Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览菲利普·吉拉迪(Philip Giraldi)档案
相互保证的破坏
导弹防御可能是谎言
通过电子邮件将此页面发送给其他人

 记住我的信息



=>

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

有时,阅读或查看完全改变了人们看待事物方式的东西是可能的。 上周我在阅读时有过这样的经历 Lobelog 上的一篇文章 题为“导弹防御常识的恳求,”乔·西林乔内 (Joe Cirincione) 写道,他是众议院军事委员会的前任工作人员,现在是犁头基金会的负责人,该基金会是一家总部位于华盛顿特区的全球基金会,旨在阻止核、化学和生物武器的扩散。

这篇文章揭穿了白宫和五角大楼关于导弹防御的大部分叙述。 可以肯定的是,鉴于联邦政府可追溯到 1812 年战争的记录,不信任任何为战争辩护的事情是完全合理的。美国对伊朗和朝鲜的好战姿态很可能会受到谴责就其本身的优点而言,在没有真正利益受到威胁或因各种原因而回避外交解决方案的情况下威胁战争。

但白宫侥幸逃脱的真正原因是历史性的,自 1916 年潘乔·维拉入侵以来,美国大陆没有经历过战争的后果。这是一个又一个政府利用做他们想做的事的现实与外国打交道时:“那边”发生的任何事情都将留在“那边”。

因此,美国人不知道战争,除非是发生在其他地方和发生在外国人身上的事情,只需要美国偶尔介入并救助事情,或者根据个人的观点把事情搞砸。 这就是为什么像约翰麦凯恩这样的鹰派,在接受乔拜登的“自由”奖时,可以板着脸,侥幸逃脱 谴责那些美国人 他们已经厌倦了扮演世界警察的角色。 他形容他们害怕“我们组织和领导了四分之三个世纪的世界,[放弃]我们在全球范围内提出的理想,[拒绝]国际领导的义务和我们保持‘最后一个为了一些半生不熟的虚假民族主义,地球的最大希望。”

麦凯恩对近期世界历史的完全愚蠢的描述适合一位擅长撞毁飞机并几乎击沉自己的航空母舰的海军飞行员。 被捕后,他还为北越广播电台宣传。 不幸的是,麦凯恩全球主义者-美国例外论的叙述也得到了媒体的回应。 不断吸收谎言和半真半假的事实是公众无休止地要求增加国防开支的原因,他们承认外面的世界是一个危险的地方,必须保持一致 不可抗力. 是的,我们是好人。

但是,公民愿意接受军事机构应该用外国基地环绕全球以保持世界“安全”的基本假设是,48 个国家是无懈可击的,被广阔的海洋和南北友好国家孤立。 并且通过技术保护免受远距离威胁,拦截系统的开发和维护费用巨大,以拦截和击落海外敌人发射的来袭弹道导弹。

在一个 最近的演讲,关于朝鲜的威胁,唐纳德·特朗普总统吹嘘美国的反导弹防御系统有 97% 的效率,这意味着他们可以拦截和摧毁 97 次中的 100 次来袭射弹。特朗普试图向公众保证,无论发生在韩国,它不会在美国本土产生不良后果,显然也不会在夏威夷、阿拉斯加和像关岛这样的海外领地,所有这些都受到反导弹防御的保护。 毫无疑问,特朗普指的是阿拉斯加和夏威夷的陆基中段防御(GMD)设施,即使他不知道其中的许多细节,这些设施是现有 330 亿美元导弹防御系统的一部分。

得知无论我们的政府在海外做什么,都不能用核武器或常规武器对美国进行物理攻击,这当然令人欣慰,但这是真的吗? 如果对策的有效性稍微接近 0% 会怎样? 这会改变对朝鲜开战的想法吗? 还是关于在东欧对抗俄罗斯? 对于那些认为核交换是不可想象的人来说,明智的做法是考虑 最近的评论 杰克·基恩 (Jack Keane) 是名副其实的战争研究所 (Institute for the Study of War) 的作者,他是一位领先的新保守主义前将军,据报道他有白宫的耳朵并反映了白宫对此事的看法。 基恩毫不犹豫地对平壤采取军事选择,他将美国攻击以摧毁其核设施或移除“领导目标”的可能触发因素描述为在朝鲜安装核弹头的弹道导弹顶部“瞄准美国”。 一些观察家认为,朝鲜已经接近有能力缩小其核武器规模以实现这一目标,如果基恩被相信的话,这将被视为一种“战争行为”,将引发华盛顿的立即袭击. 平壤的反击。

美国反导弹防御系统的 97% 可靠性的说法正受到 Cirincione 和其他人的挑战,他们认为美国只能“在某些时候击落一些……导弹”。 他们提出了一些非常有说服力的论点,即使对于一个对所涉及的物理学一无所知的外行来说也是如此。 我会尽量保持简单。 首先,反导弹拦截器必须正面或接近正面击中目标,它必须要么实际击中目标,要么在足够近的距离内引爆自己的弹头才能发挥作用。 这两个目标都很难实现。 洲际弹道导弹 (ICBM) 以每秒 5,000 米的速度飞行。 作为比较,从步枪发射的子弹以大约五分之一的速度行进。 想象一下,两个拿着步枪的人站在相距一英里的地方开枪,试图让子弹正面交锋。 如果一个指的是导弹,而不是子弹,则将速度乘以五。 即使使用最好的雷达和传感器以及最先进的制导技术,所涉及的变量也使得错过而不是命中的可能性更大。 Cirincione 观察到“……击中子弹的唯一方法是子弹配合。”

其次,五角大楼为确定可靠性而进行的测试本质上是欺诈性的。 与唐纳德特朗普的评论相反,97% 的准确度是基于向目标发射四枚反导弹导弹的推断,以弥补在装配测试中单个拦截器已被证明接近 56% 准确度的事实,并且在理想条件下。 该统计数据基于自 1999 年以来执行的实际测试,其中拦截器能够击落 10 个目标中的 18 个。 四个将导致 97% 的结论源于多个拦截器提高准确性的假设,但大多数工程师会争辩说,如果一枚导弹由于任何数量的技术缺陷而无法击中目标,那么所有四个都同样可能会因为相同的缺陷而失手。原因。

测试本身经过精心编写以保证成功。 它们发生在白天,最好是在黄昏,以确保最大的能见度,在良好的天气条件下,并且接近的导弹没有试图通过使用电子对抗或通过发射箔条或干扰物来混淆拦截器,这肯定会被部署。 测试中的目标有时会被加热以使它们更容易找到,有些还安装了转发器,使它们几乎不可能被遗漏。 因此,导弹拦截系统从未在现实战场条件下进行过测试。

甚至联邦政府的监督机构 已经结束 导弹拦截系统很少执行。 政府问责办公室得出的结论是,该技术存在缺陷,它被称为“故障模式”,这意味着美国拥有“可能无法按预期工作的拦截机队,这促使加利福尼亚州的一位国会议员约翰·加拉门迪观察到“我认为答案是绝对清楚。 不起作用。 尽管如此,恐惧的势头......投资...... [of]行业的势头,它继续前进。”

国防部作战测试和评估办公室有 也曾持怀疑态度,报告称阿拉斯加和夏威夷的 GMD 只有“……保卫美国国土免受朝鲜发射的少量简单中程或洲际弹道导弹威胁的能力有限……作战 [拦截器] 的可靠性和可用性很低。”

白宫对拦截朝鲜导弹袭击的能力表现出的危险过度自信,在某种程度上可能确实是虚张声势,旨在让平壤相信,如果发动一场枪战,它将被摧毁,而美国则不受影响。 但不知何故,对于一位不太擅长微妙之处的总统,我会怀疑情况是否如此。 能够制造核武器和洲际弹道导弹的朝鲜人肯定会像任何人一样了解导弹防御系统的缺陷。

但真正的危险在于,被政府愚弄的是美国人民。 战争是可以想象的,即使是核战争,如果人们无法触及它,这是一个不言而喻的真理,它使长达 XNUMX 年的“全球反恐战争”成为可能。 如果这是白宫发出的信息,它将鼓励国家安全国家进一步鲁莽的冒险主义。 认真对待朝鲜的威胁并承认像西雅图这样的西海岸城市很可能成为成功的核武器攻击的目标,这要好得多。 这将表明战争会在现实生活中产生后果,而陌生的诚实可能会导致公众要求与平壤认真谈判,而不是在联合国和国会山的演讲中发出威胁。

菲利普·吉拉尔迪(Philip M. Giraldi)博士是美国国家利益委员会(National利益)的执行董事,该委员会是501(c)3可扣税的教育基金会,旨在寻求更多基于美国利益的中东中东政策。 网站是 www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, 地址为PO Box 2157,Purcellville VA 20134,其电子邮件为 [电子邮件保护]

 
隐藏253条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. Shitposter 说:

    I’d guess that the interceptor missiles that are actually fielded are secretly equipped with nuclear warheads themselves, so this makes it a lot easier to hit the target. Still, if the only thing able to discourage the President from nuking the Norks is the threat of them nuking us back, it’s a sign that he’s fallen under neocon domination.

    • 回复: @Che Guava
    , @Santos
  2. utu 说:

    Did the hype of Star Wars in 1980’s persuade Soviet Union that they could not keep up with the US? Is it possible that the hype about the missile defense has similar objective at least in some minds in Pentagon? But Russians do not seem to be buying it this time. Putin on several occasions said that they will improve their attack capabilities and will overwhelm any defensive measures. So there is no reason to think that anything has changed about the MAD doctrine.

    I can’t imagine any scenario between Russia and the US of limited nuclear exchange. It would escalate quickly to the full blown all the way attack on both sides if a limited exchange was ever attempted. And Russia has more reason to go all the way first as it is surrounded by American bases and it is at significant disadvantage in conventional forces.

  3. peterAUS 说:

    有趣的文章。

    Two angles here, IMHO.

    Confrontation with Russia (or China for that matter) is of course BAD/MAD.
    Anyone with brain gets that.

    But, North Korea could be seen totally opposite.

    A regime hostile to US is developing ICBM capacity. Developing, not having it. YET.
    So, US should hit them BEFORE they develop it.

    Any chance of skipping “virtue signalling” in analyzing this possibility?
    Americans that is. I do get that most of the rest here either don’t care of would actually like it. Nuke on US that is. More the merrier.

    What I actually don’t get is Kim’s regime attitude.
    Feels provocative bordering suicidal.
    They are going way above the self-defense level in this game, IMHO.
    Some believe they are just Chinese pawn in game with Trump administration. I am not so sure about it. Such regimes do get delusional and detached from reality.
    US administration/deep state also aren’t quite attached to reality.
    And nukes.
    That combination just ……..feels .

  4. Ivy 说:

    IBG-YBG. That seems like a sales pitch from defense contractors and the enablers in DoD and Congress.

  5. 菲尔,有两个我非常喜欢的话题!

    这就是为什么像约翰麦凯恩这样的鹰派,在获得乔拜登的“自由”奖时,可以板着脸谴责那些厌倦了扮演世界警察的美国人。 他形容他们害怕“我们组织和领导了四分之三个世纪的世界,[放弃]我们在全球范围内提出的理想,[拒绝]国际领导的义务和我们保持‘最后一个为了一些半生不熟的虚假民族主义,地球的最大希望。”

    这就是我们现在所处的位置的原因——我们的政府被麦凯恩、林赛·格雷厄姆和其他数百名同类所感染。 当我看着这些卑鄙的生物对这么多人造成如此多的伤害并继续存在时,我的血管中没有人类善良的奶流,癌症和其他一切,就像拥有核心的达斯切尼一样,而无辜者则倒下远离他们的邪恶。

    我曾希望他死,但正如一位朋友提醒我的那样,最好让他活着,忍受极度痛苦,因为癌症一次次摧毁他一个细胞,每天每一秒都在戳他的大脑——到疯狂的边缘只差一步就会结束他的生命,再活几十年,饱受折磨和鄙视。

    我向你滚去,你这毁灭一切却不屈不挠的鲸鱼; 到最后,我与你搏斗; 我发自地狱之心,刺向你; 看在仇恨的份上,我向你吐了最后一口气。

    — 赫尔曼梅尔维尔

    甚至联邦政府监管机构也得出结论,导弹拦截系统很少发挥作用。

    目前我找不到那个引文,但我记得美国军事专家的一份报告,该报告将拦截导弹的准确度置于现实条件下的 10% 左右。 我隐约记得,在海湾战争期间,我们在以色列放置了爱国者拦截器,以保护被选中的人免受萨达姆飞毛腿导弹的攻击,显然只有少数破旧的飞毛腿被成功拦截。 我相信这些爱国者导弹缺乏准确性的问题被掩盖了。

    Meanwhile, the Russian S-300, S-400, and the soon-to-appear S-500 missile batteries have demonstrated very impressive results. Now our “allies” are all scampering over to Moscow to acquire these instead of our duds, following the utter failure of our \$0.5 Trillion F-35 embarrassment.

    现在是我们询问我们是如何到达这里以及谁负责的时候了。 我给你三个猜测,前两个不算。

    • 回复: @iffen
    , @Joe Wong
  6. This is, unfortunately, a far more convincing picture of reality than the fables presented by the lamestream corporate media presstitutes. I also know Cirincione to be a reliable source based upon his record.

  7. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    Apart from the use of hypersonic corkscrew ICBMs with multiple dummy warheads among the MIRVs, the foremost expert on ABM, Ted Postel (B.S., Physics, MIT; Ph.D., Engineering, MIT), believes you can defeat any ABM system using countermeasures based on the system’s technology.

    就美国正在建造的那种导弹防御系统而言,拦截器看到的所有物体都会像光点一样。 除非拦截器有先验知识,比如某些光点相对于其他光点具有明确定义的亮度,否则它绝对无法确定它在看什么,因此无法确定要瞄准什么。

    一个普遍的误解是,如果这种反制措施成功,弹头和诱饵必须看起来很相似。 所需要的只是所有对象看起来都不同,并且不知道会发生什么。 结果,敌人可以修改弹头的形状(例如通过在其周围充气气球)并完全改变其外观以用于距离传感器。 如果一个敌人能够制造洲际弹道导弹和核弹头,那么敌人肯定拥有制造和部署气球的技术,以及做一些简单的事情来修改弹头的外观。 实施此类对策的技术非常有限,而击败它的技术基本上不存在——工程师们可以利用任何科学来让防御方确定它所看到的东西。

    因此,我对美国正在部署的高空导弹防御系统的反对非常简单——它们没有机会对抗任何对自己在做什么甚至有一点了解的对手。

    https://undark.org/article/five-questions-ted-postol-missile-defense/

  8. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    A nuclear warhead can be set to detonate at the ground level whenever the rocket itself gets hit. Therefore, even a theoretically 100% effective system would make itself 0% effective in no time.

  9. 它没有过度自信。如果朝鲜尝试某些事情,它会受到如此严重的打击,不会有任何回应..朝鲜什么都没有。如果我是中国和俄罗斯,我会担心溢出。

    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
    , @Joe Wong
  10. The anti-missile systems have been stunning successes at the one thing that really matters: Boatloads of money have been channeled to the cronies who matter, and some of that has been recycled (laundered?) through political and charitable (think tanks, for example) donations that keep the politicos gainfully and lucratively employed while in office and afterwards.

    任务完成!

    • 同意: Talha
  11. If our missile defense systems are so hot, why haven’t the interceptors, stationed in Alaska, Japan, S. Korea and on US Navy ships in the area, shot down any of Kim’s missiles that go flying over Japan?

    We’re being sold a bill of goods, or BS for short. Those missile defense systems make for fat Pentagon contracts, but will do no more to protect Americans than the old ‘Duck and Cover’ propaganda we were taught back in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Just duck and cover under your school desk, then after the nukes pops off, get back to living.

    With all the colleges and university’s the USA has, how can Americans be so stupid?

    • 回复: @The Alarmist
  12. The bigger lie here – seriously – is that there are ‘nuclear weapons’ at all. If you look at the evidence, it’s clear that ‘nuclear weapons’ as a whole were fake from the beginning, with multiple proofs now that, e.g., Hiroshima was a chemical fire-bombing war crime, just like Tokyo, Yokohama, Osaka, Dresden, Hamburg.

    The political context for the nuclear weapons scam after Hiroshima, was the USA-Moscow deal in Stalin’s later years, that Stalin would pretend to be a ‘nuclear weapons power’ too, riches & tech would be passed on to Soviet elites (as Antony Sutton, ‘Best Enemy Money Can Buy’ proved was happening); and the world would be in fear of ‘nuclear terror’ supporting big-power domination of the earth & trillions of profits for oligarchs via ‘weapons industries’.

    瑞典核工程师安德斯·比约克曼 (Anders Björkman) 曾被要求为瑞典调查“核武器”,多年来一直在详细表明核武器是不可能的、假的,而且从未存在过(与核能相比,核能确实有效)。 从最近关于为什么广岛不是“核”或“原子弹”爆炸的概述:
    http://www.newnationalist.net/2017/08/01/was-hiroshima-firebombed-and-not-nuked/

    –广岛遭到破坏的面积仅为东京轰炸中遭受相同破坏的破坏面积的四分之一

    –随后不久,美军少校亚历山大·德·塞韦斯基(Alexander de Seversky)对日本城市进行了调查,发现用木头烧成的广岛没有任何迹象,除了化学炸弹外,就像东京,横滨和大阪……中央铁制建筑都是完好无损的易碎物品,甚至旗杆仍在“零地面”下方……没有东西被“汽化”的地方

    –证明广岛是“烟枪”是假的,是在1945年的美国军事记录中,在广岛附近的66架飞机被记录为“化学炸弹的日本今治”,与所谓的“原子弹”在同一日期和时间发生……今治已经不存在了,在之前的两次轰炸袭击中被完全摧毁……这是对广岛进行轰炸的舰队

    –广岛的目击者,德国耶稣会牧师约翰·西姆斯(John Siemes)牧师记录了当地目击者报告飞机散布燃烧物的情况

    – 在广岛时期,存在巨大的恐吓、“未经授权的言论会被判处死刑”、压制日本和美国的证人和相关人员……而允许的陈述似乎是脚本化的和虚假的

    –广岛烟雾的照片看起来完全像化学爆炸的烟雾柱子,最终被日本目击者证实,日本目击者证实了……一般来说,最终被称为“核武器签名”的“蘑菇云”也来自某些类型的化学爆炸,正如最近爆炸的中国工厂所显示的那样

    – 1990年的一项医学研究完成了对广岛和长崎幸存者的40年研究,结果表明,没有遗传损害,这与暴露于高辐射环境中的人的典型情况相同

    最近,采取了消除核武器恶作剧的举动,今年的“联合国禁止和销毁所有核武器的决议”……这将是一个巨大的青睐,即将来临的一世界全球主义政府将为我们做些事情,使核武器成为现实。武器骗局要休息。 他们可以声称像南非过去声称的那样拆卸所有核武器

    但 72 年来,所有 10 个所谓的“核弹国”都在玩弄,在一场全球性的骗局中,拥有军备工业的寡头数万亿美元,“核武器”骗局是被允许的大中强国的主要工具声称拥有它们……考虑一下历史:

    1945年-美国对广岛和长崎(如东京,德累斯顿,汉堡等)进行化学炸弹袭击,还倾倒了引起疾病的放射性垃圾。 证人下令以死亡,化学爆炸“蘑菇云”的威胁关闭嘴–美国拥有核弹

    1949年-苏联接受了俄罗斯精英与冷战和全球核恐怖活动并发大财的协议-俄联邦拥有炸弹

    1952年–英国的英国人和伦敦金融中心不想成为二等–英国有了炸弹

    1960年-法国轻骑兵不再是英国人的二等兵-法国和戴高乐炸弹

    1964年-中国升格为大联盟-COMMIE CHINA HAB BOMB

    1966年-以色列及时加入俱乐部,以在1967年和1973年的战争中对阿拉伯人进行恐吓和勒索-犹太人拥有炸弹和犹太人已准备好参选所有人,后来被Mordechai Vanunu确认为MI6伦敦时报,然后也许住在海法海滩,而不是“不是真的在厄瓜多尔大使馆里”,就像“朱利安·阿桑奇一样”

    1974年–印度被列为大国,以其炸弹计划“微笑的佛陀”作为其遗产的基础–印度拥有炸弹

    1979年–南非的白人种族隔离政府开始行动–白人种族主义南非的炸弹已经准备杀害黑人民…但在曼德拉和黑人政府发现这起骗局之前,“拆除炸弹”

    1998年–巴基斯坦成为新的西方反穆斯林主题的主要参与者–巴基斯坦伊斯兰教徒拥有炸弹和OSAMA或恐怖分子的身影

    2006 年 - 朝鲜,总是做交易,得到升级 - 疯狂的朝鲜有炸弹

    “核恐怖”——利润丰厚的业务,以及非常有效的骗局宣传

  13. LondonBob 说:

    General Keane sits on the Board of Directors of a company called General Dynamics. I believe Michael Scheuer has suggested former Pentagon officials, generals etc. should be forbidden from taking employment at the many defence contractors once they retire. The US, especially with its advantageous geography, is a real anomaly in the West with its elevated defence spending.

    • 回复: @chris
  14. Tom Welsh 说:

    A measured and timely warning. Although not a scientist or engineer myself, I find Mr Giraldi’s logic persuasive.

    I can never understand why anyone would contemplate with equanimity the prospect of a war that could – and quite probably would – kill every human being in the world, and spell the end of the human race. That must be a fascinating question to all students of the human mind.

    • 回复: @Anonymous
  15. Two points here: (1) Is there any rational expectation that Pyongyang would seriously negotiate? So that’s one point.

    (2) The other is something that got out between the lines years ago, but if it’s true it’s so highly classified that a guy could end up in Gitmo for just thinking it. Still, I recall it was said at one time some years ago. And here it is: maybe the only way to really “hit” incoming ICBMs is to forget about a bullet hitting a bullet, what you do is you get as close as you can and then you explode nukes in the neighborhood. That would rattle the cage of the incoming enough that it would drop down wherever it was flying, like into the Pacific, say, between Hawaii and the mainland. I think this came out in the context of the “defensive” anti-missile missiles set to take off from the controversial sites in Poland and the Baltics. That would be part of the reason why Russians would never buy that those missile bases (Poland and Baltics) could ever be honestly described as purely “defensive” (like against missiles coming from Iran was the story). Remember, when all this stuff was first ramping up more than half a century ago, “mothers for survival of children” or whatever, led by Linus Pauling … the war hawks’ main slogan was “Better dead than Red”? Remember that, anyone?

    So thank you, Mr. Giraldi, for helping to bring this out into the open. Americans — earthlings in general — should know … I think … maybe …

    • 回复: @Crowbar
  16. It seems like a reasonable thesis to me. As I recall, there was criticism of the Patriot missile system that it was not as effective as first claimed when it came to knocking out Scuds launched by Iraq (which fly far more slowly than ICBMs).

    I’m not so sure that the N. Koreans would scoff at the idea of missile defense though. Back in the Cold War days the Soviets were concerned enough about the Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) that its implementation was considered by some to 增高, not lessen, the risk of nuclear war, since missile defense meant one side might feel encouraged to launch a first strike if it felt it confident in its ability to fend off a return volley. It’s probably safe to say the Soviets knew more about ICBM technology than N. Korea (but that was over 30 years ago, so maybe not), so if they didn’t think the idea of missile defense was baloney, I would not be so quick to write it off.

    • 回复: @Peter Lund
  17. @peterAUS

    Peter, you seem to be suggesting that most commenters here hate the US enough to want it to suffer a nuclear attack, is that correct? I would say that the opposite is true and that most Unz commenters actually love the US but do hate the fact that a small clique has taken control and have led the US into needless conflicts that do threaten the US, both militarily, economically and socially.

    • 同意: renfro
    • 回复: @peterAUS
  18. iffen 说:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    I will give you three guesses, and the first two don’t count.

    不好了!

    乔不是这样说的。

  19. Anonymous [AKA "buddhi"] 说:

    Besides, wrt nuclear weapons, a defense needs to be 100% effective. The entire medical system of any country would be overwhelmed dealing with the consequences of a single successful population center burst. Unlike for conventional weapons, a 97% interception rate, let alone 50%, is not good enough.
    And, except perhaps the US, any industrialized nation would take a decade to recover from a single strike.

  20. @Greg Bacon

    “If our missile defense systems are so hot, why haven’t the interceptors, stationed in Alaska, Japan, S. Korea and on US Navy ships in the area, shot down any of Kim’s missiles that go flying over Japan?”

    1) 他们没有武装。
    2)他们在日本上空时在外层空间,所以从技术上讲并不侵犯日本领空。
    3)如果我们错过了,世界有证据表明皇帝没有衣服。

    • 回复: @CalDre
  21. There are no more things in heaven and earth than in Bunkerati philosophy and MAD isn’t one of them. The 99% are useless eaters anyway.

