(Exercising my 1st Amendment rights to Freedom of Speech)
National Security and Defense
The Continuum-1 Protreptic Continuity
(Update 1 November 25, 2014)
The Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has advanced the 2014 Dooms Day Clock to 5 minutes to midnight indicating metaphorically how close we are to nuclear or global catastrophic occurrence – apocalypse. The clock settings are based on the results of detailed analysis of climatic and nuclear confrontational probabilities.
National Security and Defense in Continuum
Considering, the latest developments since the first publication of Restore America, it appears that the clock setting may be a bit too optimistic. In the 1945 through 1990 era before collapse of the Soviet Union, avoidance of nuclear war was problematic due to the United States and USSR having sufficient nuclear capability to guarantee mutually assured destruction (MAD).
Crises situations, such as the option to deter China from intervening in the Korean conflict (euphemistically – Police Action) and the 1962 Cuban nuclear ICBM crises were resolved by national leaders who fully understood the extreme consequences of unleashing thermonuclear devices. President Truman, to his credit, personally knowing the horror of his justifiable use of Atomic weapons against Japan removed the nuclear deterrent as an option to discourage China from overt entrance into the Korean conflict.
President Kennedy, facing a USSR initiated nuclear crises in Cuba, in negotiations with Premier Khrushchev brought negotiated resolution to a highly probable Armageddon situation. Until one side blinked (according to President Kennedy’s assessment of negotiations) and the other side compromised, the Dooms Day Clock during the October/November 1962 crises period would have been advanced to seconds away from midnight. A hiccup on either side could have nudged the world into a lose-lose thermonuclear confrontation. While level heads and responsible world leaders controlled the ‘Finger-on-the-button’, both the United States and USSR assured MAD deterrent through the US and Russian Ready alert and rapid deployment/employment capabilities – basically force postures which kept peace-minded leaders peaceful.
Today a mutually assured destruction capability exists, but the proliferation of nuclear technology redefines the scope of the problem and the complications of crises negotiations. Within this scenario the United States is faced with the intransigence of both North Korea and Iran who focus on the destruction of the United States as well as increased aircraft and naval force deployment power plays of Russia and China to intimidate and gain international dominance.
In the face of the growing threat to the world peace in general, as defined within the baseline Restore America National Security and Defense, neither the United States nor NATO has the motivation, intent, dynamics or effective strategy to confront real and potential aggression head on. NATO essentially establishes a hands off policy in respect to aggression against non NATO European nations. Concurrently, the United States under the leadership of President Obama, ignores the advice of qualified strategists on committing our forces into combat arenas. Nor does the president truly appreciate the gravity of being ill prepared to meet the global challenges to our security and national defense as evidenced by his continued mandates for force reductions and related reductions in budget allocations.
Since October 27 (1st posting of Restore America) Russia, China, Iran and North Korea have ‘ratcheted-up’ global tensions with overtly aggressive tactics and proclamations with the apparent intention to intimidate:
– Russia: having no fear of NATO or United States intervention, leads the field with continued deployment of military forces into the Ukraine to support and consolidate the positions of the rebel revolutionary armies. As backup to their aggression against the Ukraine, Russia has launched highly visible and detectable:
– reconnaissance flights into Baltic, United Kingdom, Iberian Peninsula and mainland central Europe air spaces.Last month, NATO said it had conducted more than 100 intercepts of Russian aircraft this year, about three times as many as in 2013, amid sharply increased tensions between the West and Moscow over the Ukraine crisis;
– Russian long range bomber aircraft repeatedly challenge the North American Air Defense Zones along both coasts, Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico;
– Russian nuclear submarines spending weeks undetected in the Gulf of Mexico;
– Russian flotilla of navy ships, including a heavily armed cruiser and destroyer, were intercepted off the northern coast of Australia;
– Russia warned France of serious consequences unless the French hands over a warship whose delivery has been delayed due to the Ukraine crises.
