Us military strategists claim that in the next five years they will have to fight with “almost equal” enemy, meaning “enemy”, of course, the Russian army. One that is rapidly moderniziruyet and was actively regaining positions along Russia’s borders with Europe.
And some observers wrongly conclude that these five years the American army will be enough to prepare for an imaginary conflict.
But, no! – says in his column for Forbes, Executive Director of the Lexington Institute Loren Thompson. A hypothetical war with Russia, according to experts, will be tied to the most rapid advancement of ground troops through a vast space.
Defeat in the war for American troops – it is quite possible, moreover, it is now the most likely outcome of a possible conflict.
And then the US influence in Europe be reduced to a minimum since the Second world war. In this will change dramatically the geopolitical balance, I’m sure Thompson.
The probability of such an outcome there are several factors: it is a strategic failures of previous presidents – George Bush and Barack Obama – and the lack of funding of the armed forces.
According to the analyst, the mistake of the Bush associated with the withdrawal from Europe of two American heavy crews, and rendering Obama is betting on Asia and the Pacific, an echo of which was to reduce the US military presence in the Old world.
Funding of the U.S. army, said Thompson, is really insufficient, especially if you compare the modernization program with Russia. Us forces receive annually from the Federal budget, $22 billion on new weapons, while Russia has launched a ten-year rearmament program budget of $700 billion, with most of the funds, according to Thompson, will go to the development of the land forces and aviation.
By the way, if we talk about the military budget of the United States, he in the full sense has long been a “barrel of milkweed butterflies” while the needs of the Pentagon is allocating huge amounts, but they are spent, to put it mildly, strange.
The fact that the us Congress, which must sign off on major military procurement, crowded with lobbyists from various companies feeding on defence procurement. A result of winning anyone, but the combat capability of the US Army is not increased.
Suffice it to recall the famous story of the “newest and best in the world” the F-35 aircraft, which first was developed quite a long time, and then actually proved totally incompetent of their creators. As was stated by the head of test services Michael Gilmore, to address the identified problems will require a structural alteration of the aircraft.
Nevertheless, Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer, was so strong lobbyists in Congress and the Pentagon that plans to provide the U.S. air force for the coming years is the acquisition solely of the F-35, as well as the replacement of the standing armed aircraft manufacturing competitors. It should be noted that the development and pilot batch of “world’s best” flying disgrace and has cost us taxpayers nearly $ 400 billion.
But back to the material Lorena Thompson. All the arguments which he mentions, even more convinced of an expert in the idea that “European” war by the American army is likely to be lost. His thesis Thompson confirms by five arguments.
First of all, Russia has the geographical advantage, says an expert. Battles will take place in the territories of Eastern Europe that are further away from the main points of the landing of American troops in Europe.
In addition, this part of the Old world is washed by the seas, in which you can enter only by narrow Straits, which Russia will be able to easily control.
The main argument is that the U.S. army was woefully unprepared for this conflict, adds Thompson. In Europe, the US has only two stationary teams, airborne light division and cavalry regiment, armed with armored “Stryker” (Stryker). If not strengthen, Russia will simply crush these troops, says Forbes columnist.
Recently the White house made the decision on the placement of the third rotational brigades in Europe, however, it was decided to send a thousand soldiers to Poland and the Baltic States, but from all the problems it does not deliver. After 15 years of dealing with opponents like the Taliban (an organization banned in Russia – ed.), the US army is still vulnerable. This applies to air defense, electronic warfare, precision weapons and inadequately protected equipment. In this, the US army can’t compare with the Russian armed forces, concludes Thompson.
Such tragic predictions from the mouths of American analysts, and military strategists, too, are constant. For example, the former Deputy commander of NATO in Europe Richard Shirreff told The Independent that the Alliance will enter into a nuclear war with Russia for 2017. Also the current commander of NATO in Europe, General Philip Breedlove also said that “American soldiers are willing to fight and defeat Russia”. Also, statements about Russia as “the enemy” was made by the Pentagon and NATO officials.
Earlier the political scientist Stephen Cohen wrote that “the US state Department deliberately strengthens military confrontation with Russia, considering it “a very unwise strategy. These games are in a cold war with nuclear power becoming more dangerous, because in response to the actions of the United States Moscow moves heavy weapons and missiles closer to its Western borders.
Recall and appeared in the media information that “combat operations forecasting Bear Spear, conducted by the Strategic command of the USA, ended in failure.” The goal of the training was allegedly “simulation speed with high accuracy and partly of a nuclear strike on Russia.” “As a result, the world was in ruins, and the United States (as, alas, Russia) – wiped off the face of the Earth.”
Of course, the us military is deliberately exaggerating the so-called “Russian threat” to obtain a larger share of budgetary allocations, and this causes confusion in the Pentagon.
The main alarmists are Lieutenant-General Herbert McMaster, who is responsible for developing the concept of the future army” in the United States and, air force General Philip Breedlove, recently resigned commander of the United armed forces (OMC), NATO in Europe.
