Russian General Wants Pre-emptive Nuclear Strike Option Against NATO

presence

Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
19,330
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/03/Russian-General-Nuclear-Strike-America-NATO
ICBM-russia-Reuters.jpg

by Oliver Lane 3 Sep 2014 123 post a comment
[h=2]A senior Russian General has called for military doctrine to be redefined to include the possibility of pre-emptive nuclear strikes against foreign powers, and that the enemies of Russia should be specifically defined in the document, reports Russian language news agency Interfax.[/h] His concerning statement comes in response to the 'eastward expansion' of NATO and plans by the United States to deploy missile defence systems in Eastern Europe. Interfax quotes Retired Army General Yuri Yakubov as saying: "This strategic document for the country should in the first place clearly identify the potential enemy of Russia, which is not in the military doctrine of 2010. In my view, our main enemy is the United States and the North Atlantic bloc [NATO].


"In particular, in my opinion, you need to carefully consider the forms and methods of the operation of Aerospace Defence, in close cooperation with strategic nuclear deterrence forces, the Strategic Missile Forces, strategic aviation and the Navy. Thus it is necessary to study the conditions under which Russia could use the Russian strategic nuclear forces (SNF) pre-emptively.


"A couple of years ago the United States and NATO at all levels stated that the North Atlantic bloc, the West in general are not the enemy of Russia. And what do we see now? Deployed against us is a real information war, with Russia deliberately shaped as a foe of the West, with far reaching goals.


"And most importantly, our borders are roughly base [sic] the United States and NATO. These global changes and challenges, in my opinion, should be clearly reflected in a revised military doctrine."


Russia's military doctrine, which governs the way its armed forces react to events and crises was last defined in 2010 and made no specific mention of nations the Russian Government considered it's enemies. It also reserves the right to "use nuclear weapons in response to use against it or its allies of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, as well as in response to large-scale aggression using conventional weapons, a threat to the very existence of Russian state."


News of General Yabubov's comments comes ahead of the NATO conference starting in Wales tomorrow. The meeting is to be dominated by discussions about the situation in Ukraine, which has worsened despite the recent ceasefire.


Former Warsaw pact countries that are now members of Nato, such as Poland, are calling for a much tougher line against Vlamir Putin. They are concerned that a resurgent Russia may attempt to recreate its old Soviet empire, using Russian ex-patriots in Eastern European countries.


So far, the West has been muted in its response to the situation in Ukraine, preferring to target sanctions on individual supporters of Vladimir Putin. This is because countries like Germany are heavily reliant on Russian energy and are very keen to see the situation defused.


Putin himself did not agree to today's ceasefire, claiming he was not a party in the conflict. Meanwhile President Obama is in Estonia shoring up jittery allies of the US including Latvia and Lithuania.
 
Meh. Even Rand just said 'all options are on the table' regarding ISIS. The Liberty candidate thinks dropping nukes on Isis is an option.

M.A.D. only works if your opponent believes you are insane enough to launch a retaliatory strike even though you have already lost.

You have to appear nuts regarding your nuclear force, or you will lose and your country will be evaporated. In theory.
 
All options have been on the table for a century... all governments go through EVERY scenario you could possibly think of in the global struggle for control and power... even MAD "Fail Safe"

 
More Trouble: http://wane.com/2014/09/05/nato-approves-new-force-aimed-at-deterring-russia/

NATO approves new force aimed at deterring Russia
By JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG, Associated Press JULIE PACE, Associated Press
Published: September 5, 2014, 12:50 pm

obama-nato-france_carr.jpg

U.S. President Barack Obama meets with France's President Francois Hollande
at the NATO summit
at the Celtic Manor, Newport, Wales, Friday, Sept. 5, 2014
(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

NEWPORT, Wales (AP) — Seeking to counter Russian aggression, NATO leaders approved plans Friday to create a rapid response force with a headquarters in Eastern Europe that could quickly mobilize if an alliance country in the region were to come under attack.

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said a command headquarters would be set up in Eastern Europe with supplies and equipment stockpiled there, enabling the “spearhead” force to mobilize and deploy quickly.


“It sends a clear message to any potential aggressor: Should you even think of attacking one ally, you will be facing the whole alliance,” Rasmussen declared as a two-day NATO summit in southern Wales drew to a close.

NATO air patrol flights over the Baltic and other air, land and naval measures already in place will be extended indefinitely, Rasmussen said, as part of a readiness package that also calls for upgraded intelligence-sharing and more short-term military exercises.


President Barack Obama said the agreement demonstrated that NATO is “fully united” behind Ukraine’s independence, territorial sovereignty and right to self-defense. He said all 28 NATO allies will now be providing security assistance to Ukraine, such as non-lethal equipment, fuel and medical care for troops.

“This commitment makes clear that NATO will not be complacent,” Obama said just before returning to Washington.

Moscow responded by claiming that NATO was using the crisis in Ukraine as pretext to advance a longstanding goal to move its infrastructure closer to Russia’s borders. In a statement, Russia’s foreign ministry said it was studying the NATO announcements, but warned that the alliance’s plans to conduct joint exercises in Ukraine later this year will “inevitably aggravate tensions, jeopardize the progress that has been made in the peace process in Ukraine and exacerbate the split in Ukrainian society.”

