US prepared ‘to fight’ in Russia, China missile defense zones – Pentagon

US Defence Chiefs in Washington really have lost the plot ...

Admiral John Richardson, addressing the US Naval Institute – CSIS Maritime Security Dialogue reportedly said "The US Navy is seemingly ready to conduct operations in areas regarded as no-go missile areas". Such defense missile zones can be found at Russia’s and China’s coastlines.

As Obama and others ramp up tensions with Russia over the conflict in Syria, Richardson said that from now on the US Navy is “scaling down” the term ‘A2/AD’ (anti-access/area denial) from its communications. Earlier, these areas were viewed as “an impenetrable keep out zone that forces can only enter at extreme peril to their existence, let alone their mission,” Richardson wrote in an article for the National Interest outlet. Now he obviously takes the view that with Russian and Chinese naval forces stronger than ever before, it is time for the USA to commit itself on two fronts simultaneously.

The Admiral went on to explain why the US military decided to ditch the classification of certain areas as no entry zones. To an outsider it appears to be the latest stage in the Obama administration's policy of going to war with every nation that does not surrender to American bullying.

US war ship harassed by Iranian speedboats after straying too close to Iran in The Strait Of Hormuz (Image source: Russia Today)

“Since different theaters present unique challenges, a ‘one size fits all’ term to describe the mission and the challenge creates confusion, not clarity. Instead, we will talk in specifics about our strategy and capabilities relative to those of our potential adversaries, within the specific context of geography, concepts, and technology,” he said.

According to Richardson, the current understanding of the term simplifies the real state of things which is “far more complex” than lines on the map.It is not quite clear what point he is trying to make, if one nation's military enters another's sovereign territory, including territorial waters uninvited, long term conventions didcate this constitutes and act of aggression.

The lines delimiting these zones on maps are used to show the limits of missile defense systems’ ranges. If the aircraft or an aircraft carrier crossed the mark, it is at risk of being destroyed, Richardson said. So he's planning to put US ships and naval personnel at risk of being destroyed.

It is noteworthy that such zones – at least, the majority of them – are located on the coastlines of Russia and China.

The only reasonable interpretation of this idiotic, warmongering blether is that US military leaders are prepared to take a risk to establish a presence in the no-go zones.

“It's actually really hard to achieve a hit. It requires the completion of a really complex chain of events. The threats they are based on are not insurmountable, and can be managed, will be managed,” Richardson said.

“Have no doubt, the US Navy is prepared to go wherever it needs to go, at any time, and stay there for as long as necessary in response to our leadership’s call to project our strategic influence,” he said.

Tensions have been running high over the US imperial expansionism. In June, Russia warned the US about American warships entering the Black Sea and “response measures” from Moscow that would follow if US naval vessels strayed to close to Russian bases. The USS Porter (DDG-78), armed with assault cruise missiles and an Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System entered the Black Sea at the beginning of June.

Another hotspot for the confrontation is South Korea, where the US is determined to install THAAD anti-missile systems.

Beijing has objected strongly to the proposal, and warned Washinton it will take steps to maintain a strategic power balance in the region. A week ago, however, the US said it will deploy the system to South Korea “as soon as possible.”

In mid-September, Russia and China held joint drills, with their culmination off the coast of China’s southern Guangdong Province.



RELATED POSTS:

UN Peace Council: The Syria conflict is a proxy invasion by the United States

This blog and our other publications have been saying ever since the 'Arab Spring' was stirred up by a stupid, demogogical speech made in Cairo by Obama, that the US aim was a proxy war with Russia and Iran in the middle east. Look what happened since then. Secular Muslim leaders in Egypt and Libya were overthrown by US led regime change campaigns ...