These and other recent intentional provocations re-enforce Putin’s braggadocio threat to the world “Russia is a strong nuclear power and foreigners should understand that its best not to mess with us.”. Ergo a one sided reversion of the pre 1990 era Cold War with a foreseeable forceful and aggressive resurrection of the USSR.
– China: flexing its muscle in the Pacific basin with development of weapons systems (according R.F. Johnson, Jane’s Defence Weekly) equipped to challenge U.S. Navy carrier battle groups and potentially deny the U.S. the ability to operate in certain areas of the Pacific . Within recent weeks, China usually secretive about its military development programs has highlighted its addition of aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines and stealth fighter aircraft: .
– A 110,000 ton super carrier in production “to compete with the mightiest in the US naval fleet” – when launched – “China will be able to confront the most advanced US carrier based fighter jets in high seas”;
– Boomer class nuclear ballistic submarines to add to their 6 nuclear powered and 53 diesel powered submarines. The boomer’s give China the effective nuclear deterrent capability employed by the USSR and the United States and could shift the balance of power in the pacific – “a trump card that makes our motherland proud and our adversaries terrified. It is a strategic force symbolizing great-power status and supporting national security.”
– Stealth fighter aircraft, although still in development and test, were displayed and demonstrated at the Zhuhai air show. Armed anti-ship and air-to-surface missiles, seem to show that China is equipped to challenge U.S. Navy carrier battle groups and potentially deny the U.S. the ability to operate in certain areas of the Pacific.
As China’s military strength increases, so do the tensions in the Pacific Rim. Points of contention included both China and Japan claimed possession of Senkaka Island in the East China Sea. In a similar confrontational expansionist mode, China extended its maritime boundaries to include areas claimed by Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia.
Similar to the situation presented by Putin in the Ukraine, intervention into the maritime dispute, according to a Chinese military professor, could lead to the next war. However, since the United States has defense treaties with both the Philippines and Japan, if either country is attacked, the US is treaty bound to come to the defense of Japan and/or the Philippines.
A factor which adds fat to the fire is China’s island building projects within the Spratley Islands in the South China Sea – an area claimed by multiple nations in the Pacific Rim including Vietnam and the Philippines. In particular the conversion of the Fiery Cross Reef into an island capable of hosting an airfield and a seaport is a matter of major international concern – China’s response to the United States concern, as reported by FOX News, was that China could build anything it wants in the South China Sea-hardly a conciliatory response. Reuters said “the construction has stoked concerns China may be turning the disputed islands into military installations, thereby exacerbating tensions”
Within this scenario, if the United States opts to commit to its defense treaty obligations , it does so understanding the potential for the situation to escalate into a larger confrontation with China – basically armed conflict. If on the other hand, the United States reneges on its treaty obligations and abandons either country, it will be a win situation for China and a gross loss for the United States. Essentially, the United States will lose its dominant power position in the Pacific.
– People’s Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea): continues to be a thorn in the side of the United States and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) with continual threats of military incursions against the south, random acts of aggression against the south and a continual quest for development of nuclear weapons and long range missile delivery systems to be used against the United States.
According to the Washington Free Beacon , Bill Gertz, August 26, 2014:
U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korea is building a submarine capable of launching ballistic missiles, potentially increasing the threat posed by the nuclear-armed rogue state.
A missile launch tube on a North Korean submarine was observed recently by U.S. intelligence agencies and is raising new concerns about the missile and nuclear threat from the communist regime in Pyongyang, according to two defense officials familiar with reports of the development.
Additionally, U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korea already has submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). The North covertly obtained several SS-N-6 SLBMs from Russia. The missile has been adapted into North Korea’s new intermediate-range missiles.
Rick Fisher, a military analyst, said he suspects one of the Golf-class submarines obtained by the North Koreans included one or more SS-N-6 missiles in its launch tubes as part of the deal.North Korea then may have used the past 20 years to reverse-engineer a version of the Golf, which was designed to carry up to three ballistic missiles, Fisher said. “In North Korean service, a Golf-size ballistic missile-carrying submarine could potentially carry two Musudan-size liquid-fueled missiles or a larger number of long-range cruise missiles,” he said.
