he is considering “the offer”, but mostly “to leverage more and better support from the Americans”.
And blames this change of his mindset on the Americans.
Meanwhile, he says, there was no response from the two points of contact in the US military, both Army captains, whom he earlier contacted.
Nuclear-Active: The Real Reason Behind Recent Pentagon’s Announcements
http://sputniknews.com/us/20160806/1044006438/us-announcements-nuclear-weapons.html
On Monday, the NNSA announced the final development phase of the upgraded airborne nuclear bomb B61-12 prior to production, the first version of which is to be completed by 2020.
On Tuesday, Pentagon announced that it “is preparing to approve development and production of a new intercontinental ballistic missile, opening competition between three top defense contractors and rekindling debate over whether the US can afford to modernize its triad of nuclear weapons.”
The announcement was even more ambiguous and vague than the previous one, according to RIA Novosti reporter Mikhail Sheinkman.
“While it is just words, the point is made. If it is not a demonstration of force, then, absolutely clearly, a reminder of it,” the author writes in his article for the RIA Novosti website.
And first of all, it is a reminder for Americans itself, as it seemingly “begins to languish” without evident military technical achievements.
The announcements are of particular importance right now when the only ones who are talking about the US might and superiority are the country’s politicians running for office.
When even the local media are reporting about Russian and Chinese success more often than providing a weather forecast.
“With such announcements Washington has apparently taken a solemn oath that it will be the same as it emerged back in 1945: nuclear. Nuclear-active. Or rather radioactive,” the author states.
And to reach this goal, it doesn’t matter whether Hillary Clinton takes the top job or not, the author states.
'Right Person at the Right Time': Why President Putin 'Dream Candidate' for US (Photos)
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160806/1044004233/us-military-putin.html
“Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the conclusion of the Cold War (“the end of history,” as Francis Fukuyama called it), there was no global enemy for America to face down,” Van Buren who served in the US State Department for 24 years and the author of several book writes in his article for The Irish Examiner.
“No big nasty to spur weapons procurement, to justify a huge standing military with hundreds of bases around the world, or to pick fights with to allow a president down in the polls to morph into a superhero,” he further explains.
A lot of people had a lot of power and money in play that demanded some bad guys, however all their previous attempts to find “the right candidate” have somehow failed.
An attempt was made in the 1980s to make drug lords the new major threat, but they were too few in number to sustain the media campaign, the author explains.
Similar failures happened with “the terrorists” who were "found" around the world right after the 9/11.
Saddam Hussein, “appointed” by the George W Bush administration as a weapons-of-mass-destruction threat, “turned out to be a bust.”
Tagging Iran and North Korea as members of an “axis of evil” also failed, because neither one “seemed able to do real harm to America” despite “making a lot of noise.”
“Osama bin Laden never launched a second attack on the US, and the Taliban was dragged down by a war that seemed to lose its focus after 15 years,” the author says.
“The US made a good-faith effort trying to label all sorts of others — Gaddafi, Assad, Islamic State — as global enemies worthy of perpetual war, but the Middle East in general has turned into a quagmire,” he further notes, adding that meanwhile “America likes a winner, or at least the appearance of winning.”
So why then President Putin and why now?
“Ahead of the next administration, Washington really needs an arch enemy, a poster-child kind of guy who looks like a James Bond villain. And preferably one with nuclear weapons he’ll brandish but never use,” Peter Van Buren explains.
Secondly, he says, Americans are “already well-prepared by the old Cold War to see Russia again as an evil empire, and Vladimir Putin looks the part.”
Besides, the “Russians are involved in Syria’s civil war, so there is some sense of continuity.”
A new Cold War with Russia, in turn, would require America to buy more expensive military hardware, and find new areas of Europe, such as the Baltic states, to garrison.
“It might even breathe new life into a North Atlantic Treaty Organization that is confused about its role vis-a-vis terrorism.”
The Muslim threat however “has proved to have downsides”: it has inflamed many Muslims, perhaps pushing them toward radicalization.
“In addition, it turns out there are Muslim voters in the US, and people who respect Muslims,” the author noted.
Vladimir Putin however doesn’t vote and not many in the present-day America “think he’s a good guy,” hence “he can be slapped around in soundbites without risk that he will actually launch a war against the US.”
Besides, he can even “be accused, without penalty, of meddling in the US democratic processes.”
All the above make the Russian “a political-military-industrial-complex dream candidate.”
“Expect him to feature heavily in the next administration’s foreign policy,” the author forecasts.
Left Dissatisfied, Disappointed by Washington, Syrian Rebels Turn to Russia
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160806/1043994952/stria-rebels-us-russia.html
The US-backed Syrian rebels, trained and armed by Washington, are now blaming their patrons for betrayal.
The leader of one of one of Pentagon-backed brigades stationed in the Syrian Governorate of Aleppo has revealed to the US-based news website The Daily Beast the payment agreements for their fight on the Syrian soil and complained of the US neglect to keep up to its promises.
In an exclusive interview with the website, Mustafa Sejry of the Liwa al-Mu’tasim Brigade stationed in the town of Marea, 25 km north of Aleppo, has revealed why he is considering “transferring of loyalties from Washington to Moscow.”
“When we signed our contract with the Americans, we had initially asked for $500 per fighter in addition to getting support for injured and killed soldiers,” he told the website.
“They agreed to $250 for the first half year, and said that we’d get an additional $250 per man after six months. We only ever got $250 and never any money for our injured or killed. And that’s when they did pay us, which was rare,” the rebel revealed.
“During the entirety of their year-and-a-half enlistment with the United States military, Sejry claims, his fighters have been paid infrequently and sporadically,” the outlet describes.
“We’ve received only one month worth of salaries in the last three months,” it quotes the rebel as saying.
As the town where his brigade has been based was besieged by Daesh in June, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) airdropped ammunition and supplies to the Mu’tasim fighters, “enabling the brigade to break the siege and mount a moderately successful counteroffensive against ISIS (Daesh) in other outlying villages.”
Sejry, the website says, had hoped that 11th-hour bailout, attended also by US airstrikes on ISIS positions around Marea, would set a precedent for more constant and steady support. Instead it appears to have been a one-off.
He also complained that since breaking the ISIS siege two months ago, the Mu’tasim Brigade hasn’t received replacement hardware for what it lost battling the jihadists.
“We lost a lot of vehicles and mounted machine guns. We can’t fix or replace broken ones,” he said.
Meanwhile the rebel, the website says, was among 1,000 other affiliated rebels — then only applicants to the Pentagon’s train and equip program.
And was described by Nicholas A. Heras in a policy brief for the Washington, D.C.-based Jamestown Foundation as a “rising leader within the Syrian armed opposition who has adroitly brokered his contacts both among the anti-Assad insurgents and the anti-ISIS coalition to make the Mu’tasim Brigade one of the most reputable in the country.”
Sejry now claims that he was approached by some “Moscow representative” at the Syrian-Turkish border 10 days ago and was offered “unlimited amounts of weaponry and close air support” to fight both ISIS and Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, (the rebranded al-Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria), in “exchange for the Mu’tasim Brigade’s transfer of loyalties from Washington to Moscow.”
Sejry also claimed that he is scheduled to “have follow-up discussions with the Russians” in Istanbul, “quietly facilitated by the Turkish government”.
The rebel says that he is considering “the offer”, but mostly “to leverage more and better support from the Americans”.
And blames this change of his mindset on the Americans.
Meanwhile, he says, there was no response from the two points of contact in the US military, both Army captains, whom he earlier contacted.