  22. 吉拉迪先生,

    After the rather odd Reagan-Gorbachev Reykjavik (Summit at Sea) and talk about abolishing nuclear weapons, the S.D.I. came to fore, and outer space became the new frontier where USA and the West were offered security against nuclear war.

    Thereafter, Soviet Union is history, & the traditional superpower SALT negotiations stopped.

    Is it the case now that SALT is completely dead and the only nuclear shootout deterrent is the old reliable M.A.D.?

    (叹)

    How much citizens really know about superpower capacities to effectively wage nuclear war and emerge victorious is nil. I am for one uncomfortable with getting showered with tempting ads for affordable “survival kits” while multi-billionaire (1% oligarchs) can luxuriate within subsurface Pleasure Domes equipped with bowling alleys.

    (Sigh) Angry with no more high level warnings about “Nuclear Freeze,” and perhaps over preponderance on the (real) Global Warning phenomenon, I am in awe how President Trump makes claim to ZUSA’s 97% effective anti-ballistic missile defense systems.

    (Sigh) Does Odigo have privileged messaging systems ready to go when it comes time to “Drop The Big One?”

    感谢。

    Selah Sgt. Schultz, “I know nothing, nothing.”

    • 回复: @silviosilver
  23. TG 说:

    Of course a hostile foreign power could simply ship a nuclear weapon to us via container ship – radiation detectors in the ports wouldn’t help because they would be triggered to explode if messed with and then we’d lose the port city… And a smallish nuke buried in the middle of a lot of shielding could be very hard to find unless you x-rayed each container separately. Inspect all incoming cargo shipments overseas before they come here? Impossible, and anyhow that would cost money and cost businesses time and convenience and so would never do. So missiles or not, we’re wide open to attack and that’s that.

    On the other hand, in the old British comedy “The Bed Sitting Room,” England ran out of bombers and missiles and tried to mail a nuclear bomb to its enemy, but the bomb was returned for insufficient postage. The fiends!

  24. Anonymous [AKA "Smoler"] 说:

    To me, the biggest threat that a North Korean attack could pose would be EMP. All they’d have to do is get a nuclear warhead into the atmosphere somewhere above or off the west coast of the US. Setting off that would destroy much of the electronics upon which our ‘Communications Age’ relies upon with an EMP wave.

    And that seems hard, or at least harder to stop. It does not require accuracy on the part of the North Korean missile(s). And it only requires that one such warhead get through the missile defenses. With a bit of subterfuge, it could possibly be disquised as yet another missile test, one that would obviously not be aimed at the US mainland, but falling short, before it explodes high in the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean, but close enough that the EMP wave has a direct path to much of the US. I suspect that many military electronics are hardened against this, as the effect has been known for quite some time. But the consumer electronics upon which our society relies would not be. Picture for instance every cell-phone/smart-phone going dead. And that’s just one effect.

    And it seems to be a big ask to ask missile defense to stop that. Especially when in controlled test after controlled test, when the ‘defenders’ know exactly what missiles will be launched, when they will be launched, and all the information about their trajectory, the missile defense still seems to be a ‘hit-or-miss’ proposition.

    Which is why we should be negotiating. Although, the main problem with that is why the North Koreans would negotiate considering the US didn’t keep its word in the 2005 agreement and is currently in the process of teaching Iran that the word of the US isn’t worth the toilet paper an agreement is written upon.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  25. I hope Rocketman has an ICBM that can reach LA.

    • 回复: @NoseytheDuke
  26. Che Guava 说:
    @Shitposter

    Another great article by Mr. Giraldi.

    Shitposter,

    That is an interesting point.

    The missiles covered by the anti-ballistic missile [missile] treaty between the USA and USSR and later Russian Fed., all, I think, had nuclear warheads. The USAF’s Sprint being one example.

    The treaty allowed two squadrons, then, IIRC, only one.

    Finally and foolishly abrogated by the US, under, predictably, neocon influence, years ago.

    Both, I would guessing, don’t push it further on those weapons, but I don’t know. The emphases in the US seem to be on

    i. technology to disrupt launches,

    ii. kinetic destruction, and

    iii. beam weapons.

    The Russian response seems mainly to make delivery systems that are impossible to foil in statistically meaningful terms.

    I wonder about the effects of EMP from the nuclear-tipped ABM[M]s.

    Didn’t mention that for some time, not wanting to giving North Korea ideas, but their officials have already made statements that they know the potential of a blast only for EMP. They are not stupid!

    As you may knowing, a USA stratospheric bomb test over the Pacific in the 1960s blew out heavy-duty circuitry from Hawaii to many Western states.

    I am adding a link to a non-related article, but it is the scariest thiing I was reading today. Srs. Read it.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185809

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  27. The flaw in Mr Giraldi’s argument is that it postulates that there is a country somewhere out there that is willing and able to launch a nuclear first strike on the US. Not North Korea. Their nuclear “programme” depends, at very least, on rocket motors bought in from or via Russia. Every time they fire off a missile, they have to import a new motor and build a new rocket! Russia? Why would it launch a nuclear attack on anyone? If it did, what would be its target and what would be the military value of that target? Trying to cow Americans into submission by a shock attack is the mistake the Japanese made at Pearl Harbor. On the other hand, Russia is far more vulnerable to attack than North Korea. Its long northern coast is just across the Arctic from North America and most of its natural resources are close to that coastline, as is its only ice-free port with access to the open sea. Without ever needing to use nuclear weapons, the US could cripple Russia’s economy very easily. Given Russia’s elongated shape, simultaneous attacks from all sides would force Russia to split up its air defences without being able to shift them around quickly in reaction to an incoming attack. Russia is a tailor-made target for a conventional air war and in the modern world, he who controls the airspace over the battlefield wins the war! Thus, I read Mr Giraldi’s article as the usual nuclear scaremongering, “the beauty of Putin’s weapons”, so to speak! Sounds like the spooks are back to defending their Russian “asset”!

    • 巨魔: L.K
    • 回复: @Che Guava
  28. wayfarer 说:

    “战争的最高艺术是在没有战斗的情况下制服敌人。” - 孙子

  29. EugeneGur 说:
    @peterAUS

    What I actually don’t get is Kim’s regime attitude.
    Feels provocative bordering suicidal.

    No, this is not. They are a hell of a lot more reasonable than the US. Kim agreed to the proposal by Russian and China to suspend his program if the US stops it military “exercises”. The US says the NK should stop the tests first before the Americans even think about talking to them. Obviously, this is not going to happen. Particularly considering that an agreement of that sort was concluded once in the past, but the US broke it almost immediately.

    You see, North Korea is not at all delusional and knows full well that the US is not to be trusted and never sticks to any agreement it signs up to. Iran is a good case in point. So, they are understandably apprehensive, given their history with the US, about giving up their nukes.

    A regime hostile to US is developing ICBM capacity. Developing, not having it. YET.
    So, US should hit them BEFORE they develop it.

    I think it’d be much more accurate to say that it is the US that is hostile to the NK regime, not the other way around. As to hitting it, are you sure the US would be permitted to hit anything so close to the China and Russia territories without retaliation? I don’t think so. I think Washington knows that, too.

  30. @Che Guava

    To all interested,

    Below is linked an article on one of the many weird things that happened during the “scary ” Cheney-W. Bush Zionist administration.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/missing-nukes-treason-of-the-highest-order/7158

    Selah Lost & Found Dept., U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale, Louisiana; Selah We are all Alfred E. Neumann (Mad) und, “Vat me worry?”

    • 回复: @Che Guava
    , @Grandpa Charlie
  31. Beckow 说:
    @peterAUS

    There is also South Korea. Try to imagine the fallout among Koreans (and Japanese, Chinese, other Asians) if their cousins are nuked. In the short run it might even work – if it would be an extremely targeted attack. But there is also longer run and for decades US would not be able to live this down. Generations of Koreans would grow up bitter that it was deemed ok to nuke people like them. War propaganda tends to wear off and only angry emotional memories remain.

    And the Europeans, they would be apoplectic, probably the end of their American infatuation.

    So the downside is potentially enormous. My guess is that fat Kim and his crew just want to be left alone. And they are scared. What’s the point is stirring up a wasp nest? Now just imagine Chinese reaction if somebody drops a nuke on their border. It wouldn’t be pretty.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @hhsiii
  32. @ChuckOrloski

    Thereafter, Soviet Union is history, & the traditional superpower SALT negotiations stopped.

    Is it the case now that SALT is completely dead and the only nuclear shootout deterrent is the old reliable M.A.D.?

    I think you’re referring to START, not SALT. SALT were arms limitation treaties (i.e. limiting growth) in the 70s. START was a treaty to reduce the stockpiles signed in the 80s. After lengthy negotiations, a new START treaty was signed in 2010.

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  33. Macroman 说:

    I haven’t read the article yet, but it’s “mutually” assured destruction. Basic English!

    • 回复: @Ash
  34. @peterAUS

    A regime hostile to US is developing ICBM capacity. Developing, not having it. YET.
    So, US should hit them BEFORE they develop it.

    The Norks are hostile to the U.S. the same way that the deer are hostile to the wolves.

  35. @silviosilver

    Hi-ho silviosilver,

    Thanks a lot for the intervention, update on SALT!

    Some here (perhaps especially geokat62) will be interested in Rep. Trent Franks’ peculiar intervention, a guy who in 2013 made his obligatory pledge to AIPAC.

    Linked below is an article on how Trent Franks and Rep. Doug Lamborn teamed up in favor of junking of the “new” START.

    (Sigh) Wonder if Trent is related to General Tommy Franks?

    https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/dont-junk-new-start/

    Selah The Lobby Doomsday Hobby.

    • 回复: @silviosilver
    , @geokat62
  36. Flavius 说:

    Another nice reality based article by Phil Girardi.
    A reasonable presumption in any discussion about nuclear preparedness is that nuclear war is an unthinkable disaster for the combatants and the rest of the world, except perhaps for the rats and the cockroaches.
    Designing a policy around a critical belief taken in isolation from every thing else that we have the capability of neutralizing (whatever in actuality that means) 97% of incoming missiles, itself a ludicrous claim, is the stuff out of which dystopian movie scripts are written. Fancy in Hollywood, madness in Washington.
    If the M/I complex is so 97% adept at M/I undertakings, how come its track record since 1945 is 3% adept and 97% failure except when Reagan, Gorbechev, and John Paul II managed to conclude Cold War I by ignoring the considered advice of their respective complex experts; alas, only to see Cold War II ignited by the damn fool experts who refused to take for an answer a reasonable peace based on mutual respect for national sovereignty.
    97% success probability my ass!

  37. Che Guava 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Chuck, was reading of that closer to the time, and it was interesting,

    Please also reading the article at the link I posted.

    I like insects, excepting mosquitos and horseflies, moths if they are wantimg to eat clothes, never killing other types, hornets and wasps only if they are trying to set up near my home, also never small spiders (arachnids, not insects, yeah I know), they are seeming to eat small cockroaches throughout summer, they are welcome, between the small population of small spiders and the cockroach traps I place, not seeing many roaches! Never using insecticide.

  38. @ChuckOrloski

    Thanks for the link. Good read. It would indeed be revealing to learn how many zogbucks were pressed into the palms of Franks and Lamborn.

    • 同意: ChuckOrloski
  39. Nukes. Sigh. How I wish these things were never invented.

    And yet, as a kid, I was anything but concerned about them. In fact, I used to “worry” (not really, but sorta) that the chance to use them would pass, and that the peaceniks would take over and that would be the end of the free world.

    Okay that was silly and scary, but it’s the sort of thing a kid can be forgiven for.

    But how the hell can you forgive some fully grown adult sons of bitches who think 核弹 a country is some legitimate way to settle a dispute with it? It doth boggle the mind.

  40. geokat62 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Some here (perhaps especially geokat62) will be interested in Rep. Trent Franks’ peculiar intervention, a guy who in 2013 made his obligatory pledge to AIPAC.

    And what a pledge, Chuck. What more proof is required to know that Capitol Hill is indeed Knesset West?

    Just watch this 10 min video of the congressman from Arizona read a speech that was undoubtedly written by AIPAC. Although it was delivered by an American congressman, this could have been delivered by the Israeli ambassador to the UN. But the delivery was more potent as it came from someone with an American accent, not an Israeli one.

    P.S. This latest news should get the neocons knickers in a knot

    Russia vetoes UNSC resolution on renewing Syria chemical weapons probe

    https://www.rt.com/news/407641-russia-veto-chemical-un-resolution/

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
    , @chris
  41. Santos 说:
    @Shitposter

    Russian nukes can withstand a full blast 500 meters away and still hit their target.

  42. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    George W. Bush withdrew from the ABM treaty with Russia right after 9/11. What had seemed like common sense once, a treaty to end the race to shoot down the missiles that are trying to shoot down the missiles that the other guys launched to shoot down the missiles that were launched first and on, and on and on – was defeated soundly. The question of whether or not something works is mostly irrelevant, but is used to obscure larger mechanisms by distilling an “issue” into a comfortably familiar form the public can think about.

    The US did a lot of research in the 50s and 60s – eating themselves a nibble at a time from their own assholes until the realization that military keynesianism might end up killing themselves. But by the 1980s, conservative revisionists were starting to rewrite Vietnam, rewrite nuclear war, massively increase defense spending and create a new reality about how winning is not only possible but must be pursued to achieve our “political goals”. It’s hard to believe that they believe any of this rot at all, there’s no intention to actually use THAAD. It’s purpose was spending, testing success with ribbons, and then installations.

  43. Am I the only one having trouble seeing through the propaganda to understand the situation in North Korea? If they are wacko bird and horrible bad guys, then Trump may be right and Tillerson is wasting his time.

    On the other hand, my suspicion is that this is our creation, we’re still fighting a decades old proxy war for some reason, and all we really need to do is get our boot off their throat. If this is the case, and it costs us Seattle, then we need to call the American experiment done.

    Let’s pretend the author is wrong, star wars works (reagan sits up in his grave and gives a fist pump) and we successfully kill a couple million North Koreans. Problem solved, right? Aside from the sin of it (hard to put aside), I think the aftermath will call in a lot of accounts Americans will be ashamed to pay.

    Or maybe not, all these wars are started by the lies of the powerful.

  44. peterAUS 说:
    @Brabantian

    感谢。

    Posts like this, IMHO, are the best reason to “trawl” Internet.

    A very good learning experience.

  45. Che Guava 说:
    @Michael Kenny

    Michael Kenny,
    You are daft at best. Needing a little more studying;!

    At the Pearl Harbour attack, Yamamato (who had opposed it) was expecting to sink a few carriers.

    The carriers based there were all in or near what is now the northern Pacific garbage gyre, where ships almost never sail (also why the garbage is the relatively new thing, ships are not normally going there, so noticing the garbage in the gyre is recent). For no explicable reason, except that …

    The attack was lured by Rozenfeldt, it was a ruse on his part to ‘GODAWAW’!

    欺骗之日, a book by a USA citizen, is to covering background quite well.

  46. peterAUS 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    彼得,你似乎在暗示这里的大多数评论者都非常讨厌美国,希望它遭受

    核攻击,对吗?

    不完全是。

    I am suggesting that a lot of commenters from non-Western sphere wouldn’t mind US suffering a nuclear attack.

    喜欢:周而复始,carma,回报,逆转种族主义等等。
    No, I am not going to trawl the posts and “prove” the case.

    Now, I have a question for you:Do you think that most of commenters here, regardless of place of birth/residence, wouldn’t mind Israel suffering a nuclear attack?

    • 回复: @Linda Green
    , @NoseytheDuke
  47. peterAUS 说:
    @EugeneGur

    出色地…。

    Kim agreed to the proposal by Russian and China to suspend his program if the US stops it military “exercises”.

    doesn’t look that reasonable to me.
    短距离 nuclear capability (to destroy invasion force) would seem more reasonable approach than threatening US mainland. That’s my point.

    You see, North Korea is not at all delusional and knows full well that the US is not to be trusted and never sticks to any agreement it signs up to. Iran is a good case in point. So, they are understandably apprehensive, given their history with the US, about giving up their nukes.

    同意。
    You are mixing two things.
    Giving up nukes and developing LONG RANGE nuclear capability.
    I’ll use analogy for clarification: you apply for a gun permit for self-defense (not necessarily in US so don’t get stuck on 2nd Amendment). And you want to buy .50 cal sniper rifle, not a handgun/shotgun.

    As to hitting it, are you sure the US would be permitted to hit anything so close to the China and Russia territories without retaliation? I don’t think so. I think Washington knows that, too.

    没有
    Nobody would be posting here if that was the case.
    We all know very well it can happen.
    If US NCA feels the threat is real, it WILL act.
    What happens after that…well…that’s what science-fiction is all about isn’t it (hint: The Day After)?

    • 回复: @Bill
  48. Sean 说:

    There isn’t going to be any war. China is yet again using North Korea as a cat’s paw to get into America’s technological and economic pants.

  49. peterAUS 说:
    @Beckow

    Reasonable reasons……

    IMHO, as far as US Administration is concerned, mean nothing….没有….compared to a nuclear attack on US mainland (or Hawaii for that matter).
    简单。

    Kim regime does not appear reasonable.
    The assassination of his half brother shows it.
    His own dealings with those within regime who cross him show that too.

    That type of person/that type of regime in possession of 长距离 nuclear weapons is not a good idea.

    • 回复: @Beckow
    , @Chris Mallory
  50. anarchyst 说:

    Most people are unaware that Israel holds a “Damocles sword” over the world. Any attack (perceived or real) on Israel will be met with a nuclear device being detonated in a city of Israel’s choosing. Israel calls this the “Samson option” and is very real.

    Israel refuses to abide by IAEA guidelines concerning its nukes as its nukes are already distributed around the world. Israel cannot produce all of them as most of them are not in Israel, proper. No delivery systems are needed as Israel’s nukes are already “in place”. Look for another “false flag” operation with the blame being put on Iran. You can bet that some Iranian passports will be found in the rubble.

  51. hyperbola 说:
    @utu

    Maybe the motivation has never changed.

    魔术布丁
    Why is the US government still pouring billions into missile defence?
    http://www.monbiot.com/2008/08/19/the-magic-pudding/

    …. The system has been in development since 1946, and so far it has achieved a grand total of nothing. You wouldn’t know it if you read the press releases published by the Pentagon’s Missile Defence Agency: the word “success” features more often than any other noun(2)….

    Missile defence is so expensive and the measures required to evade it so cheap that if the US government were serious about making the system work it would bankrupt the country, just as the arms race helped to bring the Soviet Union down. By spending a couple of billion dollars on decoy technologies, Russia would commit the US to trillions of dollars of counter-measures. The cost ratios are such that even Iran could outspend the United States…..

    … Federal government is a vast corporate welfare programme, rewarding the industries which give millions in political donations with contracts worth billions. Missile defence is the biggest pork barrel of all, the magic pudding which won’t run out however much you eat. The funds channelled to defence, aerospace and other manufacturing and service companies will never run dry because the system will never work….

    If we seek to understand US foreign policy in terms of a rational engagement with international problems, or even as an effective means of projecting power, we are looking in the wrong place. The government’s interests have always been provincial. It seeks to appease lobbyists, shift public opinion at key stages of the political cycle, accommodate crazy Christian fantasies and pander to television companies run by eccentric billionaires. The US does not really have a foreign policy. It has a series of domestic policies which it projects beyond its borders. That they threaten the world with 57 varieties of destruction is of no concern to the current administration. The only question of interest is who gets paid and what the political kickbacks will be.

    • 回复: @Grandpa Charlie
  52. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF MISSILE DEFENSE WORKS OR NOT!

    The purpose of a nuclear deterrent is to deter attacks by your opponent. If one is ever forced to use one’s nuclear deterrent, one has already lost.

    The purpose of a missile defense system is to subvert you opponent’s nuclear deterrence and deprive it of its psychological ability to deter. If U.S. politicians and generals believe they are safe behind their missile shield, they can act more aggressively. The same result can be achieved by dismissing the opponent’s deterrence as non-working or non-existent. If your opponent cannot demonstrate its capabilities by nuclear tests of missile launches, then their deterrence is as good as nothing.

  53. Peter Lund 说:
    @silviosilver

    PATRIOT 系统有一个与时间保持和浮点表示有关的错误,这使得它打开的时间越长,准确度就越低。

    http://www-users.math.umn.edu/~arnold/disasters/patriot.html

    • 回复: @MarkinLA
  54. @anarchyst

    Most people are unaware that Israel holds a “Damocles sword” over the world. Any attack (perceived or real) on Israel will be met with a nuclear device being detonated in a city of Israel’s choosing. Israel calls this the “Samson option” and is very real.

    There are some serious issues with this whole concept, even if one considers Jericho-III ICBMs. If somebody of real capability really-really needed to wipe Israel off the map, this could have been done even without any launch of ICBMs at Israel. In fact, that almost happened in 1973. In terms of counter-force suppression of Israel’s deterrent, well–that is a very interesting issue. More generally, Israel doesn’t hold “Damocles Sword” over the world and she knows it damn well–she miscalculates, say using her weapons first, there will be glass parking lot left from Israel. Size matters, so does capability–Israel doesn’t have naval nuclear deterrent and that matters a huge deal and that is what makes Israel tremendously vulnerable but also well put on the notice that she will not (not may) survive own stupidity. Appearances and realities do not always go together.

    • 回复: @utu
  55. But the real danger is that it is the American people that is being fooled by the Administration.

    When it comes to the “danger” of the government fooling the American people, you’re being a bit over-generous. As the most uninformed people on the face of the earth, Americans stay fooled and in a permanent state of ignorance and confusion. If presented with a world map and asked to do so, a full ninety percent of Americans couldn’t find North Korea on the world map is their lives depended on it.

  56. @Anonymous

    To me, the biggest threat that a North Korean attack could pose would be EMP. All they’d have to do is get a nuclear warhead into the atmosphere somewhere above or off the west coast of the US.

    Actually it is harder than that. They would have to have a warhead large enough to produce the EMP pulse strong enough to damage the electronics. Then they have to hit the right spot to target the area they want to damage. Too high and the EMP pulse won’t be strong enough too low and it won’t have the range needed to do the damage.

    Plus any equipment not under load will probably be unaffected by the EMP. The EMP threat is greatly overblown.

  57. utu 说:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    More generally, Israel doesn’t hold “Damocles Sword” over the world and she knows it damn well–she miscalculates, say using her weapons first, there will be glass parking lot left from Israel. Size matters, so does capability–Israel doesn’t have naval nuclear deterrent and that matters a huge deal and that is what makes Israel tremendously vulnerable but also well put on the notice that she will not (not may) survive own stupidity.

    They do not claim they will survive. They claim that you go when if they must go:

    And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
    2003年,军事历史学家马丁·范·克里维尔德(Martin van Creveld)认为当时进行中的阿克萨起义威胁了以色列的生存。[30] 大卫·赫斯特(David Hirst)的《枪与橄榄枝》(The Gun and the Olive Branch,2003)中引用了范·克里夫德(Van Creveld)的话:

    我们拥有数百枚原子弹头和火箭,可以向各个方向的目标发射它们,甚至可能在罗马。 大多数欧洲首都都是我们空军的目标。 让我引用 Moshe Dayan 将军的话:“以色列一定像一条疯狗,太危险了,不能打扰。” 在这一点上,我认为这一切都没有希望。 如果可能的话,我们将不得不努力阻止事情发展到那种地步。 然而,我们的武装力量并不是世界第三十强,而是第二或第三。 我们有能力与我们一起摧毁世界。 我可以向你保证,这会在以色列垮台之前发生。 [31]

    然而,根据布里格的说法,以色列甚至不太可能将欧洲作为目标。 伊扎克·雅科夫将军是“参孙选择”的幕后策划者,以色列还没有其他措施,如炸弹或导弹来携带核载荷。

    Israel doesn’t have naval nuclear deterrent

    Deterrent or not deterred Israel has excellent German submarines and it is safe to assume they all have nuclear capability. Another three submarines (\$1 billion per sub) were approved by Germany 10/23/2017:

    Germany approves deal on three submarines for Israel
    http://www.dw.com/en/germany-approves-deal-on-three-submarines-for-israel/a-41075804

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
  58. hhsiii 说:
    @Beckow

    Well, the japanese don’t seem to hate us too much. And the South Koreans would be speaking, uh, North Korean but for Uncle Sam.

    OK, yeah, it wouldn’t go over well. This article is scary.

  59. Beckow 说:
    @peterAUS

    “Kim regime does not appear reasonable”

    Appearances are created for you, I am not sure these ‘appearances’ reflect reality in N Korea. They might, but we are also being manipulated. Since I am not familiar with N Korea, my sanity check is to compare ‘media appearances’ of things I know well to actual reality. And there one can see huge media created gaps.

