It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Pentagon is planning for war with China and Russia — can it handle both?

page: 5
9
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

The 'Pentagon' plans for war with every country. The plans are then 'shelved'...in case needed in the future. Every country. That's their job.

Yawn.


This, yes.

Wargames. Gotta know the tactics of all nations for response and effectiveness. That doesn't mean we should build bunkers.

I imagine they have some creative plans for taking out the UK should they start getting uppity down the road.




posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

Nobody really thinks we're gonna attack Russia or China directly. As someone who recently retired from the military, I can tell you first hand we need more money. The anemic funding we had recently crippled us. All the defense and intelligence officials have been telling Congress we're in trouble.

They were telling them the same thing before 9/11. Nobody wanted to listen.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

So, do you think that our 'planning' will ever include just the defense of our boarders? Why does 'planning' comprise of invading other countries? Wouldn't the MAD scheme provide us with all of the defense we need? If we are attacked on our own soil, then we have the full right to counter attack with the upmost hostility, until they are off of our shores.

If they attack us remotely, we will respond in kind. No invasion necessary. No need for foreign bases. We can hit any target in the world without those bases. We should just declare that if we are attacked, we will respond with a greater response and then that is it. There is no need for any of our soldiers on foreign soil. That will never serve to protect our land and boarders.

The current 'planning' is just brainwashing the american masses that we have to be proactive. That we have to strike first to prevent attacks on our home soil, BS. All this does is to ensure we remain the pawns for the powerful. We are simply a tool and very possibly a very uneducated one at that because we continuously allow ourselves to be used. We pay in life and blood so our controllers can be paid in material and power.

Maybe it is time for a change. Time to take ourselves out of this game and truly protect our country instead of making enimies across the globe with long lasting memories. That doesn't sound very smart. Why can't we be neutral?



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: ClovenSky

Wars don't always involve just successfully defending your border and then the other guy runs off with his bloody nose and will never do it again. See Germany.

Sometimes invasion is necessary. That doesn't mean we always have to. See Desert Storm. But you should at least have a plan in case it becomes necessary.

Seriously, guys, come on. This stuff isn't hard. We all learned this stuff in high school. It doesn't take a military education or a history degree.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

Nobody really thinks we're gonna attack Russia or China directly. As someone who recently retired from the military, I can tell you first hand we need more money. The anemic funding we had recently crippled us. All the defense and intelligence officials have been telling Congress we're in trouble.

They were telling them the same thing before 9/11. Nobody wanted to listen.


This is where the Global warming previous contributions which average up to over a billion or more could come into play, I could see him using the money saved to invest into the Military.
edit on 17-2-2018 by BotheLumberJack because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: BotheLumberJack

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

Nobody really thinks we're gonna attack Russia or China directly. As someone who recently retired from the military, I can tell you first hand we need more money. The anemic funding we had recently crippled us. All the defense and intelligence officials have been telling Congress we're in trouble.

They were telling them the same thing before 9/11. Nobody wanted to listen.


This is where the Global warming previous contributions which average up to over a billion or more could come into play, I could see him using the money saved to invest into the Military.


Every little bit helps.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

What if WWI & WWII didn't occur the way our history books claim? What happens if they were strategically planned and executed simply for profit? If these huge conflicts were created to enrich a few well connected people, that would certainly change this entire picture. It is kind of amazing how well those wars allowed for majority of wars/skirmishes to follow in their footsteps.

Why are we in Afghanistan? I had always thought it was to protect the poppy fields.

Come on people, when are we going to wake up and stop being used? Why are we paying in blood and life for something that has never benefited us? How can we be so ignorant especially in these days of easily accessible information? This isn't rocket science. Doing the same thing over and over again for the last 400 years doesn't seem to have benefited us much. Why do we continue. What was that definition of insanity again?



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: BotheLumberJack

originally posted by: testingtesting
Although I do not think it will happen it does poses hypothetical question.
In a none nuke war could Russia and the Chinese beat the USA in a conventional war?.


These are the kind of questions I was hoping to provoke from people on this.

Hypothetically, we need to consider it for our own sakes.


There'll be no such thing as a non nuke war amongst such powerful agressors as the US, China, and Russia, think about it!


I believe there are enough checks and balances in great nations to where someone in the line will put a stop to any nuclear based insanity. Everyone involved in launching a nuke and thereby starting the obliteration of both nations, if not the world, has a family and even if the leader is lacking common sense, the ones surrounding him/her won't be. Caesar will be backstabbed if he puts the lives of his allies at risk for his own insanity.


that's what I would hope. These wars are stupid anyway, we already have thirty years or more of nuclear button pushing and we don't even know the full extent of the harm that has caused. In a war, those thirty years would be commpressed into a matter weeks or days..imagine that! What would be left of governments would hi-tailing it to the hills, with whats left of civilians chasing them, while the world would be destroyed for millennia anyway.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: BotheLumberJack


I have few doubts that the world has gone Boom several times due to War. We just haven't got a whole lot of evidence to show for that. We do have enough though that i've made my mind up about it.

The Russians Americans Chinese and other smaller Nations have their own weapons. Canada has more Plutonium than you can shake a stick at, and if the whole thing spun out of control, then the only ones who might survive would be the Big Shots who stole all the money to make their underground hideaways in. Remember the seed bank ? They're vying for this, there's too many people on the planet. They don't want more money, they want more Power.