Confronting another pressing international crisis, Rasmussen said NATO stands “ready to help” Iraq fight back against a violent militant group, but noted that the Iraqi government has not made any such request. Obamaand British Prime Minister David Cameron have been pressing their NATO counterparts to join a coalition of nations that could degrade militants from the Islamic State group.

The threat posed by the Islamic State overshadowed some of the NATO summit’s official agenda. Yet the leaders still spent a considerable amount of their time discussing the crisis in Ukraine, with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko taking on a high-profile role during the talks.
The summit coincided with the declaration of a cease-fire that emerged Friday out of talks in Minsk, Belarus involving Ukraine, Russia and pro-Russian rebels. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said he ordered government forces to stop hostilities, nearly five months after fighting broke out in the nation’s restive east.

“I count on this agreement, including the ceasing of fire and the freeing of hostages, to be precisely observed,” Poroshenko said.
Yet Western leaders remained skeptical that any such cease-fire would hold. The U.S. and Europe, meanwhile, have warned that they stand ready to levy more economic sanctions on Russia — a step a top White House official said could occur within days.
The crisis in Ukraine has been among the most pressing issues on the agenda during the summit. While Ukraine is not an alliance member, Russia’s actions have prompted fears among NATO member countries in Central and Eastern Europe that the Kremlin could seek to make gains beyond their borders as well.
Rasmussen said the high-readiness force would give NATO a “continuous presence” in Eastern Europe, with alliance countries contributing forces on a rotational basis. There were no final decisions on where the forces would be based, but Rasmussen said Poland, Romania and the Baltics have all indicated a willingness to host the facilities.

“We must be able to act more swiftly,” said Cameron, the British leader.

In another signal of its commitment to protecting its members in Eastern Europe, NATO announced that its next summit will be held in Warsaw, Poland, in 2016. Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski praised the alliance’s willingness to boost its presence in the region, calling it “a matter of key importance to Poland’s security.”

On the sidelines of the summit, Cameron and Obama were also meeting with their counterparts to rally support for a mission to confront the Islamic State through military might, diplomatic efforts and economic penalties. Obama met Friday with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a key regional player whose support would be crucial to defeating the militants. Cameron also planned to meet with Erdogan. Obama also met Friday with French President Francois Hollande.

Rasmussen suggested that NATO was unlikely to take imminent military action against the militants in Iraq, but said he could foresee the alliance engaging in a “defense capacity-building mission” there.

The U.S. is already launching airstrikes against the Islamic State in Iraq, and Britain has joined for humanitarian aid drops to besieged minority groups. Obama is weighing whether to extend the military mission into neighboring Syria, where the extremists have established a safe haven.

On other fronts, alliance leaders pressed NATO countries to follow through on commitments to spend 2 percent of their nations’ gross domestic product on defense. Only four NATO nations meet that threshold: the U.S., Britain, Greece and Estonia.

Komorowski said Poland would raise its defense budget to 2 percent of GDP in 2016 and would encourage other members to increase defense spending as well.

4hz0xu.jpg

The State Department and the Pentagon Globalists and Big Oil

As at December 13, 2013 Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland gave a speech to the "Friends of Ukraine" in Washington and openly admitted, the State Department (Foreign Ministry) had $ 5 billion since 1991 in the infiltration of Ukraine and separation from Russia invested, who was the sponsor of the event? It was the American oil giant Chevron! The other usual suspects also mix vigorously with, such as Exxon and Shell, and share the cake.

It is, as always, to the plundering of another country in the interests of U.S. economy and to geostrategy.
It's about the encirclement of Russia and its eventual destruction.


___
Associated Press writers Monika Scislowska in Warsaw, Poland, and Lynn Berry in Moscow contributed to this report.
 
Last edited:
Lord help all of us there's an egotistical golfer piloting this train wreck....

Might be the only thing holding Putin back actually. Nobody would actually oppose him on anything militarily for real, but Obama could just launch a thermonuclear war at any moment. Obama does a create job of filling the M.A.D. requirements of seeming caviler and possibly unhinged enough to destroy the world to protect his legacy.
 
Might be the only thing holding Putin back actually. Nobody would actually oppose him on anything militarily for real, but Obama could just launch a thermonuclear war at any moment. Obama does a create job of filling the M.A.D. requirements of seeming caviler and possibly unhinged enough to destroy the world to protect his legacy.

I don't believe Putin wants a war with the US but I also believe he's not going to put up with our politicians pulling shit over in his sandbox....

It's up to us as citizens of the US to reign in our politicians...

Thanks to the MSM most citizens are cool with what the politicians are doing..........That is until it effects their free money check....
 
Russian General Wants Pre-emptive Nuclear Strike Option Against NATO

Not exactly MAD, yet somehow it still seems like a very reasonable option to have, like putin'
in a fancy PIR motion activated floodlight to "protect" their backyard. The "light" should stay
off, and not bother anyone, unless it detects intruders.

Sure, why not?
 
Russia is the one country that could still annihilate the US using nuclear weapons.

Knowing this, is it really wise to agitate them like we've been doing?

I think not.

The Russians were pretty much dormant following the end of the Cold War.

Now we, that is, our Neocons, have unnecessarily riled them up again...over third-world Ukraine.

And some might say, well, it's not a big deal to provoke them, because they would never launch against the US.

Wrong!

In 1995, Yeltsin almost did launch a nuclear counterstrike against the US, when a rocket fired from Norway was mistakenly identified as a US Trident missile!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_rocket_incident

Accidents can happen...especially when someone is already on-edge to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top