Global war part 2

Part 2 - the war


This is looking at it from a western  standpoint for ease of explanation 

Only a few key countries are aware of the reality, the US, UK, Germany, Russia ( and by proxy the whole of the CIS ) , China, Australia, France and probably a few more.

This has over the years developed into what is essentially WW3 (but is know as the global war in certain circles),acknowledged within the alliances but not admitted to the opposing side or countries not in the 'know' 


Countries not in the know are kept in the dark for many reasons, social and economic but more so to prevent information leakage and to allow the war to be fought under the guise of multiple separate conflicts, such as the war on terror (being most of the ME), war on drugs (being south America) , Iraq,  Afghanistan, the gulf war, Yugoslavia,  then the more  covert wars of most of Africa, east Asia, Georgia and far eastern Europe/western USSR, Chechnya and the southern CIS . 

There is essentially five land fronts 

Africa ( mainly east Africa at the moment )
This is a resource war with social and political implications ( none more so than racial ) and thus is a covert war,  ( sabotage assassination, subversion, what's referred to as your black ops)  , countries need to be won over/ have puppets installed or constant rebellions until  a 'friendly' leader is in place.
However  because of this covert war unrest and rebellion has become the norm. 
This has also served a second purpose, after the second world war the ally's agreed to leave Africa as an undeveloped country and to make efforts to keep it this way from even the indigenous people, essentially keeping Africa has a resource reserve for the future, for use by the developed nations.
This constant covert war has helped prevent the modernisation and development of Africa by its populous.
This front is fairly neck and neck at the moment initially with NATO having the edge, then the CIS making gains through the 90's and early 00's 

Eastern Europe, southern USSR 
These are covert strategic fronts again using public unrest and much the same strategies as in Africa. 
But this is for land, the traditional forward edge of battle, the line between the CIS and NATO. 
This is going in NATO's favour AT THE MOMENT and has done since the start.

 The ME, the current main effort (the main centre of which is Afghanistan and Israel to some degree ) this is again a resource war and an economic war but also and more importantly  strategic ground  which is what most don't realise, due to its proximity to china and the CIS .
A land route from the med to the east,  Israel being the port entrance ( the key to the route ) 
Turkey, Azerbaijan being the land route through Europe  ( however look at Turkey as an infiltrator, playing both sides but leans east ! ) 
This is an open war for the west but largely covert for the east.
 Iraq, Afghanistan, ( go on include Syria, Iran, and Pakistan ).
But also a covert war everywhere else 
This is one of the two land battles that China is involved in with Syria Iran and Pakistan ( which is another playing both sides but leans strongly east )
This was initially dominated by the east, with the west taking ground in the 90's and 00's resulting in a neck and neck however the east has made large gains again recently and is CURRENTLY the dominant influence 

 South America 
This is a strategic war due to it's proximity to the US and it's land route.
This is also a resource war and an economic one. 
This is to the west under the guise of the war on drugs, but is also a heavy covert war again similar to Africa
This was a western held area  at first
However the east has made slow but steady progress there both in the covert war, political and  economic war  against stiff resistance which has resulted in a current neck and neck state however the east continues to make gains

The far east.
This is a strategic and resource war,
The link between the CIS and China, combined with the ME equals one big red blob ! 
This is a covert war ( not quite so covert by China )
This has always been dominated by the east but the west has key footholds and has made some significant gains . 

The naval fronts 
The Arctic sea - CIS
north sea - NATO 
Atlantic - NATO but growing CIS influence 
Pacific - NATO but growing Chinese 
Med - NATO but growing CIS 
Indian/gulf NATO but growing east 

This is predominately due to NATO's war strategy of naval superiority and strike ability

The easts strategy is that of economic and resource control 

Whats referred to as war without limits - or unrestricted warfare 
The use of economic, resources, rogue states, terrorism, political, social, and military resources to defeat your enemy.

The wests angle is traditional war fare with unrestricted warfare as its partner

The east however has focused more on this unrestricted warfare and traditional military as it's parallel 
And is much better at it, china being the best example 

This strategy though the longer to come to fruition has the greater chance of overall success, the west is learning this the hard way.

Further reading to provide insight into this strategy is the paper titled unrestricted warfare 
Written as a military strategy paper in 1998 ( if memory serves me right )
By two then majors in the PLA, details the fundamentals of how to defeat the west.
An excerpt  of this even went as far as suggesting the use of terrorist organisations, specifically naming Osama bin laden, and suggesting an economic strike against the US by attacking the world trade centres by bombing them and mentions hijacking aircraft. 

Now this isn't a 9/11 thread but to elaborate, theres a difference between the US gov masterminding the events of that day - and being aware and allowing the events to happen, assisting and using this event to their advantage

 ( let the planes hit - that won't bring them down - ok well, we will make sure they come down- then we can invade Afghanistan, and be right on chinas doorstep ! ) - a poor and small  example but just so you get the idea of the bigger picture.

These two majors were quickly promoted and are now generals.
The paper initially intercepted by the west and translated eventually became a book of the same title,
There are a few versions, however the originally translated version is the most accurate and least watered down and can be found online.

I do not have a copy with me and is taken from memory, so possibly some minor discrepencies.

THIS IS ESSENTIAL READING 
And provides insight and reasoning to many events of the last 15 years

It's not just a book, it is an active strategy. 

End of part two

And please again feel free to add insight and links
And ask questions

www.abovetopsecret.com... part 1
www.abovetopsecret.com... part 3
www.abovetopsecret.com... part 4

Your situation presents many fronts a major problem for the USA. The US military is I believe capable of waging a 4 front war max, not sure. With a WW3, that situation is more complex because much more stronger nations are in the game. Even with NATO help the situation is very grim

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Agreed
However the African front requires very few boots on the ground and resources from all sides involved, it's very much a spec ops theatre with the majority of the conflict being fought by influenced militias and armed indigenous groups. Combined with the sabotage, subversion, assassination and influence war.

South America is similar, however due to its strategic value the US requires more boots on the ground, for the east and it's allys its more a covert war

Eat Asia is much a mirror of south America, requiring more resources from china and the CIS, and less from the western nations

As for eastern Europe/southern CIS this is much like Africa, however both sides have a significant presence, more so the CIS naturally
This however is an unusual front ( especially the southern CIS ) as there are joint operations against militants, this benefits the CIS as you can guess but also NATO against militant forces involved in the ME front