    I agree that US government is capable of seeing the longterm impact on Koreans as ‘nothing’. That’s a problem, some core sanity principles have been discarded in Washington. My point is that any nuclear usage would have huge long-term consequences, it could start unraveling the magical spell that ‘America’ has had for about 100 years on the rest of mankind. But they still might do it. Remember that these actions are never clear-cut – there would be endless doubts about whether N Korea was actually going to – or was capable – of attacking Hawaii. There is no way you can win that in the long run. Koreans are after all a very-tightly related and very ethnically aware nation. And the difference between North and South Koreans is largely political – they are the same people.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @peterAUS
  60. Dr. Doom 说:

    Bibi and his people feel pretty safe with Iron Dome and ABMs but he also has a Yuuge Wall that everyone who is “respectable” says is IMPOSSIBLE for US. Americans should be more like me, and by that I mean WHITE PEOPLE. I operate on Enlightened Self Interest. Is it GOOD for Me and Mine. Do I care about Israel.? Actually NO. That covenant was broken when Babylon crushed the errant Israelites that turned away from God before the Flood. The Talmud is named for Babylon, the Original Evil Empire.
    The threat of Pancho Villa is here Today, in the cheap labor fantasies pushed by Ayn Rand Cultists. I want none of that. Go below the Rio Grande to get that profit and keep those products THERE. We do not NEED this fake world delusion called “globalism”. You are bringing Death to your door. Death doesn’t knock once.

  61. @utu

    Deterrent or not deterred Israel has excellent German submarines and it is safe to assume they all have nuclear capability

    They have nuclear capability (allegedly) from the cruise missiles those Dolphin-class subs are capable of carrying. Having said all that, all of them will never be simultaneously on the patrol since all equipment requires maintenance and repair, hence what is known as Coefficient Of Operational Tension (Strain). Out of those 5 Dolphins only 2 are AIP subs. This is one point–that is the issue of ASW. But here is point two:

    They do not claim they will survive. They claim that you go when if they must go:

    This is ever present issue of completely removing a conventional dynamics of escalation to a nuclear threshold from discussion. One doesn’t have to make Israel “go”, whatever the definition of this is. Anything prior to the actual decision to deploy nuclear deterrent is conventionally controlled. Those who control escalation–control the war. Just a simple scenario from the top of my head–an application of incremental conventional pain.

    1. Sink one of the Dolphins. Shoot down several Israeli aircraft. Take an operational pause. Observe political fallout in Israel. Will Israel cross the nuclear threshold? I doubt it really.

    2. Message “missed” after pp.1–another Dolphin goes down, another couple of aircraft gets shot down. Pause, observe. Any intent of crossing the threshold? The only threshold Israel will cross will be that of the US Congress (and the White House) with hysterical appeals to a sugar-daddy to save their asses.

    3. Israeli military posturing is well-known, as is their gross boastfulness, which, as an example, poisoned US military thinking for decades. It is expected from people in those lands, it is a part of the culture–to be overly dramatic.

    In the end, for a man in the noose, one doesn’t have to kick the chair from under his feet to convince him that he is subdued, enough to strain the rope. This is just one of many non-nuclear violent means which can make Israel do what is needed (if shit really hits the fan), without Israel “perceiving” herself to about “go down”. Truth is, Israel real security guarantees are not in Israel proper, they are in the Beltway. I am not talking, of course, about the fact–and that is purely technological issue not to be discussed here–of capability to render Israel’s deterrent generally ineffective. How–is a completely different issue. Israeli’s generally are good, but they are not THAT good. They know it. Hence hysteria and BiBi visiting Putin regularly. While I may have some reservations about people in D.C. I know that those who deal with situation in Moscow know Israel’s capabilities extremely well.

    • 同意: Cloak And Dagger
    • 回复: @Cloak And Dagger
  62. renfro 说:

    ” Far better to take the North Korean threat seriously and admit that a west coast city like Seattle could well become the target of a successful nuclear weapon attack.>>>>>>

    Isn’t that what Trump and Co. and the Walking Dead Neocons have been doing all along…fear mongering?…I think so.

    The myth of missile defense aside I don’t know that I even buy that this N Korea hysteria is even about their nukes.
    Reading reports in international papers it may be more about the fact that Russia has been actively investing in North Korea to secure a key strategic economic outlet to the Pacific Ocean. And on top of that Russia is acting as the political and business intermediary between China. Japan and the loud mouth in N Korea in this 3 sided squabble.

    So all this crap about N Korea actually lobbing a nuke on the US reminds me of the WMD propaganda to justify invading Iraq.
    It may be and probably is more about the US foiling Russian expansion of influence and commerce in that part of Asia.

    • 回复: @Cloak And Dagger
  63. peterAUS 说:
    @Beckow

    Appearances are created for you, I am not sure these ‘appearances’ reflect reality in N Korea. They might, but we are also being manipulated. Since I am not familiar with N Korea, my sanity check is to compare ‘media appearances’ of things I know well to actual reality. And there one can see huge media created gaps.

    Well….I am a simple man.
    This is how it looks from a perspective of that simpleton:
    North Korea has legitimate reason to fear regime change, even invasion by US and its allies.
    The regime in North Korea, in that case, faces “Saddam/Milosevic/Qaddafi” fate. Not pleasant.
    So, the regime wants a good deterrent.
    The only deterrent, so far, apparently, is a nuclear weapon.
    So, having a nuclear weapon just makes sense.
    Simple self-defense capability against a superpower.

    What makes sense for me is having a SHORT RANGE nuclear capability.
    On strategic/operational level a KT yield and able to reach to, say, semicircle up to Busan.

    Developing ICBMs with MT yield capable of reaching mainland US does not make sense in that, self-defense scenario.
    Threatening the superpower just does not make sense.
    Feels as unnecessary provocation.
    As …..irrational.

    简单。

    • 回复: @Anonymous
  64. L.K 说:
    @peterAUS

    As usual, you are completely full of shit… but then, anyone with, er, half a brain, can see you are merely a virulent little war mongering Internet troll, always asking for some more war, from the comfort of whatever little insect hole you type your garbage. It reminds me of what another poster wrote around here:
    ‘Amerikastan,
    Amerikastan,
    Wants to fight Russia and China,
    Iran and North Korea,
    Can’t even beat,
    The Taliban*.’

    * that is a militia, btw.

  65. @peterAUS

    North Korea has a hostile super power’s troops sitting on it’s border. That super power is located on the other side of the world from North Korea. That super power sends armed heavy bombers and naval flotillas right up to North Korea’s borders. But North Korea is unreasonable in wanting to be able to defend itself?

    The US should bring all it’s troops home from Asia and leave Asia to the Asians. Heck, let Australia police the South China Sea if it must be done. But it is not the responsibility of the American tax payer.

    • 同意: RadicalCenter, Carroll Price
  66. peterAUS 说:
    @Beckow

    Clicked “Publish” early….

    My point is that any nuclear usage would have huge long-term consequences, it could start unraveling the magical spell that ‘America’ has had for about 100 years on the rest of mankind.

    Two elements here:
    1.If properly done (hard, but possible) the job of eliminating the regime/its nuclear capability doesn’t require deployment of nuclear weapons.
    That’s less important, though.

    2. The only important is: no US administration will balance “long-term consequences” and short term (literal) fallout on U.S. soil.
    NCA won’t care for that “spell” for one microsecond.
    We can like it or not, but, they will pulverize any possible threat coming from North Korea regardless of any consequence.
    Actually, the only consequence they’d be concerned about is MAD with Russia. Not even with China.
    得出自己的结论。

    Mine are, and my point is: if North Korean regime keeps sending a message of will and capability to deliver a nuke on Hawaii, let alone mainland we are for some fireworks in Korean peninsula.
    Maybe wider.

    但是,不要害怕。
    A combination of willing and knowable public and competent and responsible politicians in modern democracies will prevent all that.
    No need to be worried…..no need to be worried…no…need…to……

    • 回复: @Beckow
  67. @utu

    there are actual retards right here in the comments that thinks usa can win a nuclear war and only be set back a few decades of progress :((( apparently a country with 250 nukes is not a concern.

    the moment a nuclear launch is confirmed by any of the nuclear powers, we can expect nuclear winter. I fully agree that there is no such thing as limited nuclear war.

  68. hypewaders 说:

    International shipping provides convenient delivery to the world’s ports. Of WMDs. Who are we really kidding?

  69. L.K 说:

    Why North Korea Needs Nukes – And How To End That

    …Now consider what the U.S. media don’t tell you about Korea:

    BEIJING, March 8 (Xinhua) — China proposed “double suspension” to defuse the looming crisis on the Korean Peninsula, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Wednesday.
    “As a first step, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) may suspend its nuclear and missile activities in exchange for the suspension of large-scale U.S.-Republic of Korea (ROK) military exercises,…”
    FM Wang, ‘the lips’, undoubtedly transmitted an authorized message from North Korea: “The offer is (still) on the table and China supports it.”

    North Korea has made the very same offer in January 2015. The Obama administration rejected it. North Korea repeated the offer in April 2016 and the Obama administration rejected it again. This March the Chinese government conveyed and supported the long-standing North Korean offer. The U.S. government, now under the Trump administration, immediately rejected it again. The offer, made and rejected three years in a row, is sensible. Its rejection only led to a bigger nuclear arsenal and to more missiles with longer reach that will eventually be able to reach the United States.

    North Korea is understandably nervous each and every time the U.S. and South Korea launch their very large yearly maneuvers and openly train for invading North Korea and for killing its government and people. The maneuvers have large negative impacts on North Korea’s economy.

    North Korea justifies its nuclear program as the economically optimal way to respond to these maneuvers.[…]

    Each time the U.S. and South Korea launch their very large maneuvers, the North Korean conscription army (1.2 million strong) has to go into a high state of defense readiness. Large maneuvers are a classic starting point for military attacks. The U.S.-South Korean maneuvers are (intentionally) held during the planting (April/May) or harvesting (August) season for rice when North Korea needs each and every hand in its few arable areas.

    To understand why North Korea fears U.S. aggressiveness consider the utter devastation caused mostly by the U.S. during the Korea War:

    阅读全文
    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/04/the-reason-behind-north-koreas-nuclear-program-and-its-offer-to-end-it.html

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Grandpa Charlie
  70. @Dingo jay

    We are the ones who should be worried: about being held responsible for that spillover.

    如果美国政府用哪怕是“小”的战术核武器来打击平壤,我们又如何避免辐射到距离很近的韩国和中国呢?

    What will the Chinese public demand of their government if hundreds of thousands of Chinese people in China itself are irradiated and badly damaged, at the least, by a US nuke? Would they be wrong to demand it?

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  71. @geokat62

    geokat62,

    Before making this comment, I read Andrei Martyanov’s narrow minded complaint that Israel doesn’t have a naval nuclear deterrent. (SIGH) Tell that one to the survivor’s of Israel’s barbaric attack on the U.S.S. Liberty?

    At any rate, thanks for posting Rep. Trent Franks’ sad abandonment of his oath sworn U.S. principles.

    Suppose I can say with confidence:

    1. In defiance of international attempts to make the M.E. a nuke weapon free zone,
    The Lobby makes sure that Israel can have nuclear weapons & can laugh at the
    “dead ender” signators of the N.P.T.

    2. Dumb Goyim Americans must continue to finance Israel’s “defense” despite their
    breaking the N.P.T. deal and are constantly looking to get their wars.

    3. Planet Earth suffers a daily (24/7) existential threat because bribed Congressmen are
    trained to “run on” winnable nuke warfare and they are happy with an Israeli
    finger-on-the (stalled) START-trigger.

    Too pessimistic, caustic, geo? Tell me straight?

    • 同意: Zumbuddi
    • 回复: @geokat62
  72. peterAUS 说:
    @L.K

    Well, you do have a point here.
    Maneuvers/harvest/mobilization.
    Does make sense.

    What would make sense, for the regime, 然后, is to have a nuclear capability (as I have already pointed out 几个 times here…..) to destroy that INVASION FORCE.
    Kiloton yield up to Busan semicircle range.

    What makes all that..suicidal kind of bizarre…is boasting on developing a megaton yield and, obviously, working on ICBM capability.

    说得通?
    Or I am looking forward to another case of Internet “anger management/manners” here?

  73. c matt 说:
    @EugeneGur

    Why would short range deter the US? If the US is the biog threat (and it is), you need to be able to counter that threat. Seems imminently reasonable. You don’t see the US scrapping its long range capability, and it has even less of a short range threat to counter.

    Using your .50 caliber analogy, if your true enemy is at 500 yards and has a .50 caliber rifle, a 9mm pistol is not much for self-defense.

    Again, I think the entire world agrees that the US cannot be trusted. Most are just afraid to admit it officially.

  74. @EugeneGur

    Kim agreed to the proposal by Russian and China to suspend his program if the US stops it military “exercises”. — EugeneGur

    The quotes around ‘exercises’ are supposed to indicate that there is something sinister and unreasonable about the military exercises, which have been conducted annually for years entirely within the boundaries of South Korea, that is, south of the 38th Parallel. Such exercises are out of rational prudence considering that North Korea did invade the South to initiate the Korean War in 1950 and continues to take an aggressive stance toward the Republic of Korea (the South).

    For the Republic of Korea (the only democratically elected government on the Korean Peninsula) to agree to Kim’s demand would set a precedent yielding to Kim control over military operations in the South. On top of that, the demand made by Russia and China on behalf of Kim includes that UN/USA military withdraw from Korea before Kim would agree to start negotiations. Thus, Kim demands surrender of the sovereignty of the ROK and surrender by the UN and USA before he will begin what EugeneGur and other of Kim’s dupes or trolls ludicrously call “negotiations”.

    What has been the response of the Republic of Korea to Kim’s demands that the ROK surrender its population to the deprivations of Kim’s Communist military forces? It has been to send food to the North — because they understand in Seoul that the Korean people in the North are being starved for the sake of Kim’s nuclear-bomb and ICBM program.

    EugeneGur is just another propagandist who takes his talking points from Kim’s “Korean Central News Agency” — EugeneGur and those like him are pathetic dupes or even agents of the only remaining Stalinist dictatorship in the world, helping to prop it up by seeking to justify its dangerously aggressive policies as somehow sane and reasonable.

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
  75. geokat62 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Too pessimistic, caustic, geo? Tell me straight?

    Bang on, Chuck.

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  76. @anarchyst

    How did those Israeli nukes get “in place”? How are the Israelis able to store and maintain nuclear weapons on foreign soil without them being discovered and disabled? Are all the nukes in the Israeli embassies?

    • 回复: @anarchyst
    , @Erebus
  77. headrick 说:

    If we nuked NK, I think we would become a world pariah. I am not sure though. NK says
    what they want is to be accepted as a nuclear power but not have to actually fight a
    nuclear war to achieve that. I don’t know who to believe about that. It seems that the US
    is more belligerent than SK so maybe we should get in line behind and not ahead of SK about
    this. Jeeze, what a mess.

    • 回复: @Grandpa Charlie
  78. @RadicalCenter

    如果美国政府用哪怕是“小”的战术核武器来打击平壤,我们又如何避免辐射到距离很近的韩国和中国呢?

    根据放射性碎片在空中停留的时间长短,我们如何避免辐射日本? 如果您查看盛行风图,风从西向东吹过朝鲜半岛并环绕日本。

    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
    , @Joe Wong
  79. @Grandpa Charlie

    So you would have no issue with the North Koreans, China, Russia or Outer Bumfreakistan running military exercises with Mexico just south of the Rio Grande?

    • 回复: @Grandpa Charlie
  80. dahoit 说:

    Brother Nat sure did identify our nemesis,didn’t he?

    • 同意: ChuckOrloski
    • 回复: @Cloak And Dagger
  81. Ash 说:
    @Macroman

    Mutual assured destruction is correct. So is mutually assured destruction. I suggest that in the future, when you take it upon yourself to publicly correct somebody, maybe look it up first.

  82. @ChuckOrloski

    Thank you, ChuckOrloski, for a very important link to a cluster of incidents that point toward treason by or within Bush/Cheney administration.

    Below is linked an article on one of the many weird things that happened during the “scary ” Cheney-W. Bush Zionist administration.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/missing-nukes-treason-of-the-highest-order/7158

    Generally related, also see current article here at Unz Review:

    ‘Duty, Honor, Atrocity: George W. Bush Receives a Character Award at West Point”,
    https://www.unz.com/article/duty-honor-atrocity/
    ,
    BTW: “He apparently killed himself by running his car’s engine inside his suburban garage in Virginia.” It’s amazing how many such deaths have occurred near SAC bases, including SAC HQ over the years. A guy could even be forgiven for supposing that this is a standard M.O. for one or more organizations who sign off as “Air Force Secret”.

    As for ChuckOrloaki’s “Cheney-W. Bush 犹太复国主义 administration” — I recall back during those dark days Dubbya had his photo taken, complete with the blue-and-white yarmulke, praying at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem.

    https://www.cwporter.com/ONTHEGULFWAR.htm

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  83. When I first read the title this morning, I was a bit taken aback. But in reading the content, I understand that it a review of the complete guessing game that is the missile defense system.

    They have never scheduled a test that was not preplanned or preprogrammed.

    I would bet that some of this comes from the dome analysis which is also vastly overrated. To the suggestion that a perceived defense system will deter attack, might make sense if your opponent believe it. But the dome defense did not stop Iraq during the first gulf war.

    I think the only system that is viable is rooted in laser tech. I hate to even mention it, because it is going to change warfare in ways disturbing to contemplate.

  84. anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    Americans consequently do not know war except as something that happens elsewhere and to foreigners,

    That’s pretty much it in a nutshell, isn’t it? Americans usually don’t give a hoot about dead furriners, they all look alike anyway. Notice that in all this sharpening of tension and debate regarding the DPRK no American has brought up the issue of what do the people of the ROK think about the prospect of hostilities over there. They’re on the front line and would bear the cost of any outbreak of war yet no American cares about that even though they’re supposed to be our close ally. Our ‘ally’ apparently would just be collateral damage of little interest to anyone on these shores. It’s worrying because now it appears that the DPRK is emerging as another nuclear power and wants to develop the capability to hit the US; it’s no longer a one-way street. The US never asked anyone for permission to build it’s nuclear weapons and it’s ability to act as a gatekeeper is eroding before it’s eyes, hence the hysterical rhetoric. DPRK is becoming a member of the world’s nuclear club regardless of who likes it so deal with it. There’s always Venezuela to invade. Or Niger. Oh wait, we’re already there.

  85. …isolated by broad oceans and friendly nations to the north and south.

    A French foreign ambassador expressed the same thought as follows:

    “美国在国家间受到祝福。 在北方,她有一个软弱的邻居; 在南方,另一个弱邻居; 在东边,鱼; 在西边,鱼。”
    – Jules Jusserand,法国驻美国大使,1910 年

  86. @Chris Mallory

    =

    So you would have no issue with the North Koreans, China, Russia or Outer Bumfreakistan running military exercises with Mexico just south of the Rio Grande?” Chris Mallory, to Grandpa

    Chris, you manage to pack quite a few false equivalencies into your 25 words! Here’s an example: Mexico is a much larger country than South Korea — anywhere in South Korea could be taken as “just south of the Rio Grande”. The area of Mexico is about 20 times that of South Korea! Plus, if you think about it, the only realistic exercises would have to be at the DMZ or at some kind of mock-up of the DMZ … and where would you like UN/USA/ROK to construct that mock-up?

    But of course, Chris, you don’t think about anything at all … you don’t have to, being absolutely certain of your righteousness … and the evil of all those who oppose your stupid POV. Very “liberal” of you!

    • 回复: @Chris Mallory
    , @schmenz
  87. anarchyst 说:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Tens of thousands of shipping containers are exported and imported every day. Hence, getting nukes into any country is relatively easy. Of course, Israel has had decades to distribute its nukes…

  88. @geokat62

    嘿geokat62,

    You heard about The Lobby King Senator Bob Corker’s goofy hesitance to say Trump can be trusted with the nuclear codes? (Sigh) Refer to link below?

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/gop-sen-corker-wont-say-if-trump-can-be-trusted-with-nukes.html

    Maybe Corker would trust the president’s son-in-law (Lord of War) Jared Kushner with the nuclear codes? How narcotized-dumb do they think dumb goyim

  89. Cyrano 说:

    Too bad that the nuclear umbrella doesn’t offer any protection against nuclear winter. Maybe they should invent a nuclear parka and nuclear mittens.

    • 哈哈: Talha
  90. @Grandpa Charlie

    Hey Grandpa Charlie,

    I’d like to go to the Dimona reactor wall, and post a note asking conscientious Jews to free Mordechai Vanunu and let him speak all that he knows to our sick world.

    Thanks for providing educational links, Grandpa C. Doomsday clock… yarmulke tick, tick.

    • 同意: Grandpa Charlie
  91. @peterAUS

    他们选择通过窃取我们的技术加入该俱乐部。 对那些不追求或拥有核武器的人使用核武器的想法在世界范围内是不可能的,除非以色列人呼吁对伊朗使用核武器。 总之,无论以色列未来发生什么,都可以归咎于以色列人和他们的行为。

    我会争辩说,类似于亨利·基辛格,这些人对他人的行为必然意味着有人最终会以一种或另一种方式踢他们的屁股。 如果没有,他们肯定会继续尝试。 看看历史,那些四处杀害无辜儿童、说谎、偷窃、纵容、刺伤他们的“盟友”的人,或者我应该说背后一直是人质,同时对他们微笑说不是这样。 以欺骗、诡计和迷惑他人的孩子作为他们活动的力量发动战争,没有任何是非观念。

    如果有足够的时间,您预计以这种方式行事的团体会发生什么? 如果我们真的决定把美国放在第一位呢? 如果他们有 80 枚核武器,我们为什么要花这么多纳税人的钱来资助他们的种族隔离恐怖国家? 为什么我们应该允许他们征用我们政府和外交政策机构的如此多的权力? 我们是否已经放弃了这个国家独立的想法?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  92. @JoaoAlfaiate

    Why do you hate LA? Surely there are both good and bad people everywhere?

  93. nsa 说:

    Not the slightest chance of a war with the Koreans…..nuke or otherwise. The reason is as plain as the hook nose on your face……..nothing in it for the jooies who run Jerusalem on the Potomac. Iran is the target. We here in Ft. Meade get paid to know these things…….

  94. @renfro

    There is a lot of hot air about South Korea being willing to destroy North Korea. I have spent a fair amount of time in Seoul over the years, and one thing that people may not realize is that many South Koreans have families and relatives in North Korea. They are not about to bomb them.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
    , @Carroll Price
  95. Beckow 说:
    @peterAUS

    N Korea simply wants to be left alone. Sending a message of ‘will and capability’ is not how they think. They are sending a message of ‘if you corner me, I will hurt you, even if we both die’. They are also not going to start anything. If they are pre-emptively attacked, what happens next is anyone’s guess. But it could be catastrophic.

    My point is that apart from the likely catastrophe, if we survive, there would also be a long-term negative consequence for Washington in terms of very bad vibes for generations in that part of the world. Actually, probably all over the world. That is a risk even more unhinged warmongers in Washington might not want to take. But, hey if their rationality is as low as you think, they just might. They might as well nuke Soul for all the emotional anger that would release among the Koreans.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  96. @dahoit

    I only started to view some of his videos after he posted here. I must say that I am increasingly impressed by his analyses delivered in his very unique style. I hope he posts more often here.

  97. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Brabantian

    Relative last year on vacation met a 93 y/o man who actually witnessed the Trinity nuclear explosion in 1945. Same relative at work met the guy who designed the first H-bomb trigger: a motor driven spark gap powered by a 10mfd/10KV capacitor. No EG&G Krytron triggers there buddy. The “Starfish Prime” space H-Bomb 1.4Mt detonation on July 9, 1962 was observed in Hawaii and the electrons injected into the earths magnetic field reflected back and forth from each pole can still be detected.

  98. @Andrei Martyanov

    I find myself agreeing with your premise that Israel wouldn’t go immediately from 0 to nuclear on first provocation, and incremental provocation may well be a viable way to observe their reaction to determine when they start preparation for nukes. This, of course assumes a sane government in Israel, and recent events would belie that assumption.

    Another point – while your premise holds for large scale nuclear weaponry, I don’t believe that it applies for tactical nukes, which some claim that Saudi Arabia has already deployed in Yemen with Israeli help. Some of the videos showing mushroom clouds from explosions would tend to support that speculation.

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Talha
  99. peterAUS 说:
    @Linda Green

    总之,无论以色列未来发生什么,都可以归咎于以色列人和他们的行为。

    So, “nukes” wise, I understand your reply as “it’s normal to have Israel nuked sooner or later”.
    For “Israel/Jew haters” of course.
    For “Israel firsters” of course not.