America G77 confrontation
America plans global hegemony
America - Iraq meltdown
American leadership failure
Fall and fall of the American Empire
American exceptionalism
America warmongering
America leads world collapse
China and America heading for war
China reserve currency
Currency wars
Obama doctrine failure
Obama and Duterte get dirty
Obama's oppressive regime
Obama trashes Venezuela
Russia fingers America for promoting terrorism
Wests lies fail to demonise Russiam
Daily Stirrer September 2016

Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] ... [ Daily Stirre.shtml ]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [Latest Posts] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [Ian at Minds ] ... [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer News Aggregator]

US Warned It Is Playing With Fire by Repeatedly Provoking China in S China Sea

In a letter from Ms. Oh Beigong (!) of Taipei to the big bosses of the US military and naval forces, it was forcefully pointed out that the USA is playing a dangerous game in the South China Sea by repeatedly provoking a Chinses reaction to violations of protocol in overflying Chinese air space and having its warships enter Chinese waters. The letter, published in Malaya, also states the US government has wrongly fabricated accusations against China. It is not known whether the letter was actually sent or us just a stunt to warn US allies in the region against being drawn into Washington's geopolitical games.

The letter was addressed to Admiral Harry B. Harris, Commander of the United States Pacific Command, and copied to his bosses, US Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus and US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, as well as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. It was published by Leslie Fong, former editor at the Straits Times, who said that Ms. Oh Beigong (Oh be gone?) found its way to his inbox. Some fragments of her letter are presented below.

“Dear Admiral Harris,

I write to congratulate you for standing up for mariners the world over to assert the right to freedom of navigation in international waters. You showed much daring when on May 10, you sent the USS William P. Lawrence, an Arleigh Burke class missile destroyer, to within 12 nautical miles of Fiery Cross Reef, over which Beijing has long claimed sovereignty and which it has occupied for years,” online publication reported Ms. Oh as saying. Fiery Cross Reef is also claimed by the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.

“Let me get serious. The US is playing with fire by repeatedly poking China in the eye. We in this region are going to be the collateral damage if this spins out of control. And why should we pay the price when the US does not really have right on its side? As a thinking man, did you not feel discomfort deep inside you when the US kept singling out the Chinese as the bad guys in the maritime disputes?” China Daily reported.

“You must know better than most on this planet that the US has not been able to cite one instance when China actually denied anyone the freedom of navigation or point to any statement by Beijing threatening that right.”

She also wrote that it takes neither courage nor brains to dispatch a destroyer or launch an air strike, as the commanding officers are only carrying out the orders of their political masters. She thinks however, that the admiral needs more credit for risking the lives of his sailors as he couldn't know for sure that the Chinese would steer clear of the US destroyer.

Ms. Oh further mentioned how, in the 80’s, Soviet frigates "bumped" American naval craft in the Black Sea because the US ships were intruding into waters which Russia considered its own. Lately, Chinese commentators have been publicly talking about imitating the Soviets.

The letter warned that the US is really pushing its luck and playing with fire.

She drew attention to the expansionism that the US has been involved in for years and how it is the US that has 11 carrier battle groups circling the globe, each with enough firepower to send four-fifths of the world’s countries “back to Stone Age.”

“You will say, no doubt, that the Chinese are going to militarize the airstrips and other facilities to project force, thus threatening all the countries in the region. Er, coming from a senior naval officer of a country that operates some 800 bases or military facilities in more than 60 countries around the world, several of them virtually at China's doorstep, that, sir, is a bit rich!”

She then cleverly pointed out that the US is not in the habit of admitting that it is or can be wrong. She brings up several examples of instances when the US refused to take the blame for its actions. This leads one to think Ms Oh Begong is perhaps not what she presents herself as, but might be a front for a political organisation. She says:

“Bottom line? Might is right. The US is out to stymie the rise of China and prevent it from challenging American dominance, if not hegemony. We get that. So do us a favor, please stop talking about high principles and international law.”

Good grief, the girl seems to have acquired her understanding of global politics from reading this blog.

She concludes by advising Admiral Harry B. Harris what he could personally do in order to regain at least a little bit respect from clear-sighted people who cannot be fooled. The letter is clearly aimed at Barack Obama, John Kerry, and Pentagon chiefs of staff. Who could really be behind it? Obviously the Chinese government but more likely in our view, representatives of smaller states in south east Asia whose governments fear the consequenses for their people should conflict flare up between two superpowers.