Not sure what you mean by the "world has gone boom several times due to war." Could you explain that a bit more?

As far as the big shots go, I would agree...the Putins, Jinpings, Trumps and Clintons of this world will have no problem finding shelter. It's the people that remember how to plant, how to build, how to plan, how to fix people and how to do almost everything that requires doing...those are the people that will pay if things go nuclear.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr


Peace is human, to make and wage war is inhuman.


Quite the opposite actually. It's sad, but the opposite is more true.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:41 AM
link   
funny, instead of asking why, the question is can America juggle them both...



this is nothing more than misinformation.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

The 'Pentagon' plans for war with every country. The plans are then 'shelved'...in case needed in the future. Every country. That's their job.

Yawn.


This, yes.

Wargames. Gotta know the tactics of all nations for response and effectiveness. That doesn't mean we should build bunkers.

I imagine they have some creative plans for taking out the UK should they start getting uppity down the road.


It doesn't mean we shouldn't build bunkers, as you say, either.

Our military is currently being audited like never in our history! Accountability is actually being addressed. NOT an overnight job. Still cleaning out the WH, never mind the machine behind it.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: BotheLumberJack


I have few doubts that the world has gone Boom several times due to War. We just haven't got a whole lot of evidence to show for that. We do have enough though that i've made my mind up about it.

The Russians Americans Chinese and other smaller Nations have their own weapons. Canada has more Plutonium than you can shake a stick at, and if the whole thing spun out of control, then the only ones who might survive would be the Big Shots who stole all the money to make their underground hideaways in. Remember the seed bank ? They're vying for this, there's too many people on the planet. They don't want more money, they want more Power.


Not sure what you mean by the "world has gone boom several times due to war." Could you explain that a bit more?

As far as the big shots go, I would agree...the Putins, Jinpings, Trumps and Clintons of this world will have no problem finding shelter. It's the people that remember how to plant, how to build, how to plan, how to fix people and how to do almost everything that requires doing...those are the people that will pay if things go nuclear.



Oh, well what I meant by that was I believe there have been Technologically Advanced Societies in our past. Some believe some don't. I'm one that believes based on stuff i've read and researched on it.

Aside, yes my thoughts as well. They'd have to have people to teach and advance in several fields, if SHTF and they ran underground. If that happened those people would be prisoners for life, slaves in a nutshell. And then after all was said and done, the return of the Gods run by the gods themselves, the Political Religious and Royalty of the day. Like ancient times. Like Egypt.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
funny, instead of asking why, the question is can America juggle them both...



this is nothing more than misinformation.


This is why it's important to Question everything, leaving nothing out.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

The 'Pentagon' plans for war with every country. The plans are then 'shelved'...in case needed in the future. Every country. That's their job.

Yawn.


This, yes.

Wargames. Gotta know the tactics of all nations for response and effectiveness. That doesn't mean we should build bunkers.

I imagine they have some creative plans for taking out the UK should they start getting uppity down the road.


The ones running the show already have bunkers. Near indestructible ones.

Bunkers for us? Would be like building a lean-to in the forest.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ophiuchus 13
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

Hence why reversed engineered technologies that build UFO & USO remain classified...

How many ufo does it take to command the air?
How many uso does it take to command the sea?
Of planet EA*RTH.


About 30 give or take. Black doritos can shut down all aircraft curretly flying.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

we can handle both. we have chinas mindset, we have many chinese people here & integrated our system & beliefs to be more like them. same for russians & russia. we have the phycological advantage when it comes to philosophy, stratagy, expenditures, something they dont have because they dont have a millions of americans their adapting to their society & ways of living.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 10:43 AM
link   
This is interesting and I am surprised they didn’t do this before.
The US military has I think 10 combatant commands across the planet: one for Mideast, Europe, Africa, Pacific and other areas. Usually it’s based on geography not a particular enemy such as Russia and China as this suggests. If they create this commbatant command just for Russia and China then they'll have 11 combatant commands.

Why this now? It may be because they have intelligence that China and Russia are allying together against the potential threat of America.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: SatansPride
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

we can handle both. we have chinas mindset, we have many chinese people here & integrated our system & beliefs to be more like them. same for russians & russia. we have the phycological advantage when it comes to philosophy, stratagy, expenditures, something they dont have because they dont have a millions of americans their adapting to their society & ways of living.


China wants money. war on the US negates our debt instantly and crashes their economy due to huge losses. Russia would be cut off on the chinese side because they would close their borders.Also China would love to ge the siberian lands in exchange as reward for not helping russia.



posted on Feb, 17 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

For many years, Pentagon policy was to have the ability to fight two major wars, and a "brushfire" war. Then they cut the military down, and started running it into the ground. As it stands now, we couldn't even fight one major war with the readiness rates that we have, and with the wear we've put on our equipment.

Currently, the Marines are averaging 14-16 flight hours a month, while the Air Force is averaging 9-10 hours. Marine aircraft readiness rates on the other hand, are still averaging around 50%. When it comes to our bombers, the B-52, the youngest of which is over 60 years old, was the highest by far, at 74%. Our aircraft fleet is averaging somewhere close to 30 years old.


edit on 2/17/2018 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join