    对于介于两者之间的少数人,仅此而已:
    Oh, BTW, Israel isn’t part of article I guess, and for sure not my interest in the topic, especially in this thread. North Korea is.

    话虽如此,只是为了记录。

    他们选择通过窃取我们的技术加入那个俱乐部。

    像苏联人?

    核武器被用来对付那些不追求或拥有核武器的人的想法在世界范围内是不可能的

    是这样吗?
    Can’t recollect seeing any document stipulating that.
    And even if I had, wouldn’t put much faith there.
    我只是相信部署/或不部署核武器的决定也会考虑其他因素。

    …people who go around killing innocent children…

    Well, that’s a strong argument when discussing realpolitics, state interests and warfare.
    情绪激动到了极点。
    所以,请你提醒我上一次非无辜儿童在战争中丧生是什么时候?
    Any example in human history of warfare will suffice. And we’ll agree you can find plenty of examples of children being killed in war(s). Just……一种………example.

    …without any notion of right and wrong….

    一个强有力的道德论据。
    You probably meant “my notion of right and wrong”.
    I haven’t seen any example in history of warfare where a party involved was not absolutely sure in morality if its cause. But, then, I could be slipping. Would you, please, point to that example? Say, from Babylon to today. Just………一种…….example.

    如果有足够的时间,您预计以这种方式行事的团体会发生什么?

    Plenty of options: sun goes red giant. They (that group) rules the word as pharaons of old. World goes MAD and cockroaches inherit the Earth. Star Trek paradise. Arthur Clarke star child. Elois and Morlocks….Judge Dredd world….etc…etc….
    If I knew the answer I wouldn’t be posting here.

    如果我们真的决定把美国放在第一位呢?

    Good point. So…why don’t you. Americans I mean? What keeps you? Don’t tell me you are stupid enough to buy MSM? Or just morally lazy. Are you?

    为什么我们应该允许他们征用我们政府和外交政策机构的如此多的权力?

    Good question. Lazy..stupid..don’t care? Scared?

    我们是否已经放弃了这个国家独立的想法?

    Don’t know. Have you? Looks that way sometimes.
    当然,我可能是错的。

    哦,当我们讨论这些问题时,还有一件事。
    If it was only you, well, I don’t think we’d be having this….discussion here.
    The thing is, well, you guys are the hyperpower. So, you do have a tendency to, how to put it, “persuade” the rest of the world should that world feels a bit different from what you want.

    The rest of the world (save Russia up to a point) can’t even ask those questions.
    我的意思是他们/我们可以问他们,但美国人为我们回答。
    经常受到制裁。 有时用炸弹。
    无辜的孩子也会被杀害。

  100. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @peterAUS

    Deterrent indeed. As if the US cares at all about SK.

    Why should the US fear to attack N Korea when it is impossible for them to strike the US. The US invaded, destroyed, and murdered the leaders of most of those countries you listed with impunity. They could do so precisely because those countries possessed no weapons capable of striking the US.

    Without long range capability there is no retaliatory capability and therefore no deterrent. I’m sure even a “simple man” as you put it can grasp that.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  101. Radical center thats china and russia problem. We will be on a full nuclear alert. We will have the nuclear gun in hand. They will have it in the holster or drawing it. Who has the edge.

    • 回复: @Talha
  102. Corvinus 说:
    @Brabantian

    “The bigger lie here – seriously – is that there are ‘nuclear weapons’ at all. If you look at the evidence, it’s clear that ‘nuclear weapons’ as a whole were fake from the beginning, with multiple proofs now that, e.g., Hiroshima was a chemical fire-bombing war crime, just like Tokyo, Yokohama, Osaka, Dresden, Hamburg.”

    I so enjoy your wild conspiracy theories.

  103. peterAUS 说:
    @Beckow

    N Korea simply wants to be left alone. Sending a message of ‘will and capability’ is not how they think. They are sending a message of ‘if you corner me, I will hurt you, even if we both die’. They are also not going to start anything.

    你可能是对的。
    What if you are wrong?

    Can the U.S. President risk being wrong?
    Oh, sure, we can all gloat in our “virtue signalling” here but he and his advisers can’t.
    “Perks” of rank.
    That’s the difference between “chatters” and people in high positions of power.

    And, funny thing here, who cares what you/me/any of us here think we’d do or not do in that position.
    The only thing that matters is what the NCA will do.
    Real people there. Now. Or, say, within next couple/several months.

    My point is that apart from the likely catastrophe, if we survive, there would also be a long-term negative consequence for Washington in terms of very bad vibes for generations in that part of the world. Actually, probably all over the world. That is a risk even more unhinged warmongers in Washington might not want to take.

    That’s the risk the U.S. leadership will definitely take, IMHO.
    I believe that, should the regime in NK continue along the current path (acquiring missile nuclear capability of reaching Hawaii) we’ll see either:
    -leadership change there (most likely Chinese/Russian work).
    – fireworks there. From the first “boom” onward all options are on the table. The best (minimal) case scenario leadership “change” with nuclear capability destroyed. The worst….well….
    And plenty of options in between.

    有趣的时代。

    When we are on the topic, since the first human killed another, probably with a rock, a weapon invented has been used………..
    We like to believe nukes won’t.
    Based on what….faith? Not on any evidence I am afraid.
    Not in our lifetime?
    希望。

    • 回复: @Beckow
  104. peterAUS 说:
    @Anonymous

    As if the US cares at all about SK

    A good point…..
    You forgot, I believe, a sizable U.S. part of a possible invasion force. And, most likely with plenty of allies. Brits, 澳大利亚人.........
    I am not quite sure that a cavalier attitude towards loss of life would extend to that force.

    Without long range capability there is no retaliatory capability and therefore no deterrent. I’m sure even a “simple man” as you put it can grasp that.

    Not quite. Grasping I mean.
    我相信一个 short range, say, 20 kiloton only, weapon would be quite useful there.
    Say, several of those dispersed carefully somewhere in NK.
    Looks as a very good deterent against invasion.
    我在这里缺少什么?

    • 回复: @Anonymous
    , @Carroll Price
  105. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    You raise an interesting point. During the UN retreat under PRC attack in the Korean War, US merchant marine were requested, not ordered, to evacuate North Korean civilians to safety from Hungnam. They evacuated 90,000+ North Korean civilians to South Korea. Those NKs have supposedly contributed 1 million citizens to South Korea. “The evacuation included 14,000 refugees who were transported on one ship, the SS Meredith Victory — the largest evacuation from land by a single ship.”

    https://www.marad.dot.gov/about-us/maritime-administration-history-program/usdot-maritime-gallant-ship-award/ss-meredith-victory-2/

  106. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @peterAUS

    Detonating nukes on your own soil is not a deterrent to a hostile foreign power.

    NK would be a guy with a hand grenade yelling that he’ll detonate it if you shoot him. Except that in this case the shooter is a guy with a sniper rifle at 500 meters who would be pleased as punch if his target would pull the pin and save him the bullet.

    If the US could make N Korea detonate their nukes on their own soil the pentagon would throw a party declare victory and go home. That’s a positive outcome, not a deterrent.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  107. @headrick

    It seems that the US is more belligerant than SK so maybe we should get in line behind and not ahead of SK about this … — headrick

    Absolutely, headrick, that’s what I have also advocated: let Seoul take the lead in dealing with the North, with Kim. I suggested that Trump could have welcomed Moon and made a statement, maybe even suggesting a Northeast Asia nuclear-free zone to include SE Russia, NE China, North Korea and all of Japan. Kim’s own father, I believe, had made moves in that direction (before he died) and probably Kim’s uncle, the one that Kim apparently murdered … maybe that’s why he was murdered. It all adds up to that Trump got overly emotional with Moon because he (Trump) was frustrated with Moon’s desire to still try to negotiate with Kim, when a simple literal reading of Kim’s demands showed that the DPRK had absolutely no intention of negotiating anything. Trump was basing his approach on the intelligence he had on the issue … but why not let Moon try something … without dragging Trump into it with him. Let it be reported that Trump told Moon, “You’re taking the lead: if you say nuke Pyongyang, we’ll nuke Pyongyang.” That would strengthen Moon’s bargaining position, while relieving Trump of the headache.

    • 回复: @Erebus
  108. peterAUS 说:
    @Anonymous

    True…true….

    I am wondering, though…….what if North Korea detonates those nukes into South Korea (invasion force staging areas….approach routes) or outside of own soil (invasion force sea-land approach routes, think Inchon type operation…or Okinawa, Normandy…you know)?

    Several mobile launchers. Think Scud with 20 KT warhead. Don’t get too technical, just an example.

    Just an idea……

    Could that be a feasible deterrent?

    Or, it IS still better to keep developing ICBMs with thermonuclear/megaton warhead(s)?
    You know, effort/feasibility, practicability…common sense…stuff like that?

  109. Beckow 说:
    @peterAUS

    You are right that leaders don’t like to risk a surprise attack. So they have a tendency to over-insure (most people in quiet, settled circumstances over-insure, because, well, what else is there to do?). This might be one of those cases where the circumstances lead us to a disaster. I hope not.

    I don’t “virtue signal”. Virtues , like charity, only make sense in a narrow sense, in one’s private life. But we need this planet for selfish reasons. Neo-cons are just the latest reincarnation of nutty, out-of-control busybodies obsessed with their own ideas and power. People like that have a cul-de-sac way of thinking. They tend to overdo it at the end and push things too far, go for that ultimate victory. Their thinking lacks boundaries. That makes them very dangerous. We are gain at one of those really dangerous moments in mankind’s history, we could absent-mindedly cause a catastrophe. In a way a smaller catastrophe (like N Korea) could help us avoid a much bigger one.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  110. Erebus 说:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I’ll bite, for no other reason than the “poor man’s nuclear Armageddon” seems entirely plausible to me.

    How did those Israeli nukes get “in place”?

    In a standard shipping container, door to door delivery. The B/L lists the contents as: “Said to contain machine parts as follows…”, then a list of Model numbers and brief description. A nuke mixed in with large steel machinery components would go unnoticed unless the authorities were looking for it specifically. Approx 40,000 20′ equivalent containers are imported daily into the US. The EU is similar. Only recently have the customs authorities started using such technologies such as X-rays, primarily looking for illegal migrants. No idea if X-rays would expose a well-shielded nuclear bomb, but containers are very rarely opened for inspection and most of those are cursory inspections at that. (That’s quite unlike China, btw, where every inbound container is opened and the goods checked against a Commercial Invoice and the B/L).

    How are the Israelis able to store and maintain nuclear weapons on foreign soil without them being discovered and disabled?

    How many Israeli owned/controlled companies are there in the West? (EG:) ZIM, an Israeli co. is one of the world’s largest logistics companies. (As an aside, they abruptly skipped on their lease at the WTC shortly before 9/11). How many such companies have warehouses or factories where a palletized crate could be stored indefinitely undisturbed? How many of those company’s owners/employees have a garage at home, or their friends’ homes? Or use a public warehouse? A very large number, I’d guess. Nukes aren’t very big any more and I’m not aware of any sort of random inspection program inspecting whses, factories and private garages for nuclear weaponry. The only way it would be found out is because an intelligence operation exposed it.

    Are all the nukes in the Israeli embassies?

    也许吧,但我对此表示怀疑。

    The one potential fly in the “nukes-in-place” soup is maintenance. I have little idea of what a maintenance program for a non-weaponized, “sleeping” nuke would look like. Would it have to be regular? How often? How extensive? Or could it be left alone and given a tune-up a few days before intended use? No idea. Certainly they’d need a lot less maintenance then the combination of a warhead and the ICBM that would carry it. If it was an IDF owned company, then regular maintenance by IDF nuclear personnel shouldn’t present a problem.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  111. @L.K

    As for the “offer” for “double suspension” — as I have argued elsewhere in this thread and what is totally obvious on the face of it, the “offer” is really nothing but a demand that the people of the Republic of Korea be abandoned to the depraved deprivations of Kim’s brainwashed Communist goons … and for what? For the sick satisfaction of a psychopathic billionaire dictator?

    As for the stuff about the Korean War destruction almost 2/3 of a century ago, it’s been said many times but never better than by General William Tecumseh Sherman:

    “It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.” ― William T. Sherman

    Now who is it today in Korea who wants “more vengeance, more desolation”.. is it the psychopathic Communist dictator of the North, Kim Jong-un, or is it the Republic of Korea’s democratically elected president Moon jae-in?

    South Korean President Moon Jae-in says the confrontation over North Korea’s nuclear program must “absolutely be solved peacefully” and the U.S. would need South Korea’s approval to take military action. Moon … said in a nationally televised address on Tuesday local time his government “will put everything on the line to prevent another war in the Korean Peninsula.”

    — from Washington Examiner, three days ago

  112. @hyperbola

    Something totally brilliant from ‘hyperbola’ —

    “The government’s interests have always been provincial. It seeks to appease lobbyists, shift public opinion at key stages of the political cycle, accommodate crazy Christian fantasies and pander to television companies run by eccentric billionaires. The US does not really have a foreign policy. It has a series of domestic policies which it projects beyond its borders.” — hyperbola

  113. @peterAUS

    这里可能有些人希望看到以色列遭到核武器袭击,但我怀疑这将是这里的大多数人。 我想说,大多数 Unz 读者和评论者希望看到以色列停止干涉美国事务,停止接受美国纳税人的任何援助,停止成为 ME 的主要交战方,尤其是在美国参与的程度上.

    • 同意: Zumbuddi
    • 回复: @dahoit
  114. Anonymous [AKA "klinik"] 说:
    @Tom Welsh

    the prospect of a war that could – and quite probably would – kill every human being in the worl

    d

    Don’t worry Tom. There is no chance of a nuclear war destroying every human being on earth. There have been 2000 plus atmospheric ground, sea and air bursts since 1945 and still human life expectancy (and population) is increasing. My guess, is that after a full exchange of all the nuclear weapons on earth…most of them targeted on cities and towns…there will be at least a quarter of a billion humans left after a period of mass starvation culls the approximately 4 billion survivors of the blasts.

    That’s still an awful lot of humans.

    往好的方面想!

  115. Erebus 说:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    Actually, lots has been going on between the Russian-Chinese tag team and the two Koreas. Westerners wouldn’t necessarily have heard much about it, but developments are afoot.

    西方企业媒体在很大程度上没有报道,在符拉迪沃斯托克发生的事情确实具有开创性。 莫斯科和首尔同意建立一个主要涉及平壤的三边贸易平台,以最终投资于整个朝鲜半岛与俄罗斯远东地区之间的连通性。
    The rest is at http://www.atimes.com/article/russia-china-plan-north-korea-stability-connectivity/

    According to reports, the N. Koreans didn’t participate in the meeting, but “aren’t against” the idea. Railways, ports, roads, and IT is how one draws the hermit kingdom out from its defensive shell. The US will have a hard time with this idea, so Moon will be under a lot of pressure to abandon these thoughts. Without the N. Korean bugaboo, the US has one less reason to be there, and they need all the reasons they can get. The Japanese have been eyeing this as well. They will not want to be left out.

    Do Putin or Lavrov ever sleep?

  116. KenH 说:

    The tests themselves are carefully scripted to guarantee success.

    And no doubt use that “success” to keep taxpayer money flowing for anti-ICBM defense systems.

    Even if the success rate is an honest 50% that means five ICBM’s will still reach their targets if say, Kim Jong Un fired ten at the west coast. Sacremento, LA and San Fransicko would go up in mushroom clouds. Governor Moonbeam would be no more, so there’s a silver lining to everything.

  117. @Cloak And Dagger

    that Israel wouldn’t go immediately from 0 to nuclear on first provocation, and incremental provocation may well be a viable way to observe their reaction

    And then, of course, there is another way to completely shut down all this Israeli boasting and Sampson options by merely positioning… wait… it has been done already (wink, wink) and the birdie brought some news on its tail that S-400 in Syria, which, accidentally, can easily cover all territory of Israel if need be, did receive and operate 40N6 with the range of 400 km and which can easily intercept ANY ICBM on its launch and accelerating phase. But, of course, coming of IOC of S-500 in 2019 can completely shut down any serious talk of “Sampson option” or any other Israel’s hair brain scheme to threaten the world. After all, who would have thought that one day in 2015 Israel will wake up and find some nasty Russkies right next to its border. And who said that S-500 will not appear there too;-) Now Israel faces another terrifying (for her) prospect of Russians slowly but surely restoring their Mediterranean 5th Operational Squadron (5th OPESK), so, naturally, Bibi is forced to communicate with Putin non-stop.

    Per alleged use of “tactical nukes” in Yemen–NO, this is not a tactical nuke. Not even close.

    • 回复: @iffen
  118. Bill 说:
    @peterAUS

    Having short range nuclear capability (to destroy invasion force) would seem more reasonable approach than threatening US mainland.

    Do you think the US should eliminate all of its long range nuclear weapons?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  119. iffen 说:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I think we could benefit from you being on our side, AM, if it wasn’t for that dual loyalty thing.

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
  120. @iffen

    for that dual loyalty thing.

    So, stating cold hard facts is now a sign of “dual loyalty”? Thank you, never knew that, now I know.

  121. @Cloak And Dagger

    If the US could keep their hooked nose out of it, South and North Korea would have resolved their differences long ago.

  122. @peterAUS

    Looks like PeterAUS and anonymous have decided to combine their talents to clutter-up the comment section with trivial crap no intelligent reader would bother reading. And Grandpa Charlie ain’t far behind.

    • 同意: utu, L.K, schmenz
  123. Talha 说:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    That could be large thermobaric ordinance though – they make similar mushroom clouds.

    May God help the people of Yemen.

    和平:

    • 回复: @Cloak And Dagger
    , @RobinG
  124. Talha 说:
    @Dingo jay

    Who has the edge.

    Those who live away from population centers. The Rednecks of the respective countries will replace us all.

    和平:

    • 同意: Andrei Martyanov
    • 回复: @iffen
  125. iffen 说:
    @Talha

    The Rednecks of the respective countries will replace us all.

    🙂

  126. @Brabantian

    Very creative and entertaining letter.

    I so wish what you were saying was true. But I have known men who worked on the Manhattan project and saw the first blast in New Mexico. They did not lie.

    Human beings had no business unlocking the destructive secrets at the center of the atom. Pandora’s box was opened and Prometheus stole fire when this secret was discovered.

    We are not Gods and our species does not have the moral sense to deal with such powerful discoveries.

    • 同意: Talha
    • 回复: @peterAUS
  127. peterAUS 说:
    @Beckow

    We are gain at one of those really dangerous moments in mankind’s history, we could absent-mindedly cause a catastrophe. In a way a smaller catastrophe (like N Korea) could help us avoid a much bigger one.

    完全是我的观点。

    I remember Pershing/SS20 period in Europe.
    Engaged public.
    Protests, for example.
    But, then, we didn’t have social media and smart phones.

    In this case………..pretty much nothing.
    Probably too busy with friends on Facebook.

    Doesn’t feel optimistic, but, then, hope dies last.

  128. @Grandpa Charlie

    No “false equivalencies ” at all, just your own hypocrisy. The US should not be holding any exercises in Asia. None. Nothing in Asia is any business of the US government or responsibility of the American tax payer.

    Yes, I am a liberal. Our Founding Fathers were liberals, the conservatives fought for the King. And looking at modern “conservatives” why would anyone want to be one of them? What have they conserved? Our borders? Nope. The Bill of Rights? No. The traditional American population and culture? No. Marriage? Nope. I know, surely “conservatives” have conserved the Ladies Room. No you “conservatives could not even keep men from using the bathroom with our daughters.

    You know what else I am Gramps? I am an American nationalist. I put the interests of the American people first. Nothing in Asia makes the cut.

    Now run along Gramps and ask your nurse for more prunes at supper time.

  129. peterAUS 说:
    @Bill

    Do you think the US should eliminate all of its long range nuclear weapons?

    当然。
    Russia first, naturally.
    Oh, wait ,China.
    Now, when we are on the topic UK as well. Israel too (now, they could be the problem in that chain of fantasy…I mean disarmament).
    France as well.
    And, India and Pakistan too.

    My proposal: all nuclear weapons should have a range of country border + blast radius. Something like that…..

    Now…..we still have chemical and biological weapons.
    Perhaps we should get rid of those too?

    Now, after my own bout of crude “virtue signalling” a question for 美味: How could we accomplish all that?
    Just post any idea.
    请。

    • 回复: @Bill
  130. @Carroll Price

    it is the perfect tactic to shut the comments section down 🙂 this has been charlie’s operating mode since his name first appear on this website 🙂 I seriously think he is a bot.

    • 同意: Hu Mi Yu
  131. peterAUS 说:
    @lavoisier

    Human beings had no business unlocking the destructive secrets at the center of the atom. Pandora’s box was opened and Prometheus stole fire when this secret was discovered.

    We are not Gods and our species does not have the moral sense to deal with such powerful discoveries.

    Older I get more of the same sentiment I feel.
    Experience or simply getting grumpy with age, still not sure, but leaning on the former, unfortunately.

  132. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @Carroll Price

    And yet I see you feel the need to pollute the thread with your own trivial crap.
    Good job, keep that hypocrisy thing going.

  133. Bill 说:
    @peterAUS

    当然。
    Russia first, naturally.

    Why shouldn’t the US go first and unilaterally?

    Now, after my own bout of crude “virtue signalling” a question for you: How could we accomplish all that?

    We can’t and shouldn’t try.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  134. @Talha

    Yeah no way to know from the videos without inspecting the site.

  135. peterAUS 说:
    @Bill

    Well…the topic is sort of important so I’ll bait.
    有点。

    Why shouldn’t the US go first and unilaterally?

    Why shouldn’t the Russia go first and unilaterally?

    How could we accomplish all that?

    We can’t and shouldn’t try.

    We should try.

    Meaningful exchange, don’t you think?

    • 回复: @Avery
  136. Avery 说:
    @peterAUS

    {Why shouldn’t the Russia go first and unilaterally?}

    几个原因:

    – US is the _only_ nuke power that has actually used nukes to kill (murder?) ~200,000 civilians. Plausible arguments can be made whether it was militarily necessary or not, but it is a fact that US is the only country that has used nukes to kill innocent civilians. Also note that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was on US military, not civilians. And so that there is no misunderstanding: Imperial Japan was a nasty, criminal entity, enslaving, killing, murdering millions during their conquests of Korea, China, Phillippins, etc., so I shed no tears for the ~2 million Japanese military deaths and IJ’s ultimate demise.

    – US is one of the few countries in the world that is pretty much immune from conventional attack and/or invasion. US has never faced an existential threat from foreign enemies or invaders.
    Russia has been invaded and occupied several times. The most recent by Nazi Germany came perilously close to exterminating most Slavic peoples, including the bulk of the USSR. So until US/NATO stop creeping closer and closer to Russia, and stop attempting to break it apart, RF giving up its nukes would be suicidal.

    If RF gives up its nukes, US/NATO will use nuke blackmail to cow RF into submission and be subject to dismemberment.

    • 同意: Cyrano, Carroll Price
    • 回复: @Cyrano
    , @peterAUS
  137. Cyrano 说:
    @Avery

    US will never give up their nuclear weapons. The reason why they invented them in the first place is because they can’t fight land battles.

    Russia and China can be (and are) superpowers without nuclear weapons, US is the only one that needs them in order to impersonate a “superpower”. I don’t care how good their navy and air-force are, most of the battles that mattered throughout the history were won on land.

    • 回复: @CalDre
  138. chris 说:
    @geokat62

    Geo, you are a bigger man than me; I couldn’t watch past 0:47s !

    • 哈哈: geokat62
  139. peterAUS 说:
    @Avery

    Well…thanks for chiming in, but, the purpose of that post of mine was just to point to…..waste of time…..with such “exchanges”.
    To be clear, I don’t much think, let alone speculate, about any military confrontation between US and Russia, save covert operations and plain errors. Errors because they can escalate.
    So, any conversation about “nuclear” stuff between those two just don’t interest me.

    Because you put some effort and the topic itself IS interesting, my reply:
    1. True but doesn’t mean much. I am positive if USSR had had a nuclear weapon they would’ve tossed in on Berlin before crossing into Germany in WW2.
    That thing abut “innocent civilians” I don’t buy for a nanosecond.
    Vae victis since Babylon.
    Dresden?
    无论如何…

    2 Agree

    But, that question of mine, again, was rhetorical.

    Nobody expects any current nuclear power to disarm. Not important here.

    What IS important is the possibility of a heavy conflict in/around Korean peninsula.

    My point is that Kim’s regime (and I mean him personally and probably less than 50 persons around him altogether) is, as idiot on drugs, pushing the region, and possibly the world too, into uncharted area.
    I place blame for this solely on that clique.
    To recap: threatening Hawaii with nuclear weapon is that irresponsible idiocy.
    Developing nuclear weapons for self defense (tactical, not strategic as the clique is apparently working on) is not.
    If he had kept developing tactical nukes only US would’ve talked a lot but not done much, IMHO.
    In this (“Hawaii case”) case US WILL act. From killing Kim to obliterating North Korea. And anything in between.
    恕我直言。
    就那么简单。

    As I already stated several times in this thread only.

