– Kumar Moses

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Evil prevails not because of the evil deeds of a few nations but because of the silence of the many good nations. Needless bloodshed has been caused in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Bahrain, Pakistan and elsewhere. Non-Muslim nations have allowed it to pass not knowing they will be the next to face US expansionism which must be stopped at all cost. US plan is to target all neutral and pro-Russian countries; isolate Russia and then take on the nation with vast economic and military potential for USA. Then there will not be any resistance to the Neo Third Reich of US rule.

There is only one way to contain USA and stop this needless continuing bloodshed. That is to confront US interests head on by Russia before Russia ends up friendless. ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Wars are bad; world wars worse. But not the worst thing that can happen to the human race. The worst possible thing that can ever happen to the human race is American expansionism which is now on high gear. Every country with economic resources and strategic worth is under threat. Their resources will be robbed if this expansionist madness allowed to run amok. Some thinkers argued against WW2 saying that a compromise with Germany would have prevented it. But such a compromise would have made three fourths the world slaves of Imperial Germany and its friends. It is time to rethink the net cost verses benefit of avoiding WW3 at all cost. Using the mentality of avoiding WW3 at all costs, USA is steadily expanding around the world depriving three fourth of earthlings their due share of economic resources. American expansionism is far worse than WW3 for most earthlings.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Mutually Assisted Destruction (MAD)

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The concept of Mutually Assisted Destruction (MAD) is a US concept. Russia for instance never ascribed into this concept. Extreme care has been taken by American agents to come up with a term that makes sense to all. MAD is one such term that makes perfect sense at all levels. It refers to the total destruction of humanity if nuclear weapons are used. It argues there will not be a winner or a loser in a nuclear confrontation. Although this is appealing and goes well with religious and moral beliefs, it is hardly true. A nuclear confrontation does not result in total destruction of humanity, not even half of it. However, it can wipe out entire civilisations in conflict areas that house less than 20% of the population. This 20% include all colonial and neo-colonial nations. Over 80% of the population will not only survive but prosper unless another expansionist agenda replaces the old. It will truly be the Asian age, including Russian, thereafter, either way.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Using the fear of MAD, western nations terrorise other nations into submission. This grand pretending is what helps the west run its course.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

It is foolish to assume a superpower will go all out to defend itself. There will not be peopleƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s support, economic resources and/or the will to fight on if large scale destruction is caused by enemy nuclear attacks. What would happen is after a few exchanges, both parties will come to an agreement to halt violence and agree to stop expansionism in exchange for peace. Even this is a farfetched possibility. Most likely possibility is the threat to use nuclear weapons and then an immediate ceasefire and halt to hostile activity. If that fails, a nuclear attack on a friendly country of the enemy would lead to an immediate peace deal. Although NATO has declared its members will stand by one another, they will certainly not do so in reality. If a NATO member is attacked with nuclear weapons, say Britain by Russia, USA will not go to war with Russia as that would bring home the destruction. Instead USA and Russia will be trying to save what is left and their own people. This is the reality shrewdly covered by the blanket of MAD (Mutually Assisted Destruction) concept.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ There will never be a worldwide nuclear confrontation. A brief decisive strike would end any war leading to a peace deal. Therefore not using nuclear weapons in fear of MAD is madness.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Nukes are not equally distributed