A nuclear capable North Korea with a stealth undersea launch capability would present a significant threat to the US allied nations in the Pacific rim . A submarine and land based nuclear delivery capability coupled with their standing army primed for aggression against the south gives the North Koreans the potential to destabilize the Pacific region and contribute to China’s apparent quest for regional dominance.
– Middle East: can no longer be considered as individual nations facing unique internal insurgency problems. The problems facing Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan generate from a singular seed of revolution – the Islamic Jihad – whether that seed is ISIS, ISIL, Al Qaeda, Taliban or remote, lesser known, Islamic revolutionary entities throughout the middle east and Africa. The problem spread far beyond the middle east and apparently, as reported on numerous media releases and web sites, found fertile and protected grounds for Jihad incubators throughout the United States :
-“Our initial investigation has concluded there are between 400 to 500 radical Islamic centers in the U.S. In those places, they preach an extreme version of Islam that says America and the West is the enemy. They espouse violence, hatred and the need for terrorism.” – Reported June 2007 by David Gaubatz, director of counterintelligence and counter-terrorism for the Society of Americans for National Existence and former senior U.S. intelligence official.
“I have sources – inside sources. These people at Best are armed and dangerous. They are doing paramilitary training there.”– Statement by former city council member about an Islamic Center in the city of Buffalo, NY. Reorted by Douglas J. Hagmann, director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, Sept 2004
WASHINGTON – A radical jihadist group responsible for nearly 50 attacks on American soil is operating 35 terrorist training camps across the nation, but the U.S. government refuses to include the organization on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorists.
Jamaat ul-Fuqra, known in the U.S. as “Muslims of America,” has purchased or leased hundreds of acres of property – from New York to California – in which the leader, Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, boasts of conducting “the most advanced training courses in Islamic military warfare.”
In a recruitment video captured from Gilani’s “Soldiers of Allah,” he states in English: “We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.
The expanding Jihad in the middle east is no longer regionally isolated as it continues to expand globally. The proliferation of training facilities and belligerent terrorists activities and threats against the United States, as well as acts of terrorism throughout Africa, Israel, the United kingdom and European nations makes the violent Muslim/Islamic Jihad a world wide conflict.
The primary focus as expressed by the Muslim leaders being against the United States of America – America being the embodiment of the ‘Great Satan’ in the eyes and minds of the Mujahideen. Yet, despite the volatility of the Islamic revolution, the United States stands in the forefront of appeaser minimally responsive nations – rather than as the standard bearing vanguard to aggressively confront and eliminate this threat to world peace and security.
It is inconceivable when considering the implicit and explicit threats to the United States that our national leaders have not recognized and reacted to the severity of those threats and our national survival. The inefficacy, either through intent or happenstance, of America’s leaders in the face of increasingly overt challenges to our sovereignty and security is a contradiction to the historic and constitutional fiber of America. In this respect our elected representatives appear to have misplaced their loyalty to America in favor of loyalty to party parochial interests wherein maintaining power and control is more important than the fate of the Union.
President Obama and the 113th Congress owe America first an explanation and justification for their misaligned budget priorities and second their absolute total misuse and abuse of the United States military forces. Essentially, why:
– mandated military force reductions when faced with a resurgence of the Cold Was as Russian President Putin pushes the envelope on conquests in the Eastern Europe, Baltic region and provocative naval and air forces operations in close proximity to European and American defense zones;
– mandated force reductions when faced with the perennial threat from the PDR Korea and from China’s recent challenges to limit or negate US Power and influence in the Pacific;
– mandated military force reductions due to budget constraints when President Obama and his supportive 113thCongress is prepared to spend billions on the costs associated with amnesty for over 4,000,000 Illegal immigrants;
– in the face of growing threats from the Islamic factions does the President and 113th Congress still insist on unprotected boarders allowing potentially free access to the United States by terrorist groups;
– has the Department of Justice not listed the “Jamaat ul-Fuqra”, known in the U.S. as “Muslims of America,” training camps throughout the United States as foreign terrorists whose mission is the destruction of the United States;
– the FBI and/or national guards, federal, state and local police are not allowed to seize those facilities based on the open threat and proposed ‘destroy the United States’ agenda of Sheikh Mubarak Gilani;
– does the President mandate self defined ineffective counter terrorist strategies in the middle east while ignoring the advice and counsel of respected and experienced members of the JCS and military advisors on deployment and employment of military forces against the ISIS/ISIL and Khorasan;
– does the President and the 113th Congress place more importance on budget busting Affordable health care and Illegal Immigration than they do on strengthening the security and defense of the United States and preservation of our freedoms?