    Now, for Rusophiles here:
    Imagine Georgia developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching Krasnodar. Wanting that Ossetia back. Wanting Russians out of it.
    How about Chinese lovers:
    Imagine Taiwan developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching Quanzhou. Demanding dismantling of all Chinese military capability in that region.
    Both Georgia and Taiwan with regimes similar to the current in Pyongyang.

    Looking forward for all the “reasoning” then.
    是的…..

    I suspect Kim started all this as almost a joke. An exercise in his dictatorial powers. Pure ego.
    And now the joke is taking life of its own.

  140. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Erebus

    Apparently, the fusion booster of Tritium and Deuterium that is injected into the center of the fissile material pit of a nuclear weapon allows a higher yield of fissile material by providing up to 40% of uranium or plutonium atoms to undergo fission. For a nuclear weapon, you can double the yield of the core mass without boosting.

    “One drawback to boosting is that tritium is very expensive to produce. However, boosting allows much less fissile material to be used, reducing the size and weight of the warhead, and fissile material is also very expensive. Tritium has a half life of 12.3 years so it decays 5.5% per year. This means the tritium reservoir in boosted weapons has to be replaced periodically to ensure the desired yield will be produced. ”

    So aging alone will reduce the yield of nuclear weapon. How that affects the reliability thermonuclear weapon insofar as it’s yield is concerned is concerned is an interesting question.

  141. RobinG 说:
    @Talha

    “May God help the people of Yemen.”

    Indeed. But we can also try to help. You’re Canadian, but spread the word:
    SUPPORT H.Con.Res.81 Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in the Republic of Yemen.
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-concurrent-resolution/81/all-info

    • 回复: @Talha
  142. CalDre 说:
    @The Alarmist

    1) 他们没有武装。

    什么? 你从哪里得到这些废话? 拥有非武装导弹防御系统有什么意义? 我可能对美军没有完全的信心,但我无法接受这种完全的愚蠢。

    2)他们在日本上空时在外层空间,所以从技术上讲并不侵犯日本领空。

    But it violates UN resolutions so perfectly “legal” to shoot them down (just like the US intercepts N. Korean vessels in international waters, bans international trade, and the like).

    3)如果我们错过了,世界有证据表明皇帝没有衣服。

    Bingo! (but change “If” to “when”)

    • 回复: @The Alarmist
  143. CalDre 说:
    @Cyrano

    Russia and China can be (and are) superpowers without nuclear weapons, US is the only one that needs them in order to impersonate a “superpower”.

    Remind me again, how long did it take US to take out the Iraqi army, then considered the fourth most powerful in the world? 40 days? With how many casualties? Almost none?

    Sure, in the end there was no clear victory because, despite all of its evils, the US was not willing to cause the amount of casualties that, say, Russia was willing to cause in Chechnya, where it killed 30% of the entire population, an act verging on, if not actually (depending on how you define the eradicated group) genocide. The US came nowhere close to wiping out 30% of Iraqis, though it easily could have.

    The problem is it’s virtually impossible to win a sustained war against a determined guerilla army without inflicting massive civilians casualties (again, Russia won in Chechnya, but at the cost of murdering 1/3rd of the entire population). Israel has also learned this lesson in its recent invasions of Gaza and Lebanon; Syria and Iraq in their battles against ISIS (and ISIS wasn’t even particularly popular among the locals).

    So do not confuse military strength with military scruples. Granted, the US’ military scruples are far from what benign, but also they are not as evil as they easily could be. In open confrontation with a “state” opponent (including Yugoslavia, Syria (on minor occasions), Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan) the US victory has been quick, overwhelming and decisive. Guerilla war, on the other hand, is a whole other beast.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Cyrano
  144. @Richard Raymond

    There is considerable debate about EMP and what it would take to knock out the grid. I am no expert…

    • 回复: @Richard Raymond
    , @Erebus
  145. Talha 说:
    @RobinG

    嘿RobinG,

    I’m actually American and live in the great state of Illinois. I will definitely forward this.

    Peace and thanks!

  146. Art 说:

    If I were a Korean I would be saying my prays. Trump has put a third carrier group on station near Korea. It looks like he is deadly serious about no ICBM’s with nukes on them for NKorea.

    Would it be wrong to go to war over a country having nukes and the ability to use them on a ICBM? Is it moral to kill a million people over their potential possibility to do harm to us?

    The likelihood that Kim would nuke America is ZERO. He knows the outcome would be a disaster for him.

    Should we go to war over the ZERO probability of a war against us?

    答案是不!

    思考和平-艺术

    p.s. I have a bad feeling about this – Trump is too sure of himself.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  147. @Chris Mallory

    Good to know. Strengthens the argument against nuking North Korea.

  148. peterAUS 说:
    @CalDre

    题外话:

    The problem is it’s virtually impossible to win a sustained war against a determined guerilla army without inflicting massive civilians casualties (again, Russia won in Chechnya, but at the cost of murdering 1/3rd of the entire population).

    Actually….it is possible, in certain scenarios.

    Ethnic cleansing/population exchange.
    Push enemy population out->put own/friendly population in.

    Americans can’t do it.
    The concept of “blood and soil” is alien to them.
    Or at least unacceptable.

    Some other peoples….especially some European types, at the other hand…..

  149. Art 说:
    @anarchyst

    Most people are unaware that Israel holds a “Damocles sword” over the world. Any attack (perceived or real) on Israel will be met with a nuclear device being detonated in a city of Israel’s choosing. Israel calls this the “Samson option” and is very real.

    Clearly Israel is the most dangerous country in the world. It openly threatens all of humanity with a nuke Armageddon. No other nation does this. Surely the Jews are the most unstable tribal state on the planet. They have been at war with their neighbors from day one of their existence. Their treatment of the Palestinians is inhuman.

    The entire world must peaceably put sanctions on Israel to eliminate all their weapons of mass destruction. (Nuke, chemical, biological, other.)

    This must happen NOW!

    That is a MUST step for the possibility of peace in the ME. Without the WMD threat, the Jews would have to settle on peaceable terms with their neighbors.

    思考和平-艺术

  150. peterAUS 说:
    @Art

    No need to over react.

    All Kim needs to do now is to invite international monitors on North Korean soil to ensure ICMB capability doesn’t exist.
    Or if it existed in roots it’s destroyed.

    简单。

    Russia/China broker the deal, Trump accepts it, no shooting starts, no ICMBs.
    Inspectors keep doing their job on “no ICMB” front, mixing with the population…..
    Free exchange of ideas, thoughts…information…..between local population and inspectors, of course.

    What’s not to like about it?

  151. Cyrano 说:
    @CalDre

    恐怖轰炸平民不是“战斗”,也不是“战争”,我的朋友。 你提到的所有美国“光荣”胜利的例子——叙利亚、伊拉克、利比亚、南斯拉夫,都是针对大多数平民的恐怖轰炸行动——而不是战争。

    伊拉克战争可能是个例外——它的开始——它是与正规军作战的,但你对伊拉克军队的评价被夸大了。 根据我的定义,任何国家要被认为拥有“伟大的军队”,基本要求之一是——该国必须生产所有武器。

    伊拉克没有制造他们使用的任何武器——他们也不知道如何正确使用它们——这里没有不尊重,阿拉伯人是勇敢的人,但勇敢是不够的。

    By my definition – countries that can be considered to have great armies based on the fact that they produce ALL of their weapons are: US, Russia. That’s it.

    欧洲人——法国、英国、德国和日本都有能力生产他们所有的武器,但没有这样做,因为他们是美国的附庸。 中国快到了。

    The Russians pissed me off few years ago when they tried to buy the Mistrals from the frogs. No great power ever buys someone else’s weapons.

    但是回到美国,即使他们所有的武器都是国产的,他们仍然觉得他们需要额外的类固醇(核武器)来击败日本,因为如果他们试图以常规方式入侵日本,他们的伤亡会太高。 (号泣)。

    如果你不能接受伤亡,那你就没有资格打仗和假装自己是“大国”,更不用说“超级大国”了。

    • 回复: @Talha
    , @Avery
    , @CalDre
  152. @Richard Raymond

    理查德·雷蒙德

    在相互确保愚蠢的非犹太人毁灭的教义下,任何事情都是可能的。
    (MADGD)

    感谢您提供引人入胜的链接!

    • 回复: @RobinG
    , @RobinG
  153. Back to the long neglected subject of Phil’s article. If the US had the capability of shooting down ballistic missiles fired by anyone, they would have already shot-down one of Kim’s missiles, reducing N. Korean’s over-hyped ability to nuke the US to zero.

  154. Erebus 说:
    @Philip Giraldi

    如果没有核 EMP 爆炸的费用、不可预测性和复杂性,整个美国电网可以用 30-50 RPG 永久拆除。 从本质上讲,只要在美国古代电网战略性选定的阻塞点对 30-50 个 LPT(大型电力变压器)进行驾车射击,就可以将整个事情搞砸。 它甚至可能不需要那么多。 我已经读过,根据时间和网格加载,只需 10-15 就可以了。

    由于 LPT 需要超过 1.5 年的时间来设计/建造,并且必须来自海外,因此它们将需要 2 年的时间来更换。 2 年无电将使该国大部分地区陷入混乱,因此国家电网可能永远无法恢复。 更不用说 100 艘 Fukashima 将依靠柴油发电机来无限期地保持冷却。

    非常混乱的业务。

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
    , @Poupon Marx
  155. Talha 说:
    @Cyrano

    非常有趣的指标和定义。 我大多同意。

    一件事…

    这里没有不尊重,阿拉伯人是勇敢的人,但勇敢是不够的

    当阿拉伯人相信他们为之奋斗的目标时,他们可以像钉子一样坚韧并且非常勇敢(支持萨达姆的愚蠢入侵并不是很鼓舞人心)。 否则,他们可以让每个人都在全球懦夫奥运会上获得第一名。

    没有大国会购买别人的武器。

    我认为这是一个公平的观点。

    和平:

  156. “但白宫侥幸逃脱的真正原因是历史性的,自 1916 年潘乔·维拉入侵以来,美国本土从未经历过战争的后果。”

    似乎每个国家的公众都会放纵战争的欲望,如果它保持不变的话。 当然,这助长了对德国战争的认可,直到战争结束。

    对豁免权和有罪不罚的看法结合起来造成了道德真空,这与“如果思想可以杀人”这句格言无异。 一个人不再像上帝,而是变成了魔鬼,随之而来的是所有的后果。

    • 同意: Andrei Martyanov
  157. “根据我的定义——基于生产所有武器这一事实可以被认为拥有强大军队的国家是:美国、俄罗斯。”

    MIC 法团主义者如此贪婪,以至于他们将采购部件外包给美国的金融和军事力量,以制造所谓的“美国制造”先进武器。

    你可以打赌,在更严重的差异爆发时,这些组件将不再可用,即使我们可以,我们也不知道如何在这里制造它们,这反映了精英们为我们和平时期的制造业选择的相同去工业化. 这就是美国对日本所做的,剥夺了它所需的军事必需品,在这种情况下,这就是导致太平洋战争的十年中的燃料。

  158. “导弹防御”甚至不是一个相关或值得花费时间和资源的主题。 在 ChewNighted 州的地面上爆炸的热核装置将被走私并重新组装,然后被驱动到有效载荷目标。 这将是华盛顿,又名沼泽、马达哈坦、西雅图、休斯顿、达拉斯等。地面核弹可以空运到一个高度,对所有类型的固态设备造成最大的 EMP 损害。

    由于残留辐射,在华尔街引爆的一种此类装置将导致曼哈顿下城人口减少,至少在许多年内。

    这甚至不包括“脏”炸弹。 对华尔街的影响也是一样的。 还有沼泽。

    要么我们有“坦克坦克”、将军、顾问和“专家”的彼得原则笨蛋,要么是叛徒和颠覆者。

    诸如此类的文章就像石油地质学家不断钻探石油,即使出现的只是咸水。 这太愚蠢了,甚至杜比亚布什也可能意识到这一点

  159. Avery 说:
    @Cyrano

    {几年前,当俄罗斯人试图从青蛙那里购买米斯特拉尔时,我很生气。}

    据我记得(公开信息……),俄罗斯军方对文职领导人强迫他们购买 2 艘法国西北风船不太满意:他们说这不适合俄罗斯的天气条件。 我读到的是,莫斯科想通过从法国购买军事装备来在法国和美国/北约之间挑拨离间。 当然,俄罗斯可以设计和建造类似 Mistral 的东西。 显然,一些设计局正在研究俄罗斯版本的 Mistral。
    此外,如果俄罗斯军队需要一架直升机攻击舰,为什么不买几艘设计非常好的外国版本,使用一段时间,了解它的优势/劣势,然后设计和建造自己的。

    向别人学习并不可耻。
    纳粹在他们的黑豹上复制了出色的 T-34:显然纳粹所谓的“大师赛”并不太自豪,不能向​​他们学习,你知道, 'Untermenschen'。
    如果我没记错的话,优秀的苏联/俄罗斯 RPG 系列是建立在德国铁拳之上的。

    {没有大国会购买别人的武器。}

    有时向他人学习然后改进会更具成本效益和更快。
    中国的大部分军事技术都是从苏联/俄罗斯的武器设计中复制而来的。

    美国和苏联之所以成为太空大国,是因为它们都采用了纳粹德国科学家开发的火箭设计。 事实上,V-2 成名的 Werner von Braun 设计了美国的土星 V。

    _________________
    *
    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/sorry-france-russia-build-powerful-mistral-style-assault-13250

    • 回复: @Cyrano
    , @Zumbuddi
  160. CalDre 说:
    @Cyrano

    恐怖轰炸平民不是“战斗”,也不是“战争”我的朋友

    当然,这些都是战争,即使目标主要是平民,但事实并非如此。 给我说一场没有平民受伤或死亡的战争? 或者也许在你的脑海中没有战争这回事,但为了交流,为了语言,使用其他人所做的相同含义实际上是有用的; 的确,这就是这件事的全部意义所在。

    国家必须生产所有武器

    如果你想包括整个供应链,那么没有一个国家满足这个“定义”。 甚至美国的航空母舰也使用台湾制造的电脑。 虽然我没有直接证据,但我怀疑俄罗斯也使用全球采购的 OEM 零件,更不用说他们可能使用从德国获得的精密加工工具。

    他们仍然觉得他们需要额外的类固醇(核武器)来击败日本

    双方的伤亡人数会更高。 但使用核武器的意义不同。 无论如何,只有傻瓜才能衡量一个国家的军事实力,它愿意无谓地屠杀多少人。 就像几乎任何其他努力一样,战争的全部意义在于以最小的伤亡和成本取胜。

    • 回复: @Cyrano
  161. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Erebus

    好吧,如果是这样的话,我会说有一个很大的未开发的强化 LPT 市场。 所需要的只是适当的广告。 硬化可以是混凝土屏障、卷起的铁丝网、重链……如果你真的想看起来很酷,你可以制作像用于 AFV 的贴花主动装甲块。 或者像豹子坦克一样的间隔装甲。

    我会注意到这已经发生在加利福尼亚人民共和国:

    “The Metcalf sniper attack was a “sophisticated” assault on Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Metcalf Transmission Substation located in Coyote, California, near the border of San Jose, on April 16, 2013, in which gunmen fired on 17 electrical transformers. The attack resulted in over \$15 million worth of damage.

    “在攻击之前,由 AT&T 运营的一系列光纤电信电缆被肇事者切断。 此外,在袭击发生后,调查人员在枪击地点附近发现了一小堆岩石,这些岩层可用于侦察射击位置。

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalf_sniper_attack

    以色列人已经注意到配电的脆弱性; Sargent & Lundy 的任务是设计配电塔,如果其中一条腿在几十年前被阿拉伯人炸断,配电塔将保持站立状态。

    • 回复: @Erebus
  162. Cyrano 说:
    @CalDre

    无论如何,只有傻瓜才能衡量一个国家的军事实力,它愿意无谓地屠杀多少人。 就像几乎任何其他努力一样,战争的全部意义在于以最小的伤亡和成本取胜。

    那么,我想,恭喜你。 美国是历史上最崇高的战斗力量(NOT)。 原谅我的天真。

    • 回复: @CalDre
  163. 致艺术与激进中心:特朗普对朝鲜对日本和韩国的威胁非常认真,更不用说美国了。 中国和俄罗斯必须对朝鲜讲道理,否则就没有朝鲜。

  164. Cyrano 说:
    @Avery

    如果我被一群流浪狗袭击,而一个法国人恰好在附近,提议卖给我一根棍子来保护自己——我不会买它,我宁愿被撕成碎片也不愿从法国人那里买武器。

    法国人是背叛者。 在福克兰战争期间,他们向阿根廷出售了反舰导弹,然后告诉英国人如何打败那些法国制造的反舰导弹。 这有多烂? 这是阿根廷输掉福克兰战争的最大原因之一。

    我很高兴 Mistral 的交易失败了。 制造你自己的武器的全部意义在于了解它们最复杂的细节,所以当你使用它们对付可能是这些武器的制造商或关系更好的人时,你不会有任何令人讨厌的惊喜。那么你的国家是制造商。 俄罗斯人应该比试图从法国人那里购买武器更清楚。

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1387576/How-France-helped-us-win-Falklands-war-by-John-Nott.html

  165. Zumbuddi 说:
    @Avery

    以色列使用武器销售——对朋友和敌人,尤其是敌人——作为对客户施加影响和控制的一种手段。 也意味着将以色列的眼睛插入客户的内部运作。

  166. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    今晚公共图书馆的更多宝藏:安杰伊·瓦伊达(Andrzej Wajda)的《Katyń》,他的父亲在那里去世。 你知道这是一场谈判,德国人俘虏了士兵,苏联人俘虏了军官吗? 此外,许多俄罗斯人也在那里被杀。

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/may/02/1

    • 回复: @Rurik
  167. Erebus 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    好吧,如果是这样的话,我会说有一个很大的未开发的强化 LPT 市场。 所需要的只是适当的广告。

    有这种情况发生的迹象吗?

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  168. edNels 说:
    @Brabantian

    好吧,感谢您勇敢地提出这样一个罕见或激进的概念。 信不信由你,我也有过这样的想法,但只是顺便说一句,就像一个声音舞台上的登月恶搞之类的东西。

    但是,如果考虑到曾经说过:“谎言越大,越会相信它。” 那么,为什么不建造和建立一个非常大的呢? 首先,所有这些都是在曼哈顿计划的最(巨大)最高机密中开发的,我们所知道的一切都来自于泄露的家庭手工业,以及充当公地调解者或一些狗屎的说话头特权专业人士几十年,以及核物理学的奥秘性,它限制了很多人对这一切的判断。

    所以,如果这些天才如此真实,他们为什么不做一个曼哈顿项目,把那该死的深岛灾难放回瓶子里,是不是因为它真的不是它应该的样子? 如果它毒化了大海,那么它就足够重要了

    他们两方面都想要:“你既害怕又无知,他们威胁要轰炸一切,让地球在加齐利亚半年内被遗忘和毒害,他们表现得好像他们有更好的事情要做。 中国综合症必须被夸大了。

    不过说真的,哪怕只是个大大的谎言,也值得关注!!! 我认为辐射部分是真实的,但炸弹部分,也许可以用成吨的……TNT来完成,真的!

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  169. CalDre 说:
    @Cyrano

    战争并不高尚,从来没有; 这是关于杀死那些对你没有任何帮助的人。 我什至没有指出美国是最崇高的战斗力量,就像任何其他努力一样,参与战争的人们寻求好的结果。 这意味着,最小的伤亡和成本(除了 MIC 腐败,它会扭曲成本部分)。

    美国发动战争的问题不在于他们不光彩(尽管肯定有那部分),而在于美国同时参与了本身不公正的战争。 战争是可怕的,只有在绝对必要的情况下才应该进行,而美国远远没有达到这个标准。 (但所有“大国”也是如此——参与可选战争的能力也许是“大国”的定义,当然法国、俄罗斯、英国在过去几十年都参与了这种可选战争)。

  170. Joe Wong 说:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    美国总统和国会由美国人选举产生,是美国人民的意愿。 如果 POTUS 和国会是邪恶的,在没有公众对他们不满的情况下,你不能单独责备他们。

  171. @edNels

    埃德内斯,

    对于我们所经历的所有 Zio 剧院,对所有人保持开放的态度是明智的。

    随后,我添加了下面链接的关于秘密温压核武器主题的文章。

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/25/suppressedclassified-americas-secret-thermobaric-nukes/

    我感谢你和 Brabanyian!

  172. @Joe Wong

    公众对他们有极大的不满,但不幸的是,我们占主导地位的两党制意味着选民几乎从来没有真正的改变选择。 特朗普提出了改变,就像他之前的奥巴马和布什一样,但这只是对无休止的战争和有利于当权者的腐败制度的相同公式的一种变体。

  173. Joe Wong 说:
    @Dingo jay

    很遗憾地通知您,您是约翰麦凯恩的顽固支持者的样本,偏执,无知和好战,他们在华盛顿环城公路上被有毒的战争贩子从摇篮到坟墓洗脑,并以过度的国旗敬礼强化。

    朝鲜不会先发动战争,它只是抗议美国和SK对它的侵略。 美国人是侵略者,而美国人最有可能触发 Amaggardon。

  174. @CalDre

    我的意思是诺克火箭没有武装。

  175. Joe Wong 说:
    @Chris Mallory

    美国人似乎已经在模糊不清的情况下逃脱轰炸、杀戮和水刑太久了,他们成为了自己宣传的受害者,他们确实购买了自己的假新闻。

    或许朝鲜可以解释说,他们的核弹头被风吹离了航线并落在了美国。

  176. Rurik 说:
    @RobinG

    此外,许多俄罗斯人也在那里被杀。

    嗨罗宾,

    我记得很久以前写过在卡廷发号施令的不是“俄罗斯人”

    数以百万计的俄罗斯人与恶魔作战,数千人因此在雅尔塔被“龙骨牵引”

    我很高兴这部电影制作完成

    从链接:

    苏联士兵和纳粹是恶棍。 中间有一点灰色地带。

    嗯,这是 苏联 他们围捕了诗人、神父、学者、作家、教授和军官,把他们站在沟边扣动扳机——驱赶推土机,以及刚刚发现罪行的纳粹分子(最终应该为此受到指责)背信弃义的盟友),所以至少在卡廷恶棍的背景下,他们实际上 做到了——不应该是这样一个灰色地带。

    从链接:

    瓦伊达过去曾抱怨说,波兰的年轻一代对该国的历史兴趣不大。

    因为他们被告知的只是谎言!

    无情的,无情的,无情的议程驱动的谎言

    他们厌倦了是可以理解的

    罗宾:

    你知道吗,这是一场谈判,德国人俘虏了士兵,而苏联人俘虏了军官

    你是在暗示纳粹在卡廷与苏联合作?!

    我以前从未听说过

    无论如何,谢谢你的链接罗宾..

    • 同意: ChuckOrloski
  177. Hu Mi Yu 说:
    @Joe Wong

    如果 POTUS 和国会是邪恶的,在没有公众对他们不满的情况下,你不能单独责备他们。

    你住在另一个星球上吗? 有很多明显的不满。 听说过antifa吗?