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ There is no equal distribution of nukes. USA has got Russia to agree to limit active nuclear warheads to 1,500 each but making inactive warheads active is a very easy and fast process. All in all the approximate number of nuclear warheads are: Russia 13,000; USA 5,000; China 800; France 300; UK 200; Israel 100; India and Pakistan 50 and a few others are suspected have less than 10 each. The barrier to entry into this elite club of nuclear weapons owning nations is technology. However, the limiting factor of the number of nuclear weapons of each of these nations is not money, sympathy for the human race or technology. The limiting factor is their population density. For instance China can afford much more than 800 nuclear warheads but its high population density prevents it. Russia with extremely low population density can hold a large stock of nuclear weapons without risking the security of own population more than USA risks its own population with its nuclear weapons stock. This is the equilibrium.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ However during a prolonged war, every country will produce as many nuclear weapons as it possibly can. But a nuclear war will not be a prolonged one. Using SLBMs (Sea Launched Ballistic Missiles) is one way to overcome the constraints of high population density. This is why UK keeps all its nuclear weapons in SLBMs. But the benefit this offers is limited. Although nuclear powered submarines can stay without refueling for years, all submarines call at homeports for regular maintenance, replenishment and rotation of crew. Without regular maintenance, these machines would become time bombs. On the other hand, there are SLBM carrying submarines that can strike anywhere on earth without leaving homeports! That takes away any little advantage a nation would have by having nuclear weapons away from its land.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Positioning of nuclear weapons mainly Inter Continental Ballistic Missile (ICBMs) which are considered the most lethal and others (mainly air delivered warheads) is another important factor. While UK, France and China have very little space to keep these carefully without endangering their own population, Russia and USA have more options. To minimise damage to own population, USA keeps them in mid country. Any shift west, east, north or southward endangers own population. However, Russia not only thrives in flexibility of where it keeps its massive nuclear weapons arsenal, but also has the ability to position them close to its borders near Alaska, Western Europe, etc. They pose a bigger danger to other nations than own population! It has also given Russia the flexibility of a large number of land mobile warheads which is unthinkably dangerous to all other superpowers. Today most Russian ICBMs are on trucks making them extremely lethal to the enemy and very difficult for the enemy to track down and destroy than their own static ICBMs.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ These strategic advantages have given Russia a clear upper hand in nuclear weapons that others cannot even imagine of matching. Today Russia is only the third largest spender in military. USA and China spend more. However, although USA and China spend next to nothing on nuclear weapons due to safety concerns of own population, Russia has spent most on nuclear weapons which is its competitive advantage. Today Russia is the only country that continues to test nuclear weapons and increase the potency of its weapons. A good example is the Bulava long range nuclear warhead delivery missile that took over six years of failures to work. This is the very reason why USA insists on a missile defence shield in the Czech Republic and now in Poland. Very heavy spending on nuclear weapons has deprived Russia new conventional weapons. No new conventional weapons were developed by Russia since 1991. Only upgrades to Soviet era weapons were made despite ranking third in world military spending, having a comparatively smaller size military than USA and China and not engaging in any major wars.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Russia has overcome its disadvantageous position in conventional weapons by strengthening its nuclear weapons. Chemical, biological and bio-chemical weapons offer similar advantages to countries with less population density.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ This was the reason why US based propagandists invested the Mutually Assisted Destruction (MAD) concept. Conventional weapons, if used relentlessly can also create mutual destruction though much less potent than nukes.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The need for Russia to save the world from American expansionism

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Russia has been very passive against American expansionism. It has been avoiding a confrontation with the west at all cost. However, the cost is now too high to ignore. After creating a pro-US vassal region from India to Israel, the next US target is obviously Russia. Eastern Europe has already been converted into a pro-US vassal region. USA and its friends are increasingly getting active in the Arctic region due to its economic and strategic worth. Russia is increasingly getting isolated making it vulnerable on all its fronts to a US economic, political and military onslaught.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Contrary to US expectations, Boris Yeltsin didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t end up the sell-out USA expected him to be. He soon realised his American friends took him for a ride which would have ended up in suicide. He toughened his stance refusing many US demands on nuclear disarmament. He eventually appointed former KGB agent Vladimir Putin as the head of state; a very wise decision that sent shockwaves in USA.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Sending Russian warships to Tartus, Syria and vetoing the US led resolution against Syria at the Security Council are very good decisions against American expansionism. Had Russia acted with better foresight, violence in Libya and Iran could have been avoided. USA is again trying to flex its muscle in the area around the Black Sea, particularly in Georgia threatening Russia. US arms sales to Georgia has increased rapidly. Russian moves to defend independent nations of South Ossetia and Abkhazia against US funded Georgian expansionism are commendable. Despite big talk, western expansionists backed down when they saw resolute Russia not showing any signs of fear in Georgia in 2008.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In the same way it is imperative for Russia to save its southern border. Syria and Iran must be protected against American expansionism. Going for open war with the west is worth it. Russia is the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s largest petroleum producer today. Oil resources that may be stolen by American expansionists should be secured by Russia. Only such a move can ensure continued benefits of black gold resources to humanity.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Russia must act now without putting off its responsibilities. USA can very easily destroy Iran and create a pro-US vassal nation encompassing Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia (already subjugated) and Iran (about to be subjugated). Eliminating Syria will make the entire region spineless as Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq (and Kurdistan) are already in US hands. This poses a grave danger to all petroleum uses around the world as USA comes to own all Middle Eastern oil reserves. It will also use this platform to attack Russia from its southern borders ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the only border of Russia which could not be conquered by USA so far. With its conquer, USA would have encircled Russia for its next move.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In this context it makes sense even to go to WW3 than allow USA to run on rampage much worse than Imperial Germany in WW2. With a decisive Presidential Election just completed with a fantastic outcome, over three fourths of earthlings look up to Russia for protection, guidance and deliverance from the Evil Empire.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