Possible US Nuclear War with Russia and China?
While US nuclear war with any nation is possible by accident or design, it’s highly unlikely.
Attacking nuclear powers Russia and/or China with nukes would be suicidal.
Nuclear wars between nations armed with these weapons and delivery systems able to strike anywhere against a foreign adversary are unwinnable.
Since the atom was split over 75 years ago, the above reality is why nuclear war was never waged.
According to saber-rattling Big Lies and mass deception by US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) head Admiral Charles Richard:
Moscow and Beijing have “begun to aggressively challenge international norms (in) ways not seen since the height of the Cold War (sic),” adding:
“There is a real possibility that a regional crisis with Russia or China could escalate quickly to a conflict involving nuclear weapons, if they perceived a conventional loss would threaten the regime or state (sic).”
In stark contrast to endless US wars by hot and other means against invented enemies, Russia and China prioritize peace, stability and cooperative relations with other nations, confrontation with none.
Claiming both countries threaten US security by Richard is utter nonsense — the phony view shared by likeminded Pentagon and political militarists in Washington.
It diverts attention from US war on humanity by inventing threats that don’t exist.
If nuclear war ever occurs ahead, it’ll be made-in-the-USA or Israel.
Russian and Chinese super-weapons are solely for defense, not offense. The same goes for Iran and other nations free from US control.
Cold War mutually assured destruction (MAD) kept these weapons from being used. The same reality holds today.
Soviet Russia never intended to use them preemptively, nor their US counterparts.
Nor does any evidence today suggest that Russia and/or China threaten the US militarily by nuclear or other belligerence.
During the height of the October 1962 Cuban missile crisis, Jack Kennedy later said that he never had any intention of using these weapons of mass destruction.
No US or other Western politicians today remotely approach his stature.
While waging war on humanity at home and abroad, the most extremist US officials in Washington know that striking Russia or China with nukes would assure retaliatory mass destruction and horrific numbers of casualties in American cities.
Yet Richard defied reality by claiming the following:
“(T)he US military must shift its principal assumption from ‘nuclear employment is not possible’ to ‘nuclear employment is a very real possibility (sic),’ and act to meet and deter that reality (sic),” adding:
“We cannot approach nuclear deterrence the same way.”
“It must be tailored and evolved for the dynamic environment we face (sic).”
“At the US Strategic Command, we assess the probability of nuclear use is low, but not ‘impossible,’ particularly in a crisis and as our nuclear-armed adversaries continue to build capability and exert themselves globally (sic).”
No such Sino/Russian menace exists, no threat of a preemptive attack by either nation against the US.
In stark contrast, hegemon USA’s rage to dominate other countries — including Russia and China — threatens everyone everywhere.
Yet Richard called for “wrestl(ing) with the relationships among competition, deterrence, and assurance.”
“Despite views to the contrary, successful competition does not result in an ‘end state.’ ”
“We must rethink how we assess strategic risks and how those assessments inform our planning and execution.”
“Following our conclusion that crisis or conflict with a nuclear-armed adversary could lead to nuclear employment, US Strategic Command embarked on a revised ‘Risk of Strategic Deterrence Failure’ assessment process to better inform our own thinking.”
The US war department “must reframe how it prioritizes the procurement of future capabilities.”
“Our record in this regard is not stellar. We must ensure that all of our capabilities map to an overarching strategy.”
The US “must acknowledge the foundational nature of our nation’s strategic nuclear forces, as they create the ‘maneuver space’ for us to project conventional military power strategically.”
Richard falsely accused Russia and China of “cyberattacks and threats in space (sic),” along with having weapons that threaten US security, adding:
“(T)hey are even taking advantage of the global pandemic to advance their national agendas (sic).”
“These behaviors are destabilizing, and if left unchecked, increase the risk of great power crisis or conflict (sic).”
“We must actively compete to hold their aggression (sic) in check.”
“Ceding to their initiatives risks reinforcing their perceptions that the United States is unwilling or unable to respond, which could further embolden them (sic).”
“Additionally, our allies may interpret inaction as an unwillingness or inability to lead (sic).”
“Remaining passive may deny us opportunities to position in ways that underpin one of our greatest strengths: strategic power projection.”
Psychologist Abraham Maslow once explained that when all someone has “is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”
That’s how US Pentagon, intelligence, and political militarists think and operate.
They plot ways to use their hammer against one nation after another.
While nuclear war by the US against Russia, China, or another nation is remote, it’s clearly possible ahead by accident or design.
Richard and others like him assess the threat backwards.
It’s not by other nations against the US. It’s the other way around.
My two Wall Street books are timely reading:
“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”
“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”