    然后是这样的: http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/eligible-voter-turnout-for-2016-data-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-republican-democrat-popular-vote-registered-results/

    选举项目指出,有 251,107,404 人被归类为投票年龄人口的成员,因此投票年龄人口中有 115,449,897 人(或 46.3%)没有投票。

    选举项目的最新更新显示,有 136,489,372 名选民投票支持最高职位。 这意味着 2,395,271 人没有投票给总统,即使他们确实投票了。

    克林顿获得了 65.84 万张选票,占总票数的 48.1%。 特朗普获得了 62.97 万张选票,即 46.0%。

    因此,两位候选人都没有从投票年龄人口中获得高达 30% 的支持。 如果“以上都不是”在选票上,他很可能会赢。

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
    , @ChuckOrloski
  178. RobinG 说:

    所以留里克,

    澄清一下,评论家和我都没有暗示纳粹/德国人对卡廷负有责任。

    评论家说纳粹犯下了他们自己令人发指的罪行,因此几乎没有资格对卡廷进行宣传。

    我指的是电影的开场,我认为这是准确的,被击败的波兰军队被苏联人和德国人隔开——他们还没有相互交战,而是从相反的方向瓜分他们入侵的战利品。之间的波兰人。

  179. @Erebus

    正如这里其他地方所提到的,开车进入当地的降压变电站比使用叉子切苹果派皮更容易。 由于有数以万计的伊斯兰恐怖分子居住在阿穆尔卡(现在不一定是伊斯兰恐惧症),同时轰炸和大口径子弹(例如 50 卡)喷射到最大单位的呼吁将耗资数十亿美元,引起广泛的恐慌和混乱,并可能导致大部分阿穆尔干人弯下腰,匍匐在地,并说“求你了,别再说了,我会做你要求的任何事”。 “Doan没有打我”。

  180. @Hu Mi Yu

    胡,

    (叹)

    你的评论让我很期待在亚洲出差的 The Maven Sam Shama 的回归。

    (叹)

    在 The Maven Sham 成功返回 UR 评论部分后,读者将被他的 Thomas L. Friedman 式的债务和高利贷魔术所欺骗和对待。

    Selah 我们撒谎 我们欺骗 我们诈骗 我们偷窃 我们轰炸你 我们闯入 Antifa 我们在新加坡大放异彩。

  181. @Hu Mi Yu

    胡,

    (叹)

    你的评论让我很期待在亚洲出差的 The Maven Sam Shama 的回归。

    (叹)

    在 The Maven Sham 成功返回 UR 评论部分后,读者将被他的 Thomas L. Friedman 式的债务和高利贷魔术所欺骗和对待。

    Selah 我们撒谎 我们欺骗 我们诈骗 我们偷窃 我们轰炸你 我们闯入 Antifa 我们在曼谷大放异彩!

  182. @Joe Wong

    在 Tweedledum 和 Tweedledee 作为非民主国家受控选举过程中唯一提供的选项之间进行选择时,我们只能投票给“感知到的”较小的邪恶,或者根本不投票。 无论哪种方式,我们都被强加给我们的人所困。

    没有公众对他们不满

    你怎么算?

    • 回复: @Joe Wong
  183. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    你知道,查克迈斯特,在同意鲁里克的意见时要谨慎,因为鲁里克似乎太容易误入歧途。 第一,误读清晰的文字。 然后,不是俄罗斯的命令? 好吧,斯大林是格鲁吉亚人。 但他不是犹太人。 创建自己的谎言无助于打击历史谎言。

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
    , @iffen
  184. schmenz 说:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    爷爷,我担心马洛里先生在这个论点上更胜一筹。

  185. @RobinG

    罗宾·G,

    呃,对不起,“创造我自己的”什么?

    我知道 Vodzh 是格鲁吉亚人,从东正教神学院辍学。

    • 回复: @RobinG
    , @RobinG
    , @RobinG
  186. iffen 说:
    @RobinG

    这是什么,黑暗面的混乱和分歧?

    日耳曼星球上的气候变化?

    注意执法者地理:

    清理过道 “如果你责怪 dem 犹太人,那就错不了。”

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  187. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    应该是“创造 他的 own” [R.] 或“one's own”——避免因使用代词“you”或“your”而造成的进一步误解。 这是一个普遍性。

  188. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    但我可以补充一下,你同意他关于犹太人命令卡廷的说法。 那么,你的证据是什么?

  189. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    “创造我自己的”

    “你自己的”是一般意义上的,就像“自己的”一样(或者可能是“他自己的”)。

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  190. @RobinG

    看,罗宾G,

    我的祖先来自波兰,煤矿工人。

    关于谁对卡廷大屠杀负责,有很多历史争论。

    鉴于支持约瑟夫斯大林将中欧和西欧从资本主义中解放出来的目标的犹太人占主导地位,我倾向于对红军实施卡廷大屠杀并将这一行为归咎于德国人的想法持非常开放的态度。

    对我来说,这很可能是布尔什维克派生的假旗杀戮。

    如果这让我成为留里克的傻瓜,那就这样吧。 (叹气)我更倾向于知道谁真的做了 9/11。 提示:这不是伊斯兰法西斯!

    Selah Suvorov 和罪魁祸首应该成为 DVD 纪录片。

    • 回复: @RobinG
    , @CalDre
  191. @iffen

    嘿,小伊芬-伊芬

    这是 1941 年基辅的“Babi Yar”诗,让你的小脑袋花上几分钟。

    http://remember.org/witness/babiyar

    塞拉 WTF? 我为什么要打扰?

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
  192. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Erebus

    我认为主要的障碍是州公用事业委员会; 您将如何提高潜在恐怖袭击的利率? 消费者群体当然会抱怨为理论问题支付更多费用。 国土安全部会为这部分或全部提供资金吗?

  193. @ChuckOrloski

    这是 1941 年基辅的“Babi Yar”诗,占据你的小脑袋几分钟

    它必须用俄语阅读,就像一首关于小女孩和党卫军警卫的诗一样——一种真正强大的体验。 话虽如此:本杰明·奥科普尼克(Benjamin Okopnik)介绍叶夫图申科(Evtushenko)的诗的借口充满了狗屎和超出一切原因的典型夸张,尤其是:

    政府拒绝为在那里被纳粹军队处决的数千名犹太人竖立纪念碑的不公正行为在俄罗斯产生了巨大的影响。

    不,它没有,因为在任何这样的大屠杀犹太受害者纪念碑被竖立之前,数以百万计的特别是斯拉夫“untermensch”的纪念碑必须出现。 你刚刚完美地展示了犹太人自己如何通过假装他们是唯一的“特殊”群体来继续诋毁大屠杀的悲剧和创伤,但是,如果记忆没有让我失望,而且它没有让数百万斯拉夫人失望被枪杀、饿死、在集中营中灭绝,被当作奴隶运送到第三帝国,如果曾经在俄罗斯,除非在一些虚假的知识分子“自由主义圈子”(极少数)中,否则试图兜售这种“巨大的影响”在那场战争中失去了几代男女的俄罗斯人或白俄罗斯人或乌克兰人。 充其量他们会当着你的面笑。 所以,不——没有“巨大的影响”,因为在苏联时期,除了以色列和犹太复国主义的问题,苏联对卫国战争的看法很简单——它触动了所有人。 更不用说数十万苏联犹太人在红军中战斗并与他们的俄罗斯、白俄罗斯、哈萨克、阿塞拜疆、楚瓦什、亚美尼亚等同志一起死去。他们不是大屠杀的受害者——他们是战士,其中许多人参加了战斗勇敢地。 其中有 XNUMX 万。

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/05/05/soviet-jewish-wwii-veterans-say-israelis-dont-know-about-their-time-in-red-army.html

    对于今天的许多美国犹太人来说,大屠杀只是商业和极好的鞭子,可以将真正的战争无知的美国民众鞭打成适当的意识形态形式,这是我的内疚手段。 和这个 Okopnik-fella 一样。 此外,第二次世界大战与犹太人和大屠杀无关,因为美国犹太人试图说服许多易受影响(且受过良好教育)的美国人。

  194. iffen 说:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    从Wiki:

    ... 总的来说,苏联 92.7% 的战时铁路设备生产是根据租借协议提供的,[24] 包括 1,911 辆机车和 11,225 辆轨道车[27],这增加了现有的战前至少 20,000 辆机车和半辆百万辆轨道车。[28]

    此外,苏联军队的后勤支持由数十万辆美国制造的卡车提供。 事实上,到 1945 年,红军近三分之一的卡车是美国制造的。 卡车,如 Dodge ¾ 吨和 Studebaker 2½ 吨……

    根据俄罗斯历史学家鲍里斯·瓦迪莫维奇·索科洛夫的说法,租借协议在赢得战争中发挥了关键作用:

    总的来说,可以得出以下结论:如果没有租借条件下的这些西方货物,苏联不仅无法赢得伟大的卫国战争,甚至无法抵抗德国侵略者,因为它本身无法生产足够数量的武器和军事装备或足够的燃料和弹药供应。 苏联当局很清楚这种对租借协议的依赖。 因此,斯大林告诉哈里·霍普金斯[罗斯福在 1941 年 24 月前往莫斯科的使者],苏联无法与德国作为欧洲及其资源的占领者相匹敌。 [XNUMX]

    撕毁那份租约,你的窥视者已经赚到了。

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
  195. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    “有很多历史上的来回……”现在没有了。

    很高兴你“对这个想法持开放态度”,因为俄罗斯人在 1990 年代就承认了这一点。 是的,布尔什人使用德国武器和弹药来牵连希特勒。 但是红军和内务人民委员部之间有很大的不同,就像国防军和党卫军之间一样。

    维基说,“卡廷大屠杀……是 1940 年 XNUMX 月和 XNUMX 月,内务人民委员部(“内务人民委员部”……)对波兰国民进行的一系列大规模处决。虽然杀戮发生在几个不同的地点,但大屠杀以卡廷森林命名,其中一些万人坑首先被发现。

    屠杀是由 NKVD 负责人拉夫伦蒂·贝利亚的 [格鲁吉亚东正教,不是犹太人] 5 年 1940 月 8,000 日处决波兰军官团所有俘虏的提议,得到苏联共产党政治局的批准,包括其领导人约瑟夫·斯大林。 …… 在遇难者中,约有 1939 人是在 6,000 年苏联入侵波兰期间被监禁的军官,另有 XNUMX 人是警察,其余的是波兰知识分子,苏联认为他们是“情报人员、宪兵、地主、破坏者、工厂老板、律师、官员和牧师。”

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
    , @utu
    , @Anon
  196. geokat62 说:

    注意执法者地理:

    清理过道 “如果你责怪 dem 犹太人,那就错不了。”

    告诉你什么,我一定会清理这条过道上的溢出物,只要你对过道上的溢出物做同样的事情“你有时可以愚弄一些人,但你可以愚弄 The Dumb Goyim all the时间。” 好?

  197. @iffen

    鲍里斯·瓦迪莫维奇·索科洛夫

    哈哈。 是的,我即将写一篇关于如何通过喉咙切除结肠息肉的作品。 那么为何不? 如果索科洛夫是军事历史学家,那我肯定是一名医生。 我也会向你建议——从巴顿日记等来源阅读更多关于二战的信息,使用新保守主义文学,玛莎·格森也会有所帮助。 一般来说,继续生活在 BS 泡沫中。

    • 回复: @iffen
  198. @Andrei Martyanov

    非常感谢您对奥科普尼克对叶夫图申科最著名的诗安德烈的欺骗性介绍的有根据的回应。

    真诚地,当我提到“Babi Yar”时,我认为(WW 2 专家)SolontoCroesus 可能在这里插话,遗憾的是我忘记了你的声音。

    最后,我承认对这首诗发表评论只是为了激怒 nincompoop “Little iffen-iffen” 跑到维基百科并试图让他愚蠢的非犹太人屁股摆脱他游说的头脑。

    • 回复: @geokat62
  199. @RobinG

    嘿RobinG,

    非常感谢基于 Wiki 的信息!

    太糟糕了,Maven Shama 因“生意”而离开,否则,他会通过链接 Yad Vashem 的最终判断向我们展示穿过 Katyn Forest 的道路。

    谢谢你,我现在回到文章 MAD 主题,明天早上开校车!

  200. MarkinLA 说:
    @utu

    根据我的阅读,美国掌握了有关苏联在北约的资产(来自一名叛逃者)的信息,这些资产是在《星球大战》进入高潮时卷起来的。 俄罗斯科学家并不认为像 X 射线激光器这样的骗局是可行的,但苏联是盲目的,因为他们在这些领域附近工作的资产已经消失了。 他们不知道所有来自美国的炒作是垃圾还是真的有突破。 这有助于将戈尔巴乔夫推向更屈从的讨价还价地位。

    • 回复: @utu
  201. CalDre 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    “这很可能是布尔什维克派生的假旗杀戮”

    毫无疑问,这是斯大林下令进行的大屠杀,但在这种情况下,责怪犹太人是不公平的。 回想一下,是斯大林“背叛了革命”(根据托洛茨基主义者和大多数犹太人的说法),他从党内清除了犹太人严重不成比例的影响。 斯大林和贝利亚都是(东正教)希腊人。

    OTOH 斯大林并没有清洗所有犹太人,例如,犹太人拉扎尔·卡加诺维奇(Jew Lazar Kaganovich)对“大饥荒”负责。

  202. anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    此外,第二次世界大战与犹太人和大屠杀无关,因为美国犹太人试图说服许多易受影响(且受过良好教育)的美国人。

    这是关于什么的?

    • 回复: @Avery
  203. utu 说:
    @RobinG

    内务人民委员部的波兰行动

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Operation_of_the_NKVDhe 1937-1938 年苏联内务人民委员会安全部门的波兰行动是内务人民委员会在大清洗期间针对据称在苏联的波兰特工开展的大规模行动。 政治局下令打击所谓的“波兰间谍”,内务人民委员会官员通常将其解释为与“绝对所有波兰人”有关。 它导致 139,835 人被判刑,111,091 名波兰人[3][4] 以及被指控为波兰工作的人被即决处决。[5] 该操作是根据由 Nikolai Yezhov 签署的 NKVD 命令№ 00485 实施的。[6] 根据蒂莫西·斯奈德 (Timothy Snyder) 的说法,大多数受害者是波兰人,但并非全部。 [7] 其余的人被“怀疑”为波兰人,没有进一步调查。 [6] 为了加快这一进程,内务人民委员部人员审查了当地电话簿并逮捕了名字听起来像波兰语的人。

    很明显,在卡廷三年前,苏联就有强烈的敌意要杀死波兰人。

    显然,在 1939 年占领波兰之后,NKVD 和盖世太保之间进行了一些协调。

    在波兰举行了盖世太保-内务人民委员部会议。

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo–NKVD_conferences
    下一系列会议于 1939 年 6 月开始,即波兰战俘首次转移一个月后。 会议于 7 年 1939 月 100 日至 8 日在被占领的克拉科夫举行。 并于 9 年 1939 月 XNUMX 日至 XNUMX 日在波兰南部塔特拉山脉(距克拉科夫 XNUMX 公里)的度假小镇扎科帕内持续了两天。扎科帕内会议是最令人难忘的。 苏联方面,内务人民委员会秘密警察的几名高级官员参加了会议,而德国东道主则提供了盖世太保的一组专家

    这是最著名的,发生在扎科帕内,[14] 开始于 20 年 1940 月 4 日[XNUMX] 在别墅“Pan Tadeusz”,位于靠近 Dolina Białego 山谷的 Droga do Białego 街。 德国方面的代表是阿道夫·艾希曼(Adolf Eichmann)和一位名叫齐默尔曼(Zimmermann)的官员,后者后来成为总督辖区拉多姆区的负责人。 苏联代表团由 格里戈里·利特维诺夫(Grigoriy Litvinov)与科雷马金矿厂长丽塔·齐默尔曼(Rita Zimmerman)等人.

    这是红军和国防军 1939 年在波兰举行的胜利阅兵式
    Парад на Вермахта и Червената армия Полша
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0-a3JgB_Q8
    德国人做了 AB-Aktion:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_AB-Aktion_in_Poland
    对波兰领导人、政治家、艺术家、贵族、知识分子和涉嫌潜在反纳粹活动的人的大规模谋杀始于 1939 年秋天,[1] 纳粹德国将其视为保留波兰人的先发制人的措施。抵抗分散并防止波兰人在计划中的德国入侵法国期间起义。 [5] 反波兰 AB-Aktion 由总政府指挥官汉斯·弗兰克准备。 在一系列秘密会议期间,它还与苏联官员进行了讨论。 盖世太保-内务人民委员部会议.

    1940年春夏,30,000万多名波兰人在德占波兰中部被纳粹当局逮捕。 [2] 随后,包括社区领袖、教授、教师和神父(被标记为涉嫌犯罪活动)在内的大约 7,000 人在包括帕尔米里附近的帕尔米里森林综合体在内的不同地点被秘密屠杀。 [3][4] 其他人被送往德国集中营。

    德国人有没有可能知道卡廷并以某种方式参与其中? 我对此表示怀疑。 如果他们知道,为什么要等到 1943 年才发现坟墓? 他们提供后勤支持吗? 据说卡廷使用的弹药是德国的? 我不认为这意味着什么。 22,000 年春天,卡廷和其他波兰战俘、警察和知识分子被杀(大约 1940 人)的地点位于苏维埃的苏联领土上。 该命令是在莫斯科发布的。 苏联负全部责任。 有犹太人的角度吗? 苏联所做的一切都有犹太人的角度。 他们是否因为是俄罗斯人、犹太人或共产主义者而憎恨和害怕波兰人? 它是三者的结合。

    在法国被德国击败后,当苏吞并波罗的海国家时,苏接管了被拘留在波罗的海国家的波兰战俘。 这些战俘不是被苏联人杀死的。 为什么? 或许斯大林在法国战败后不再将波兰人视为威胁。 不再是法国并与她的波兰结盟可以惩罚 SU 成为盯着二战的罪魁祸首。

    • 回复: @Miro23
  204. iffen 说:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    您为什么不尝试纠正他在 Wiki 中所说的内容。 或者是什么阻止了你?

  205. geokat62 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    ......只是为了激起 nincompoop “Little iffen-iffen” 跑到维基百科并试图让他的愚蠢的非犹太人屁股摆脱他的游说头。

    我喜欢这样,查克。 我希望你不介意我稍微修改一下:

    试图让他愚蠢的非犹太人屁股离开他的 游说化 头。

    • 回复: @iffen
    , @ChuckOrloski
  206. MarkinLA 说:
    @Peter Lund

    许多老式军用计算机非常原始,因为它们必须在构造中使用军用规格组件。 这些机器没有内置浮点,因此所有算术都使用缩放整数。 与今天相比,寄存器的大小也不大。

    这真的不是一个错误,它是具有低精度数字的结果(只有 2**总共 24 个可能的表示值)并且没有实际的浮点限制可以使用的算法。

    当我在 Burroughs 工作后于 82 年第一次在 Hughes 找到工作时,我惊讶于导弹和飞机驾驶舱系统中的计算机看起来多么落后。

  207. peterAUS 说:

    “朝鲜”情景中的真正问题是“政权到底有多稳定?”。

    当然,我不知道这个问题,相当肯定的是,朝鲜以外的人也不知道,而且,这是一个想法,不太确定那里的政权也知道这一点。

    我相信那里的现实与政权的思想之间存在脱节。

    真的,这一切都归结为那里的人们真的愿意为政权牺牲自己。
    由于他们的种族、特定历史以及最重要的政权特点,真的很难知道。
    他们会拉塞班岛/冲绳岛……还是在第一弹爆炸时分崩离析?

    现在……看看苏联解体以来的例子,不知何故, 疑似,它们会快速折叠。
    这就是该政权追求核能力的主要原因。 它给了政权一个很好的机会来反对“政权更迭”。 或者,实际上,它需要大约 10 000 人在政权方面,最高层,才能使其正常运行。 不多。 任何政权都可以拥有这种级别的忠诚者。

    我怀疑,另一种威慑根本不再起作用。
    那种集结的火炮,我只是不认为它像宣传的那样有效。
    对于那里的其他军队来说更是如此。

    所以……实际上…………。
    对关键政权点进行快速、激烈的空袭。 经典的,不是核的(包括 Daisy Cutters)。 如果最高领导层被推翻,它可能会瓦解政权。

    这就是航空公司的用途,在韩国和日本都有飞机。

    而且,现在最重要的事情。

    特朗普是批准这种行动的人。
    想一想。

  208. Avery 说:
    @anon

    {这是关于什么的?}

    生存空间:

    这样所有的斯拉夫民族( 下人) 乌拉尔以西可能会被灭绝,因此被剥夺土著人口的肥沃土地可能会被所谓的日耳曼“大师种族”殖民。

    • 同意: Miro23
    • 回复: @anon
  209. geokat62 说:

    您为什么不尝试纠正他在 Wiki 中所说的内容。 或者是什么阻止了你?

    也许这可能会阻止他:

    相机,在维基百科上改写历史

    一个亲以色列的压力集团正在策划一场秘密的长期运动,以渗透流行的在线百科全书维基百科,以改写巴勒斯坦的历史,将粗俗的宣传当作事实,并接管维基百科的行政结构,以确保这些变化要么未被发现,要么不受挑战。

    亲以色列团体 CAMERA(美国中东报道准确性委员会)的成员和同事向电子起义 (EI) 提供的一系列电子邮件表明,该团体正在参与一位激进分子所说的“战争”在维基百科上。

    https://electronicintifada.net/content/ei-exclusive-pro-israel-groups-plan-rewrite-history-wikipedia/7472

    除了改写巴勒斯坦历史之外,也许这些人热衷于确保邪恶的纳粹分子被视为卡廷大屠杀的罪魁祸首?

    或者,正如你所说,“如果你责怪纳粹,那就不会错了。”

    • 同意: ChuckOrloski
    • 回复: @RobinG
  210. iffen 说:
    @geokat62

    说到愚蠢的 goyim,你在我在 #402 中提出的那个极其复杂的问题上有什么进展吗?

  211. 虽然金看起来很古怪,但他的动机可能是理性的。 金说,我们打算改变朝鲜政权,这是非常合理的,因为朝鲜是一个邪恶轴心国,可以向伊朗提供威胁以色列的武器。 正如约翰·米尔斯海默(John Mearsheimer)和其他人似是而非地论证的那样,核武器本质上是防御性工具。 我们不希望伊朗拥有核武器,不是因为我们担心他们会用它们来攻击以色列,而是因为我们担心它们会充分阻止美国或以色列的攻击。

  212. @Andrei Martyanov

    优秀的点。 另外,我记得我们有这样的歌曲:

    这还不够吗? 它覆盖了所有人。

  213. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @RobinG

    贝利亚是否是犹太人似乎未知。 一个人可能在成长过程中是希腊东正教徒,在种族上可能是犹太人,在职业上可能是无神论者。 有人告诉我,“Lavarente”可能是“Lev”或“Levi”的变体。

    • 回复: @RobinG
  214. @geokat62

    嘿geokat62,

    我非常喜欢“游说”!

    该诊断描述甚至可以在 UR 之外广泛使用
    评论部分。

    恭喜……也许纳撒尼尔弟兄会接受你的聪明改编并将其用于真实的犹太新闻?

    • 回复: @RobinG
  215. RobinG 说:
    @geokat62

    等你,吉欧? 这个线程已经散发出无所事事的猜测和斧头研磨的味道。 请不要添加假新闻。 维基百科绝不会在卡廷中暗示纳粹或德国人。 为什么会有人需要? 纳粹正在其他地方对波兰精英进行屠杀。

    • 回复: @geokat62
    , @iffen
  216. anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Avery

    生存空间:
    因此,乌拉尔以西的所有斯拉夫民族(Untermenschen)都可能被消灭,因此被剥夺了土著人口的肥沃土地可以被所谓的日耳曼“大师种族”殖民。

    不,说真的,不是宣传版。

    也许安德烈·马尔蒂亚诺夫 https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/mutual-assured-destruction/#comment-2056926 会回应——

    此外, 第二次世界大战与犹太人和大屠杀无关,因为美国犹太人试图说服许多易受影响(且受过良好教育)的美国人 [像艾弗里]。

    • 回复: @Avery
  217. RobinG 说:
    @Anon

    根据您的[缺乏]语言逻辑,托尔斯泰是希伯来人。 (“Anon”是否是 POS 机器人尚不清楚。有人告诉我,Anon 可能是 A-hole 的变体。)

  218. utu 说:
    @MarkinLA

    他们不知道所有来自美国的炒作是垃圾还是真的有突破。

    这可能意味着里根并不是地球上唯一相信星球大战现实的人。

  219. geokat62 说:

    菲尔,你之前文章中的这条评论很受欢迎:

    菲利普·吉拉尔迪 说:
    格林威治标准时间 4 年 2017 月 12 日下午 35:100 • XNUMX [电子邮件保护]
    我会注意到 antiwar.com 特别容易受到政治正确的审查。 他们没有发表我的两篇文章中的任何一篇,大概是因为他们被所使用的内容和语言冒犯了。 他们似乎不明白,除非我们直接面对中东真正的战争提供者,这是一群与以色列政府勾结的犹太专家和组织,否则我们永远不会“没有战争”。

    antiwar.com has, indeed, begun reposting your articles.

  220. geokat62 说:
    @RobinG

    等你,吉欧?

    你是对的,罗宾G。 我发表评论时并未真正阅读卡廷大屠杀的 wiki 条目。 这样做之后,它显然将责任直接归咎于苏联和内务人民委员部。

    因此,我准备撤回我之前的评论。

    道歉。

    • 回复: @iffen
    , @RobinG
  221. iffen 说:
    @RobinG

    对你有好处 RobinG。 但我必须警告你,我认为你不会以这种态度在黑暗面走得太远。

  222. dahoit 说:
    @NoseytheDuke

    核武器以色列?巴勒斯坦人呢?