The answers to these questions are critical and the continuation of current policies on military reductions severely jeopardize the security of the United States. Unless the American public demands accountability and redirection from their elected representatives, we may well be the unwitting co-authors of the Rise and Fall of the United States. While the following comments were focused on the debilitating effects of sequester on our military capabilities, the continued and projected reductions in military budgets, manpower and equipment will have the same debilitating effects on military preparedness as sequester:
The U.S. military’s ability to stay ahead of technology advances by other countries and respond to multiple crises around the world is already in jeopardy and will get worse unless mandatory budget cuts are reversed, top U.S. officials warned on Saturday.
Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert told Reuters the Navy would have to cut forces and reduce its ability to position ships around the world if lawmakers did not ease or reverse the cuts, which are due to resume in fiscal 2016.
“Electronic warfare, electronic attack, anti-submarine warfare – all of these higher end areas – will fall further behind because we’re just not investing in them,” he said in an interview at a conference at the Reagan Presidential Library.
He said the Navy’s ability to stay ahead of potential adversaries would “degrade significantly” unless the cuts ended.
Greenert and other U.S. officials are urging Congress to end the cuts known as “sequestration,” citing growing strains amid increasing threats, including Russia’s aggression in the Crimea region, and increasing Islamic State extremism in Iraq and Syria.
Executives with Lockheed Martin Corp, Huntington Ingalls Industries and Raytheon Co said they were cutting overhead to drive down weapons costs but budget uncertainty limited their ability to make needed investments.
Industry and military officials said the changing political landscape and escalating threats could increase the chances for another short-term agreement to stave off budget cuts.
Admiral James Winnefeld, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the conference that procurement of new weapons had slowed, even as escalating demands around the world made it difficult to restore the military’s readiness for new missions.
Considering the multitude of potential as well as actual threats to the United States, I again refer back to Restore America – National Security and Defense statement in respect to consequences of sequester . Secretary of Defense (SoD) Hagel opined :
“ We are gambling that our military will not be required to respond to multiple major contingencies at the same time”.
Apparently, to his credit, SoD Hagel is not willing to back a gamble with the security of the United States at stake and through open disagreement with President Obama, and under pressure, tendered his resignation as SoD.
When asked what the risk would be in respect to force reductions, a senior Department of Defense official said:
“If the force is smaller , there’s less margin for error. Lets face it things are uncertain out there.”
In a nutshell, the two statements from the office of the Department of Defense project President Obama’s ethos of myopia and basic lack of knowledge, or intentional destabilization of the military, in respect to effective national defense. With an ever growing challenge to the United States globally and to our allies regionally, defining and mandating force level reductions is a gamble most responsible Americans do not consider feasible, practical or justifiable.
The absolute absurdity of “If the force is smaller , there’s less margin for error….” defies logic. In today’s world, smaller forces, as projected by President Obama’s out year budgets (2015-2019) will be inadequate to meet the multitude of threats and challenges to our security at home and abroad.
Beyond absurd is the inconceivable fact that President Obama and his administration’s obsession for Affordable Health Care program and his Executive Order for Illegal Immigrant Amnesty with related increases in social services budget deficits take precedence over the needs of the national security. President Obama unilaterally negated the rights of the citizen’s voice in government and in this scenario places the economic and security future of America in jeopardy.