RELATED POSTS:
Russia Loses Patience In Syria, Unleashes Hell On ISIS
Germany Hopes To Ease Anti-Russia Sanctions 'to Rescue EU Unity'
One Day Czechs Will 'Wake Up To Find That US Troops Are Here to Stay'
US Missile Shield; Loved Up Obama And Cameron Laugh As Putin Warns Poland, Romania Now In The "Cross Hairs"
Irony Overload: Iran Warns Obama Not To Cross Red Lines
America Today: How Empires Die
China and Russia Challenge US Dominated IMF
Russia Sends Growler Missile System To Syria and China Unveils Hypersonic Strike Aircraft
First China, Now Russia: US Navy Chief Debates European Escalation Amid "Fears For The Global System"
2015 Will Be The Story Of China, Russia, Iran and The Petrodollar
Why It Really All Comes Down To The Death Of The Petrodollar
As Russia, China and Iran line up behind Assad, has the USA (and its proxies) lost the middle east war?


Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] ... Daily Stirrer ...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [Ian at Minds ] ... [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer News Aggregator]

First China, Now Russia: US Navy Chief Debates European Escalation Amid "Fears For The Global System"

by Arthur Foxake

Is Russian Naval Blockade of Syrian coast aleady in place (Russia 'ships are white, US 'Naval Assets' are red) (Source)

A recent story in the ongoing saga of the drift towards global conflict (that we did not report at the time because it happened withle Ian was on holiday and managed to get the rest of us locked out of the account by hacking into it because he couldn't be arsed setting up his Google global ID. (It wasn't that, I don't like Google tracking me when I'm at home, spying on my vacations it totally off limits - Ian) America sailed warships close to China's reclaimed islands in the South Cina Sea, sparking a diplomatic incident.

To be fair to Washington, the Chinese have been regularly rattling The Pentagon's cage, while simultaneously the situation between the USA and Russia is worsening in the middle east. We have reported our fears that American foreign policy overreach has prompted the eastern alliance to decide it is time the USA was deposed as dominant world power.

In a shockingly quick confirmation of our gravest concerns, Admiral John Richardson, chief of naval operations, told The Financial Times that the navy was reassessing its position in the face of Russian activity, which stretches from the Black Sea and Mediterranean to the Pacific.

In the face of China's island-building in the South China Sea through which 30% of global trade passes, and Russia's naval activity in The Mediterranean (20% of global trade), Richardson warns, rather ominously, the "ambiguous motivations" of China and Russia has raised concern about the viability of a global system that claims to ensure freedom:

"It again perturbs that global system," he said, adding that "the current model... has been threatened?"

So what now? It is a good bet that despite Russia's denials, the Pentagon will use the alleged Russian ground campaign against ISIS in Syria, credible or not (Russia has support troops on the ground in Syria, as does the USA,) to get push through Congress an enabling act to send a "small at first, then bigger ground force of US troops" into Syria, you guessed it,"to fight ISIS", but in reality to do everything to prevent Russian troops from taking over key strategic positions.

What happens then? The Russian fleet has in 2014 stationed ships off Syria's main ports to convince washington that a groun invastion of syria was a bad idea, so that demonstrated a naval blockade of Syria eould be Putin's next tactical move, and with both US and Russian warplanes flting missions against ISIS and Al Nusra targets in Syria, and both superpowers now having, from their own POV, justification to put troops on the ground, what was until now a mere proxy war is about to become full blown land combat on Syrian soil, one which will soon involve both Russian and US ground, sea and airborne forces.

Should US battle cruisers, destroyers and/or aircraft then approach the Syrian coastline, pissing distance away from comparable Russian ships that could be the trigger for the next and final escalation.

And sure enough, as The FT reports, The US is debating whether to position more ships and naval assets in Europe as Russian warships and submarines operate at levels not seen in two decades, according to Admiral Richardson. The key to this now is not whether China offes support to its allies, Russia and Iran, but how much support they offer and what form that support will take.