  223. Avery 说:
    @anon

    {不,说真的,不是宣传版。}

    是的,认真的。

    真正的版本,而不是未受过教育的新纳粹、新希特勒修正主义者和为种族灭绝的纳粹德国辩护的修正主义版本。

    真实历史:大约 15 万苏联公民,绝大多数是斯拉夫民族,被纳粹入侵者直接或间接杀害/谋杀。 不计算战俘,其中 3.5 万(占总数的 60%)被纳粹杀害:枪杀、饿死、因未经治疗的伤口而死,......

    • 同意: Cyrano
    • 巨魔: L.K
    • 回复: @Avery
  224. iffen 说:
    @geokat62

    这就是关于脑部疾病的犹太人会对你做的事情。

    对你来说,这只是伊芬、维基、犹太人和纳粹的漩涡。

    我对 Wiki 的引用是关于 Lend-Lease 计划的。

    悲惨。

    这么多好人都死于这种疾病。

  225. iffen 说:

    相互保证的破坏
    导弹防御可能是谎言

    这是一篇重要且内容丰富的文章。 它值得更广泛的受众。 这里有人知道为什么它可能无法吸引更多的观众吗?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  226. geokat62 说:

    悲惨。

    不悲剧。 只是一个错误。

    真正可悲的是愿意为不可辩护的人辩护的人。 一个被愚弄的人。 某人是别人的有用工具。 愿意支持导致超过一百万无辜者死亡和毁灭的犹太复国主义政策的人。 看到他所谓的祖国毫不犹豫的人向外国势力致敬,其领导人站在人民代表面前,因无视自己总统的政策而受到 29 次起立鼓掌。 现在, 是悲剧。

  227. peterAUS 说:
    @iffen

    这里有人知道为什么它可能无法吸引更多的观众吗?

    I 可能 有一个排序理论。

    观众对这个主题的影响为零,加上我们的领导人仍然有足够的头脑和责任来防止核战争的信念。
    这适用于主要宗教的非信徒。 我说信仰了吗? 谈论信仰……有些讽刺。
    对于信徒(正确的信仰是……),有什么可担心的? 任何版本的天堂/轮回都可以
    然后是“沙中的鸵鸟”。
    然后你有关于盖亚和人类污染所有这些的疯狂边缘(但相当响亮)(某种死亡愿望)。
    然后是那些不考虑今天过去的任何事情的人。
    而人们根本没有思考......

    等等

    解决这个难题的唯一方法是使用温和的核装置杀死大约一百万人。
    那可能……不会……可能……改变态度。
    最有可能的是几周。 尤其是在重大体育赛事之前。

    一种找出我害怕的方法。

  228. Joe Wong 说:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    那些举着标语牌高呼口号的人并不是公众的不满,他们是政府和国会眼中的少数派,因为无论这些少数派做什么,同样多的政客都回到了办公室。

    如果美国人真的想表达他们的公众不满,那就发动一场革命,推翻目前的寡头财阀制度和体制,重新开始一个真正的民主。

  229. RobinG 说:
    @geokat62

    谢谢,G。
    5 月 100 日,当地的 PSL 正在纪念俄国革命 XNUMX 周年,并用列宁海报宣传—— https://www.facebook.com/events/144233619642436
    人们只能希望他们有一些尖锐的批评,但我对此表示怀疑。 那些家伙是敬业的理想主义者。
    刚刚意识到,这大约是所有受到威胁的 Antifa 行动的时间,他们称其为非暴力行动(我猜是为了让#Resist 加入进来)。 到处都是有用的白痴。 超现实主义。

  230. Miro23 说:
    @utu

    关于德国/布尔什维克合作摧毁波兰的精彩评论。

    波兰人是民族主义者并希望保护自己的边界,这有什么奇怪的吗?

    德国、俄罗斯和奥匈帝国之前将这个国家从欧洲地图上分离出来,而在这里,德国人/纳粹/俄罗斯//布尔什维克犹太人也试图将其作为一个社会斩首。

  231. Avery 说:
    @Avery

    {巨魔:LK}

    施韦因亨德。

    (许多保卢斯入侵的纳粹施韦因洪登在伏尔加格勒肥沃的土壤上施肥(后称斯大林格勒),在被红军切碎和生物炭化后)

  232. RobinG 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    崩溃后这有点令人困惑,但我认为你在这里发布了这个,TY: http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2017/10/30/540349/Israel-settlers-British-activists-Khalil
    我与我的教会团体分享,他们只能处理一种认知失调[巴勒斯坦],并且是令人震惊的男男性接触者,被灌输给叙利亚、克里米亚、俄罗斯勾结等的党派路线。

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
  233. Incitatus 说:

    “美国人……不知道战争,除非是发生在其他地方和外国人身上的事情,只需要美国偶尔介入并纾困,或者根据个人的观点把事情搞砸。”

    更差。 战争的娱乐。 施瓦茨科普夫的空战镜头。 企业鼻烟电影。 建筑物、桥梁和车辆被炸成碎片。 海湾战争电子游戏。 以“逃离伊拉克人”的结尾完成。 其次是畅销回忆录。 越南消退,癌症缓解。

    十年后,《震惊与敬畏》首次亮相。 巡航导弹照明和平整巴格达喘不过气来。 编辑掉令人讨厌的部分——创伤、肢解、自焚、纵火、抢劫、孤儿、难民、肿胀的尸体等。更多的公司鼻烟电影。 坏人雕像被推倒。 轻快的术语麻醉并远离现实。 “他们因为我们的自由而恨我们。” “先发制人。” “胆大妄为的敌人。” 战争变得不像天气预报那么有形。

    由于精确的 JDAM,平民死亡(“附带损害”)已成为过去。 承诺。 “政权变革”是一项值得称赞的公共服务。 比如流感疫苗。 可靠、有利可图、永无止境。 “反恐战争”:完美履行大洋洲的永久负担。

    “……欣慰地得知,无论我们的政府在海外做什么,美国都不能受到核武器或常规武器的物理攻击,但这是真的吗?”

    不会赌它。 Infallible Patriots 在 91 年初被证明是错误的。 在 KSA 发射的 28 架飞毛腿中有 110 架造成损坏; 两人逃过拦截。 XNUMX名士兵阵亡,XNUMX人受伤。 想象一下核弹头的人数。

    现在? 只需要一枚不够好的反导弹。 软件错误。 服务器关闭。 一个松懈的经营者。 为什么要打扰导弹? 一个集装箱就可以做到。 一个粗心的海关转移。

    “……真正的危险是……战争是可以想象的,甚至是核战争,如果一个人无法触及的话。”

    死亡和毁灭使战争变得不可想象。 放任不管,颓废感染宿主。 杀戮变得像呼吸一样没有问题。 娱乐。 或者,更好、更有效的社会政策,罗马马戏团。

    为什么要去打仗? 领土? 赃物? 王朝争吵? 复仇? 荣誉? 有什么正当理由吗? 核武器使“全面战争”瞬间爆发。 自杀。 或者杀人的规模让魔鬼脸红。

    • 回复: @geokat62
  234. geokat62 说:
    @Incitatus

    为什么要去打仗? 领土? 赃物? 王朝争吵? 复仇? 荣誉?

    以上都不是,英西。 自 9/11 以来,我们为加强丛林别墅的安全而开战,执行 PNAC 的游戏计划,即在 7 年内消灭 5 个穆斯林国家……你知道的。

    • 同意: ChuckOrloski
    • 回复: @Incitatus
  235. JohnMc 说:

    通常假设你的对手会以你最防御的最佳状态攻击你。 但历史表明,事实并非如此。 按照这种思路,诺克斯甚至需要洲际导弹来攻击美国吗? 诺克斯人非常擅长对运送到已知客户地点的武器进行消毒。 那么,他们可以利用这种能力走私装有大规模杀伤性武器的集装箱,以便在他们方便时触发吗? 我想不是。

  236. @RobinG

    罗宾·G,

    如您所知,即使是高于平均水平的智力和(道德)良心也很难处理企业媒体设计的一 (1) 个认知失调问题。 (每天,愚蠢的非犹太人都会在他们的盘子上消化大量的认知失调)

    例如,26 月 XNUMX 日,我们的 ZUSA 行政部门有义务公布所有 JFK 谋杀案的机密文件。

    博内斯珀总统*光荣地发誓要发布所有机密的肯尼迪文件,但随后深州干预并保留了一些文件“机密”。

    (Zigh)认知失调有人吗?

    1. Bonespur 总统是一位英雄,他试图帮助公民确定谁管理了肯尼迪暗杀/政变!

    2. 呸——博内斯珀总统胜过追究实际暗杀罪犯的企图!

    最后,RobinG,我是毕生的拜占庭天主教会成员。 鉴于无条件支持犹太国以色列的主要冲动,很少有天主教教区居民可以真诚地与我分享历史和政治思想。

    (Zigh)哲学家弗里德里希·尼采(Friedrych Nietzsche)概述了我对他们最大的担忧。

    尼采专注于“权力意志”,并预测人类需要进化成“超人”。

    尼采甚至推测耶稣基督是一个狡猾的希伯来创造物,旨在让非犹太人致力于不会威胁犹太人至高无上的软美德。

    换句话说,RobinG,让像羊一样的(哑巴)Goyim 练习对邻居、敌人、宽恕、怜悯等的爱,直到心满意足……而狼统治并掠夺战利品!

    (Zigh)当然,我不是尼采学者,最后,我相信会发疯。 然而,我相当有信心,他的黑暗哲学与使徒保罗所描述的邪恶从业者的力量和公国产生了共鸣。

    * 感谢 Counterpunch 编辑 J. St. Clair 发明了一个非常有趣和嘲讽的名字,“President Bonespur”。

    谢谢,罗宾格!

  237. Crowbar 说:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    如果我们可能出于防御目的在导弹上安装核弹头的“秘密”是 GTMO 值得,那么只有在整个古巴才有站立空间。 耐克导弹计划早在 50 年代就是这样做的,这不是国家机密。 它们被设计为(在所有变体中)在末端/接近末端阶段拦截飞机和导弹/弹头。 在 Wiki 中查看 Nike Hercules。

  238. Incitatus 说:
    @geokat62

    为什么要去打仗? 领土? 赃物? 王朝争吵? 复仇? 荣誉?
    “以上都不是,英西。 从 9/11 开始,我们为了加强丛林别墅的安全而开战,执行 PNAC 在 7 年内消灭 5 个穆斯林国家的游戏计划……你知道的。”

    美国的核武库、MAD 和反导弹能力(吉拉尔迪的主题)都是关于以色列的吗? 一定是错过了那部分。 美国所做的一切都是为了以色列? 朝鲜最近发生的事情?

    档案显示,不喜欢“大厅”、PNAC 或 ME 战争。 “你懂的。”

    绝望的? 无法解释为什么“大厅”与几乎所有其他特殊兴趣相形见绌?

    • 回复: @geokat62
  239. geokat62 说:
    @Incitatus

    朝鲜最近发生的事情?

    NK不是构成臭名昭著的“邪恶轴心”的三个国家之一吗?

    “像这些国家(伊拉克、伊朗、朝鲜)及其恐怖主义盟友构成了邪恶轴心,武装威胁世界和平。” – GWB

    你确实记得是谁把这些话放在了 W 的嘴里,不是吗? 为什么,这正是新保守主义者的最爱,大卫弗鲁姆。 我们知道这要归功于他的妻子,她在网上向她的一些朋友吹嘘。

    为什么你认为优秀的大卫将 NK 纳入轴心?

    这里有几个线索:

    1. 破产的叙利亚独裁者巴沙尔·阿萨德从需要现金的朝鲜金正恩手中购买化学武器。

    2. And remember that nascent Syrian nuclear facility Israel destroyed in 2007? North Korea helped design and build it. Israeli intel sources say Iran paid Pyongyang up to \$1 billion to finance the project.

    写这篇文章的 Benny Avi 引用了这两个原因 迎接新的邪恶轴心 发表在《纽约邮报》上。

    既然伊拉克已经成功地改变了政权,Benny 就可以用以色列 DM Avigdor Lieberman 提供的一份更新 David Frum 的旧 AofE 名单:

    以色列国防部长阿维格多·利伯曼(Avigdor Lieberman)最近对以色列新闻社瓦拉(Walla)指出,伊朗与金和阿萨德结盟,朝鲜、伊朗、叙利亚和真主党组成了“邪恶轴心”。

    事实证明,多年来一直受到批评和蔑视的 Dubya 的老话毕竟是有用的。 也许是时候重振它了。

    http://nypost.com/2017/08/24/meet-the-new-axis-of-evil/

    绝望的? 无法解释为什么“大厅”与几乎所有其他特殊兴趣相形见绌?

    矮? 你一定是在开玩笑,英西。 忘记 geo 对 The Lobby 的力量的评价吧。 让我们听听前参议员查克·黑格尔(Chuck Hegel)曾经说过:

    “犹太游说团体恐吓国会”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/so-just-how-powerful-is-the-israel-lobby-in-the-us-8478432.html

    或者,更好。 让我们直接从马嘴里得到它,好吗?

    AIPAC 特工史蒂夫·罗森曾吹嘘:

    你看到这张餐巾纸了吗? 我可以在 70 小时内获得 24 位参议员的签名。

    https://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/israels-unprecedented-interference-in-american-politics-46570/

    您认为大型制药公司的任何一位高管会做出如此大胆的声明吗? 没有机会!

    • 回复: @ChuckOrloski
    , @Incitatus
  240. @geokat62

    太棒了,geokat62!

    舔伤口,我想InZi会从这里继续前进,

    • 回复: @Incitatus
  241. Incitatus 说:
    @geokat62

    朝鲜最近发生的事情?
    “NK不是构成臭名昭著的‘邪恶轴心’的三个国家之一吗?……你记得是谁把这些话放在W嘴里的吧? 为什么,这正是新保守主义者的最爱,大卫·弗鲁姆……为什么你认为优秀的大卫将 NK 纳入轴心?”

    发誓。 这与正在进行的、未解决的朝鲜战争有关吗? 36,574 美国人死亡? 103,284 人受伤? 威胁盟友韩国的僵局? 会是这样吗? 不,当然不是。 David Frum 催眠了 GW Bush。 他的妻子是这样说的。

    绝望的? 无法解释为什么“大厅”与几乎所有其他特殊兴趣相形见绌?
    “矮人? 你一定是在开玩笑,英西。 忘记 geo 对 The Lobby 的力量的评价吧。 让我们听听前参议员查克·黑格尔(Chuck Hegel)曾经说过:“犹太游说团体恐吓国会”

    回答问题。 为什么“游说”的钱与几乎所有其他特殊利益相形见绌?

    “犹太游说团”显然对黑格尔感到无情,并全力抹黑他。 不可原谅的诽谤,不予谴责。 这不会改变游说竞赛和奖励。

    查克·哈格尔的简介 [1997-2009]:

    • 1999 年投票支持 Gramm-Leach-Bliley(废除 Glass-Steagall);
    • 投票支持2001 年爱国者法案;
    • 投票支持11 年2002 月XNUMX 日的伊拉克战争决议;
    • 投票支持2001 年和2003 年的战时减税;
    • 投票支持每年增加五角大楼的预算;
    • 投票成立国土安全部;
    • 投票支持2007 年保护美国法案扩大无证监视;
    • 支持2006 年和2007 年的综合移民改革法案;
    • 提议的家庭团聚,以允许833,000 更多永久居民;
    • 1 年2008 月XNUMX 日投票支持问题资产金融救助计划;

    Chuck Hagel 的职业部门支持 [1997-2009]:

    1. Finance, Insurance, RE: \$1,665,266
    2. Misc. Business: \$635,661;
    3. Energy & Natural Resources: \$530,801;
    4. Agribusiness: \$439,639;
    5. Other: \$391,593;
    6. Health: \$386,600;
    7. Lawyers/Lobbyists: \$373,098;
    8. Communications/Electronics: \$302,067;
    9. Construction: \$272,105;
    10. Transportation: \$260,999;
    11. Ideological/Single-Issue [Human Rights, Environment, Guns, Pro-Israel, etc.]: \$215,092;
    12. Defense: \$62,750;
    13. Labor: \$47.500.

    What do the figures say? Was Hagel’s vote to repeal Glass-Steagall connected with his top sector contributions? Wartime tax cuts (Cheney’s reward)? His vote for financial bailout? Entities (contributors) who benefited from deregulation screwed the pooch and benefited again to the tune of \$7,000,000,000,000. Courtesy Mr. & Mrs. US Taxpayer.

    Whad’ya think Geo? Is \$7 trillion more that \$3.8 billion? David Frum plan the bailout too? Ask his wife.

    令人惊讶的是,哈格尔的国防支持如此之低。 他们是否谨慎地反对并帮助反弹他? 他在奥巴马医改之前离开了参议院,因此健康数字很低。

    “这两个原因被 Benny Avi 引用,他撰写了《遇见新的邪恶轴心》一文,发表在《纽约邮报》上”

    本尼·阿维尼? 纽约邮报的“黄鼠狼轴心”? 那是你的来源? Benny 可能认为以色列每天早上都能让太阳升起。 '黑客'浮现在脑海中。 就像捶胸顿足的史蒂夫·罗森一样。 为什么他们不能阻止伊朗核协议 (JCPOA) Geo? 疲惫的尾巴综合症?

    “你认为大型制药公司的高管会做出如此大胆的声明吗? 没有机会!”

    他们不必这样做。 他们以及医疗保健、金融、国防、可再生能源和其他部门的人员拥有该系统。 他们是满意的客户。 不需要虚假的吹嘘。 看看数字。

    • 回复: @geokat62
  242. Incitatus 说:
    @ChuckOrloski

    查克! 多么高兴!

    “太棒了,geokat62!”

    穿着你的啦啦队长装? 紧身运动衫、裙子和红色高跟鞋? 一个人只能希望。

    “舔伤口,我认为 InZi 会从这里继续前进,”

    很抱歉让你失望了。 唯一的“舔”是你的。

  243. geokat62 说:
    @Incitatus

    发誓。 这与正在进行的、未解决的朝鲜战争有关吗?

    那么,你认为NK被纳入邪恶国家轴心是因为美国想解决朝鲜战争吗? 哈哈。 不错的尝试,英西。

    这里有两个消息来源非常清楚地说明了为什么 NK 被列入打击名单……这与解决朝鲜战争无关,而是与以色列的安全有关:

    1. 以色列和朝鲜之间罕见的口水战背后的真正原因

    上周,以色列高级国防官员对朝鲜发表的两次罕见言论提醒人们,在安全问题上,“隐士王国”长期以来一直令以色列头疼。

    随后,国防部长阿维格多·利伯曼在接受以色列瓦拉新闻网站采访时称朝鲜领导人金正恩是叙利亚总统巴沙尔·阿萨德的盟友,也是包括伊朗、叙利亚和真主党在内的轴心的一部分。

    除了以色列人相当不透明的言论和平壤的歌剧式回应之外,这种罕见的交流还揭示了 酝酿已久的挫败感在以色列方面,朝鲜在该地区有影响力。

    三十多年来,朝鲜一直是向伊朗出口武器的主要出口国,而伊朗又向包括叙利亚和真主党在内的代理人提供武器。 它已逐渐演变为伊朗主要的军事技术来源。

    从理论上讲,美国摧毁朝鲜导弹和核研究中心的行动会受到以色列的欢迎,因为它可以消除伊朗以及真主党和叙利亚政权的主要武器和武器技术来源。

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.786631

    2. 为什么朝鲜刚刚威胁以色列?

    朝鲜还积极支持阿拉伯国家对以色列的军事行动。 1973年赎罪日战争期间,朝鲜向埃及派遣了20名飞行员和19名非战斗人员。 21 年战争期间,朝鲜飞行员配备埃及 MIG-1973,埃及空军在开罗试图压制以色列 F-4 飞机的进攻能力时要求朝鲜提供技术专长。

    在 1980 年代,朝鲜从直接军事反对以色列转向支持向以色列在中东的敌人出售武器和军事技术。 朝鲜向伊朗、叙利亚和利比亚出口导弹,并协助叙利亚和伊朗发展核武器能力……

    除了威胁以色列的安全外,朝鲜还通过表达对巴勒斯坦事业的声援来对抗耶路撒冷。 1988 年,朝鲜宣布支持将以色列纳入其边界的巴勒斯坦国,并支持将戈兰高地移交给叙利亚。 朝鲜政府向巴勒斯坦解放组织 (PLO) 提供武器供应巩固了平壤和巴勒斯坦民族主义者之间的根深蒂固的联盟,这种联盟一直持续到今天。

    尽管朝鲜无法再将其亲巴勒斯坦的言论与军事支持相提并论,但朝鲜仍然是以色列最尖锐的国际批评者之一。 朝鲜官员经常将以色列在加沙的军事行动描述为“危害人类罪”,并公开谴​​责以色列在 2008-09 年加沙战争、2010 年加沙舰队袭击和 2014 年以色列-加沙冲突期间杀害平民的行为。

    朝鲜强烈反对以色列在巴勒斯坦领土上的存在和行为的权利并没有引起阿拉伯世界的注意。 30月XNUMX日,哈马斯赞扬朝鲜政权对以色列的威胁言论,并感谢朝鲜声援巴勒斯坦人民反对“以色列占领”。 这种积极的强化表明,朝鲜不太可能在不久的将来缓和或重新考虑其激进的反以色列外交政策立场。

    https://thediplomat.com/2017/05/why-did-north-korea-just-threaten-israel/

    回答问题。 为什么“游说”的钱与几乎所有其他特殊利益相形见绌?

    我已经这样做了(有关详细信息,请参阅其他线程下的响应)。 没有其他游说团体能够分别向民主党和共和党贡献 50% 和 25% 的资金。

    Whad’ya think Geo? Is \$7 trillion more that \$3.8 billion? David Frum plan the bailout too? Ask his wife.

    不知道你在开什么车,Incy。 你是在暗示我们这些相信大堂已经为 GWOT 暴涨的人也必须相信经济繁荣和萧条在某种程度上也是大堂的错。 大堂要为美国的一切问题负责? 或者它所造成的问题使世界上所有其他问题都相形见绌……比如世界饥饿、全球变暖或银背大猩猩灭绝的风险?

    为什么他们不能阻止伊朗核协议 (JCPOA) Geo? 疲惫的尾巴综合症?

    如果一开始没有成功,请再试一次!

    麦克唐纳教授告诉我们,大堂花了 100 多年的时间才制定了非限制性移民政策。 在 1965 年移民法通过之前,它曾多次失败。

    伊朗核协议 JCPOA 也是如此。 虽然奥巴马设法通过了它,但看起来特朗普为了安抚大堂,一心要取消奥巴马最重要的成就之一。

    他们以及医疗保健、金融、国防、可再生能源和其他部门的人员拥有该系统。 他们是满意的客户。 不需要虚假的吹嘘。 看看数字。

    这些大厅可能在公共汽车上拥有几个座位,但毫无疑问,它仍然是一辆犹太复国主义公共汽车。

    还是不相信我? 只要问比比,他也不会羞于承认:

    '美国是一个你可以很容易移动的东西'

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkpoint-washington/2010/07/netanyahu_america_is_a_thing_y.html

    • 回复: @Incitatus
  244. geokat62 说:

    稍微偏离主题,但仍然与我们所有人成为二战见证人的潜力高度相关。

    菲尔,你之前写过几篇与威廉布劳德和马格尼茨基法案有关的文章。 我想你甚至可能看过涅克拉索夫的放映 Magntizky 法案:幕后花絮.

    我不确定的是你是否知道一本书 威廉布劳德之死:解构比尔布劳德的危险欺骗 那是由亚历克斯克莱纳写的。

    尽管亚马逊已决定将这本书下架,但幸运的是,它仍然可以在线获取:

    The KillingOfWilliamBrowder_PrintLayout_6x9-1

    这本书的特别之处在于,它根据布劳德在普雷韦松案中提供的证词建立了大部分针对布劳德的案件。 你还记得你在一篇文章中包含的 YouTube 剪辑,这些剪辑显示布劳德逃离了试图为他提供传票的人吗? Well Krainer 提供了一些关于这种相当奇怪的行为以及接下来发生的事情的有趣背景信息:

    In September 201[4], U.S. Government filed a civil forfeiture case against Prevezon Holdings owned by a Russian citizen Denis Katsyv on allegations that he was linked to the \$230 million Russian tax fraud.

    六个月后,2015 年 15 月,处理服务器 Nicholas Casale 在纽约赶上了 [Browder],当时他在电视上露面后坐在豪华轿车上。 当卡萨莱接近他时,布劳德再次打开对面的豪华轿车门并步行穿过交通逃跑。 对布劳德来说不幸的是,法官裁定当时传票送达正确,他的证词日期定在 2015 年 XNUMX 月 XNUMX 日星期三。那天,布劳德不得不出现在纽约 Baker Botts, LLP 的办公室,他将在一天中花整整七个小时接受律师 Mark Cymrot、Esq、Paul Levine、Esq 和 Moritz Abramovitz、Esq 的讯问。

    我阅读了本书的大部分内容,并提供了出自 Browder 自己口中的最具破坏性的引语,如下所示。

    这是布劳德在法庭案件中的证词全文的链接

    美国地方法院 – 纽约南区:美国诉 Prevezon Holdings

    http://usvprevezon.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Browder-Deposition-04-15-2015.pdf

    这本书还多次引用了一篇文章, 金钱平面,那是发表在纽约杂志上的,其中也包含了一些非常有罪的证据。 这是一个链接

    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/the-money-plane-republic-national-bank-russia/

    不确定你是否同意,但我认为新书、证词和纽约杂志文章中有足够的材料可以作为 Unz Review 的一篇非常有趣的文章的基础。

    [更多]

    以下是克莱纳书中一些更具破坏性的摘录:

    这份 386 页的证词抄本被证明是一本非常有启发性的读物。 它揭示了布劳德的故事与他在书中以及他在世界各地孜孜不倦地宣传的无数采访、演讲和演示中提出的引人入胜的版本相去甚远……

    当 Prevezon 的律师向他询问有关土星的问题时,他们声称 Browder 将公司置于破产状态以避免支付其税单。 布劳德否认了这一点,声称俄罗斯联邦税务局在 2003 年对土星进行了审计,并对其进行了干净的审计。 此外,他声称该审计凌驾于法院裁决之上。 但是,当 Prevezon 的律师 Mark Cymrot 要求 Browder 出示一份税务审计的副本时,他必须根据传票提供,似乎 Browder 的狗吃了他的审计报告……

    Cymrot 先生:也就是说,应该交税。 你会这样理解吗?

    布劳德:是的

    Cymrot 先生:而你完全不知道这些事件? 你不知道这个法令,不知道上诉,不知道 Dalnaya Step 被置于破产中,并且欠税的事实?

    布劳德:完全不知道。

    Browder 随后解释说,2004 年 Hermitage 已将 Dalnaya 转移到 Visao Risk Management 公司进行清算。 Visao 由一位 Jakir Shaashoua 经营,他原来是以色列前摩萨德特工,负责 15 年 Edmond Safra 在与 Vladimir Potanin 摊牌时派给 Browder 保护的 1998 人安全小组。 除了在红色通缉令中,布劳德以假名 Ariel Bouzada 呈现了 Jakir Shaashoua。 当 Cymrot 先生问 Browder 为什么在他的书中更改 Shaashoua 的名字时,Browder 回答说:“我不记得了。”

    然后,Cymrot 先生重述了 2007 年警方突袭 Hermitage 莫斯科办事处时的情况:

    Cymrot 先生:所以在 2007 年 XNUMX 月执行搜查令时,情况是法院发现你利用了卡尔梅克的税收制度,有应缴税款,但没有缴纳,公司是破产。 你说这不是调查的理由?

    Bill Browder:我不——我不知道你是什么——你想说的是。

    Cymrot 先生:我想说的是,你说过调查当局在 2007 年对 Hermitage Fund 进行调查完全没有根据。......这些决定表明,纳税申报表存在虚假陈述,有应缴税款,未缴税款,公司陷入破产。

    布劳德为自己辩护称,2006 年,在他被驱逐出俄罗斯后,内政部致信 Hermitage,通知他们没有针对他们的公开刑事调查。 但当被要求出示这封信的副本时,布劳德没有——这很奇怪,因为那封信本来是支持他的故事的重要证据。

    Cymrot 先生:但是——所以内政部从 2004 年开始就在调查 Hermitage 的税务欺诈行为,并最终在 2007 年用搜查令搜查了它的办公室,对吗?

    布劳德:没有。
    Cymrot 先生:发生了什么事?
    布劳德:2004 年,内政部正在调查冬宫; 2005 年结案。
    Cymrot 先生:谁告诉你的?
    Browder:我在 2000 年——最近几年得到了信息。
    Cymrot 先生:从谁那里?
    布劳德:我不记得它是从哪里来的。

    布劳德得到的信息是,对他的调查已于 2005 年结束,但他既无法提供任何证据来支持他的主张,也无法回忆起他是何时、如何或从谁那里获得这些信息的。 尽管如此,他仍然坚持自己的说法,因为他“非常确定这是真的”。 但后来在他的证词中,Cymrot 先生出示了一份文件,证明这绝对不是真的。 该文件是 18 年 2006 月 2006 日对 Sergei Magnitsky 的检查记录,标题为“税务犯罪特别重要案件调查员”。 它表明马格尼茨基被问及土星投资以及沙舒阿先生在其中的角色,证明对布劳德的调查确实在 XNUMX 年底进行。

    布劳德还声称对他的调查是出于政治动机,试图使针对他的调查不合法。 然而,Cymrot 先生提醒布劳德,在调查开始时,他是弗拉基米尔·普京的直言不讳的支持者,因此没有理由进行出于政治动机的迫害。 布劳德承认这一点,但仍然坚持认为他的迫害是出于政治动机,因为当时他正在追查俄罗斯天然气工业股份公司的腐败……

    Browder then proceeds to read the text of his complaint where he implicates Interior Ministry’s Artem Kuznetsov in the fraud by claiming that “on or about 28 April 2007,” he flew to Cyprus on a private jet together with one Dmitry Klyuev, a convicted fraudster and owner of the Universal Savings Bank (through which part of the \$230 million tax refund was recycled). Klyuev supposedly was the mastermind of the network that carried out the fraud. While in Cyprus, they also met with Pavel Karpov and two Russian lawyers, and some ten days later Klyuev met Olga Stepanova, the head of the Moscow Tax Office No. 28 (which paid out a major part of the \$230 million refund).

    所以你有它,整个快乐的欺诈者在塞浦路斯相遇,他们一定是在那里制定了他们的邪恶计划。 但是当 Cymrot 先生问 Browder 他是如何知道 Kuznetsov 和 Klyuev 一起去塞浦路斯时,Browder 回答说他看过旅行记录的副本,只是他不记得他是如何得到这些记录或从谁那里得到的,只记得这个人(他不记得的人)是举报人。 158

    Cymrot 先生:我明白了。 但这只是一个标签[举报人]。 我们不知道名字,我们不知道地址……我们也不知道这些文件是否真实,对吧?

    布劳德:我不知道。
    Cymrot 先生:但你依赖它?
    布劳德:我的团队做到了。
    Cymrot 先生:你最终去了美国检察官办公室并说,'这发生了'?

    随着他的证词继续进行,布劳德提供了关于德米蒂里·克柳耶夫和奥尔加·斯捷潘诺娃之间会面的相同质量的证据:一些匿名的人告诉他的团队,这次会面已经发生。 就是这样。 他们无法证明会议确实发生了,或者 Klyuev 和 Stepanova 可能讨论了什么,这一事实似乎并没有让 Browder 感到困扰。 他的进一步支持证据,包括据称最终进入不同个人账户的汇款或他们购买的昂贵汽车和公寓,也证明完全没有用。 然而,在布劳德看来,所有这些前往塞浦路斯的旅行、被指控的欺诈者和他们所谓的财富之间的会面足以证明他们参与了欺诈,足以证明他公开指控他们、破坏他们的声誉并将他们列入制裁名单是正当的。马格尼茨基法案下的个人。 然而,他的任何指控都不能在法庭上站得住脚。 正如布劳德的证词所显示的,奥尔加·斯捷潘诺娃几乎可以肯定布劳德对她的恶意指控是无辜的。 所以,很可能,是帕维尔·卡尔波夫少校。

    布劳德的证词涵盖了进一步的问题,因为普雷韦松的辩护律师调查了布劳德故事的各个方面,他巧妙地安排这些故事将他的原告牵连为真正的罪犯,声称自己是受害者并为自己的任何不法行为开脱。 一个接一个地,他的每一个主张在仔细分析时都被证明是非常有问题的:许多都是基于他自己的说法或从匿名来源获得的信息、可疑文件或来自各种狡猾角色的证词,布劳德试图通过称呼他们来支持这些角色的可信度告密者或人权活动家。

    布劳德本人被认为是所有人中最狡猾的角色。 他声称自己至少 50 次记不起关于他的故事的重要细节,并完整地回答“我不知道”211 次。 此外,他似乎在几乎所有相关主题上都缺乏专业知识:1 次他拒绝承认直截了当的断言,因为他不是该主题的专家,就像一个拒绝确认 1 + 2 = XNUMX 的人,因为他是不是数学家。 事实上,布劳德给人的印象与他在世界各地发表的无数演讲中所塑造的角色截然相反。 在这种情况下,我有幸亲眼目睹了其中的两个,布劳德给人的印象是一个非常能干的人,他对细节和细微差别有着非凡的把握,他用他来建立他扣人心弦的故事。

    然而,在他的证词中,笨手笨脚的布劳德毫不犹豫地炫耀他在一个特定领域的专业知识:地缘政治。 当 Cymrot 先生问他为什么称美国国务卿约翰克里为“普京的走狗”时,布劳德解释说,“……在我看来,他正在对俄罗斯采取绥靖政策。” 克里究竟是如何安抚俄罗斯的? 首先,克里并不是马格尼茨基法案的忠实拥护者,在该法案签署成为法律后,克里阻止了布劳德继续在受制裁者名单中增加更多名字的努力。 他还对克里不冷不热地支持扩大“[针对俄罗斯的]制裁政策,更普遍地,向乌克兰、叙利亚、伊朗等国提供武器”感到非常不满。

    显然,布劳德赞成任何对俄罗斯不利或敌对的措施,无论它是否与谢尔盖·马格尼茨基的困境或内政部所谓的税务欺诈有任何关系。 来自一个声称只是为“为谢尔盖伸张正义”而战的人,这一切似乎有点令人困惑。......

    埃德蒙·萨夫拉很可能只是聘请了布劳德作为自己的经纪人,帮助他在莫斯科开店,并在必要时为他辩护,以尽可能多地占据俄罗斯经济的大部分份额。 Hermitage Capital 只是一个合法的前线,它包括比购买俄罗斯股票更广泛的活动。 在完成全面调查之前,我们可能不知道这些操作的全部范围,不仅在俄罗斯内部,而且在所有主要的西方货币中心。 阻碍和取消此类调查的合法性定义了布劳德当前努力的目标,并比他对“为谢尔盖伸张正义”的破坏性痴迷更可信地解释了他的动机。

    Another detail about the way Browder used Magnitsky to garnish his story emerged during his deposition in the U.S.A. vs. Prevezon case. At one point, Prevezon’s attorneys brought up the name of Oleg Lurie, a controversial Russian journalist who had spent many years investigating the story of how IMF money that went into Republic National Bank in 1998 ended up stolen. Lurie, who had met with Magnitsky in prison claimed that Magnitsky was asked to take the fall for the Saturn and Dalnaya Step tax returns and that he had turned down Browder’s offer of legal assistance. Lurie also alleged that someone using Browder’s name had contacted him and offered him \$160,000 to change his story about Sergei Magnitsky. Apparently, he had recorded those conversations and produced the recordings in support of his claim. When Mr. Cymrot questions Browder about this, Browder does not deny it:

    Cymrot 先生:你有没有人向 Magnitsky 先生建议他应该负责 Saturn 和 Dalnaya Step 的纳税申报?

    布劳德:我不记得了。

    我本来希望布劳德会回答这个问题,“绝对不会”。 相反,布劳德的“我不记得了”表明马格尼茨基可能确实被要求为土星和达尔纳亚阶梯承担责任。 这也可能解释了布劳德关于马格尼茨基被捕的奇怪扭曲的故事,这让我怀疑马格尼茨基的同事被警告不要被捕,而马格尼茨基却被悬而未决。 回想一下,当马格尼茨基被捕时,警方还试图逮捕他的助手伊琳娜·佩里希纳和鲍里斯·萨莫洛夫,他们以某种方式设法避免被捕。

    如果马格尼茨基确实被留下作为替罪羊,那么布劳德和他的好伙伴应该为他的死承担责任。 在他死后,他们愤世嫉俗地亵渎了他的名字,以掩盖他们的犯罪行为,并欺骗全世界设置法律和行政障碍,阻碍对他们的贪污和洗钱活动的进一步调查……

    逃离美国盖世太保

    Although it is unrelated to Magnitsky’s death and the \$230 million tax fraud, the story about Browder’s change of citizenship from U.S. to U.K. and his varying explanations of this act, add another shining exhibit of the quality of Browder’s character. He became UK citizen in 1998. In a 2011 interview for Institutional Investor’s Alpha magazine, Browder explained that he didn’t give up his U.S. citizenship for tax reasons but because his then wife was English and because he liked the UK. “ I did not do it for tax reasons,” he insisted: “My tax bill was roughly the same either way.” 179 Four years later, Browder thought up a better explanation. During his deposition in the U.S.A. vs. Prevezon lawsuit it turned out that Browder gave up his U.S. citizenship just as the laws about reporting foreign income came into effect. Browder pretended that he was not aware of this and explained instead that he gave up U.S. citizenship because his family had been persecuted in the United States during the McCarthy era:

    Cymrot 先生:您在 1998 年就放弃了美国国籍,对吧? 布劳德:正确。
    Cymrot 先生:正如有关报告外国收入的法律生效一样; 是对的吗?
    布劳德:我不知道。
    Cymrot 先生:你为什么在 1998 年放弃你的美国公民身份? 布劳德:十年前我移民到英国。
    Cymrot 先生:所以英国要求你放弃美国国籍? 布劳德:没有。
    Cymrot 先生:那你为什么放弃你的美国公民身份?
    布劳德:个人原因。
    Cymrot 先生:这些个人原因是什么?
    布劳德:我的家人在麦卡锡时代受到迫害。
    Cymrot 先生:而你父亲是经济系主任,在哪所大学?
    布劳德:他不是——
    Cymrot 先生:他在哪儿?
    布劳德:我父亲是芝加哥大学的数学教授。
    Cymrot 先生:他曾经是部门的负责人吗? 布劳德:是的
    Cymrot 先生:还有你叔叔,他是什么职位? 布劳德:他是普林斯顿大学的数学家。
    Cymrot 先生:曾经是部门负责人?

    布劳德:是的。

    Cymrot 先生:但是您担心您的家人受到迫害,但他们却成为了两所名牌大学的系主任,这就是您放弃美国公民身份的原因?

    布劳德:是的
    Cymrot 先生:你面临什么样的迫害?
    布劳德:我祖母身患癌症,美国政府在她临终时试图将她驱逐到俄罗斯。
    Cymrot 先生:那是哪一年?
    布劳德:1950 年的事情。
    Cymrot 先生:我明白了。 所以在 1998 年,这一切都以一种激动的情绪回归,你决定放弃你的美国公民身份?

    显然,在比尔·布劳德放弃他的美国公民身份后,美国国税局恢复了迫害布劳德家族的伟大美国传统,将比尔列入为逃避纳税而放弃公民身份的美国人的“名誉与耻辱”名单。 值得庆幸的是,他当时住在莫斯科和伦敦之间,持英国护照旅行,安全地远离美国盖世太保。

    • 回复: @geokat62
  245. geokat62 说:
    @geokat62

    尽管亚马逊已决定将这本书下架,但幸运的是,它仍然可以在线获取:

    The KillingOfWilliamBrowder_PrintLayout_6x9-1

    这是本书的有效链接:

    https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKillingOfWilliamBrowder_PrintLayout_6x9-1.pdf

  246. Incitatus 说:
    @geokat62

    “所以,你认为NK被纳入邪恶国家轴心是因为美国想解决朝鲜战争吗? 哈哈。 很好的尝试,英西。”
    “这里有两个消息来源非常清楚为什么 NK 被列入打击名单……这与解决朝鲜战争无关,而是与以色列的安全有关……”

    自朝鲜战争以来,NK一直是敌人。 美国骄傲的伤口。 它威胁到“唯一超级大国”的抱负——政治、金融(贸易、货币、投资)、军事。 它的核和洲际弹道导弹计划挑战相同,可能使国内领土处于危险之中。 弗鲁姆在 2002 年的演讲中加入了一种回忆二战的修辞手法。 如果你还记得的话,“绥靖”是当时新保守主义者不断重复的话题。 目的是通过将目标与两个更为人所知的不友好政权联系起来来推销对伊拉克的战争。

    美国对NK的敌意是由以色列指挥的? 你的消息来源将以色列-NK关系不佳作为“证据”。 与以往一样,您会挑选,而忽略以下内容:

    “尽管朝鲜的核建设主要危及华盛顿主要的亚太盟国日本和韩国的安全,但以色列政府一直直言不讳地表示有必要解除朝鲜的核武能力。”

    阅读理解不是你的强项?

    添加一些来自 Adelson、Lieberman 和 Netanyahu 以及 Presto 等吹牛者的名言! 全球阴谋! 犹太复国主义巴士! 犹太复国主义巴士! 在某种程度上,对以色列来说是一个很好的补充,它甚至无法控制黎巴嫩。

    回答问题。 为什么“游说”的钱与几乎所有其他特殊利益相形见绌?
    “我已经这样做了(有关详细信息,请参阅其他线程下的回复)。 没有其他游说团体能够分别向民主党和共和党贡献 50% 和 25% 的资金。”

    再一次,你忽略了你的消息来源。 美国犹太人拒绝了亲以色列的共和党候选人并支持 JCPOA。 党的钱就是证明? 就像说冰堡只存在于水线以上一样。

    Look at all funding. Party, Dark Money, Soft Money, Independent Spending, Lobbying, PACs, Super PACs, Leadership PACs, Foreign-connected PACs, etc. Refer to OpenSecrets.org.

    https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/
    https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/
    https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/softsource.php
    https://www.opensecrets.org/dark-money/
    https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/
    https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.php
    https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2018
    https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/industry.php?txt=Q03&cycle=2018
    https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/foreign.php

    Each Senator/Congressman can be searched. Compare donor sources with committee assignments and voting record. Ever-faithful Ed Royce? Top career contributor: anti-Iran NorPAC at \$162,393. Truly impressive! Top industry? Insurance at \$1,647,299. Ten times NorPAC.

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00008264&cycle=CAREER&type=I

    Context? Ed’s top industry career totals (\$):

    1、保险:1,647,299;
    2、房地产:1,628,743;
    3、证券与投资:1,461,268;
    4.退休:1,299,060
    5、律师/律师事务所:804,849人;
    6. 卫生专业人员:758,134;
    7、商业银行:594,744家;
    8. 信用合作社:563,364;
    9. 杂项。 财务:506,765;
    10、会计师:505,820;
    等待它,请鼓点:
    11. 亲以色列:481,093!!!!

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/industries?cid=N00008264&cycle=CAREER

    亲以色列占 Ed 的前 4.7 个行业总数的 XNUMX%。 是谁的巴士?

    Getting someone elected is just the first step. 你必须游说他们说正确的话,写有利的立法,正确投票等等。如果你把生意交给他们所在地区的家人和朋友,这会有所帮助。 更好的是,提供利润丰厚的立法后职位作为对忠诚度的奖励。 价值百万的旋转门。 制度就是危机。 “大堂”只是其中的一小部分。

    为什么他们不能阻止伊朗核协议 (JCPOA) Geo? 疲惫的尾巴综合症?
    “如果一开始不成功,再试一次!”

    以色列的权力是绝对的,除非它不是? 为什么 Scudder Libby 没有被清除? 为什么沃尔福威茨会被世界银行踢出局? 为什么 Perle 必须从 DPB 辞职? 如果“大厅”摇着狗,一切都很容易解决。

    “你是在暗示我们这些相信大堂已经为 GWOT 暴涨的人也必须相信经济繁荣和萧条在某种程度上也是大堂的错。 大堂要为困扰美国的一切负责?”

    你的话:

    “这些游说团体(医疗保健、金融、国防、可再生能源和其他部门)可能在公共汽车上拥有几个座位,但不要搞错,它仍然是一辆犹太复国主义公共汽车。”

    这是一辆犹太复国主义巴士,除非它不是? 让人头晕目眩。

    “美国是一个你可以很容易移动的东西”

    毫无疑问,麦凯恩总统和罗姆尼总统都同意这一点。

    • 回复: @geokat62
  247. geokat62 说:
    @Incitatus

    阅读理解不是你的强项?

    显然不是,英西。 毕竟我只是个笨蛋。

    我已经尽力了,但我仍然无法突破你。 仍然不确定为什么。

    剩下要做的就是等待,看看未来的事件如何发展。 也许如果 800 磅的大猩猩变成了 8,000 磅的大猩猩,你也许终于可以看到它了。

    我仍然抱有希望。

    • 回复: @geokat62
  248. geokat62 说:
    @geokat62

    剩下要做的就是等待,看看未来的事件如何发展。 也许如果 800 磅的大猩猩变成了 8,000 磅的大猩猩,你也许终于可以看到它了。

    Well what do ‘ya know, someone has indeed spotted an 8,000 lb gorilla. It is investigative reporter Robert Parry of consortiumnews.com.

    在他的文章中, 俄罗斯门的疯狂失衡, Parry poses the query: Does anyone think that Israel’s influence over U.S. politics is limited to a few hundred Facebook accounts and \$100,000 in ads?

    我的回答是:是的,Incitatus 可以!

    [更多]

    而且,我们不要忘记房间里 8,000 磅重的大猩猩:以色列。 有没有人认为,无论俄罗斯在试图影响美国政治方面可能会或可能不会做的任何事情,都与以色列一直以来所做的相比有一点点呢?

    哪个政府利用其及其美国代理人(即新保守派)的压力将美国推入伊拉克的灾难性战争? 敦促美国不要入侵的国家不是俄罗斯,而是俄罗斯。 是以色列和总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡。

    事实上,伊拉克和叙利亚的“政权更迭”计划可以追溯到 1996 年内塔尼亚胡的政治运动中雇用的主要美国新保守主义者的工作. 当时,理查德·珀尔、道格拉斯·费斯和其他主要的新保守主义者公布了一份题为“彻底决裂:确保领土安全的新战略”的开创性文件,该文件提议搁置与阿拉伯人的谈判,以简单地更换该地区的反以色列政府.

    然而,要做到这一点,需要吸引强大的美国军队,所以在 9/11 袭击之后, 乔治·W·布什总统政府内部的新保守主义者发动了一场欺骗运动,为入侵伊拉克辩护,这场战争之后将在叙利亚和伊朗发生更多的“政权更迭”。

    计划中的一个扳手

    尽管伊拉克的军事灾难打乱了这些计划,但以色列/新保守主义者的议程从未改变。 与以色列的新地区盟友沙特阿拉伯一起, 一场代理人战争被设计出来以推翻叙利亚总统巴沙尔·阿萨德。

    正如以色列驻美国大使迈克尔奥伦解释的那样, 其目标是打破从伊朗经叙利亚到黎巴嫩和以色列真主党敌人的什叶派“战略弧线”。

    从来没有解释过如何粉碎这个什叶派“弧线”符合美国人民的利益——甚至在他们的意识中。 但这是以色列想要的,因此这是美国政府要求做的,甚至到了让美国尖端武器落入叙利亚基地组织附属机构手中的地步。

    以色列对美国政客的影响如此明目张胆,以至于总统竞选者每年都在以色列游说团会议前排长队跪地 美国以色列公共事务委员会成员。 2016 年,唐纳德特朗普出现并宣布他不是在那里“迎合”,然后脱掉了裤子。

    而且,每当内塔尼亚胡总理想炫耀他的权力时,他都会被邀请在美国国会联席会议上发表讲话,共和党人和民主党人在会上竞争,看看他们能在起立鼓掌中站起来多少次,多快。 (内塔尼亚胡保持着外国领导人在联合会议上发表三次此类讲话的次数记录,与温斯顿·丘吉尔并列。)

    然而,以色列的影响在美国政治进程中根深蒂固,以至于即使提到“以色列游说团”的存在,也会带来反犹太主义的指责。 “以色列大厅”是华盛顿的禁忌词。

    然而,几乎每当以色列以失败为目标的美国政客为目标时,这位政客就会倒下,这是以色列在 1980 年代初期在罢免众议员保罗芬德利和参议员查尔斯珀西的过程中表现出来的,这两位温和的共和党人的罪行是建议与他们进行谈判。巴勒斯坦解放组织。

    因此,如果关注的是美国民主进程的纯洁性以及保护它免受外部操纵的必要性,那就让我们开始吧。 为什么不全面审查谁在做什么以及如何做呢? Does anyone think that Israel’s influence over U.S. politics is limited to a few hundred Facebook accounts and \$100,000 in ads?

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/22/the-crazy-imbalance-of-russia-gate/

当前评论者
说:

发表评论 -


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有Philip Giraldi的评论
Personal 古典文学
他们在与中东打交道时不应该退缩吗?
华盛顿启用的现代格尔尼卡
在提名候选人之前给候选人施加压力
但是它甚至是朋友吗?
今天的中央情报局是为承包商和官僚服务的,而不是为国家服务的。