18:58 GMT +324 March 2017
    Nuclear explosion

    Pentagon-Linked Analysts Push Preemptive Strike on Russia, Missile Defense

    © Wikipedia/
    Military & Intelligence
    Get short URL

    The Beltway military punditry floats one of its most inflammatory ideas yet, in calls for a preemptive strike against Moscow along with calls to bolster America’s missile defense system.

    On Friday, a DC-based think tank issued a report calling for additional funding to advance US missile defense technology to combat what they view as a rising nuclear missile threat from Russia.

    Earlier this year, Russian President Vladimir Putin scoffed at Western assertions that Russia poses the preeminent threat to the US and NATO, labeling the idea of an attack against the military alliance "the type of thing that only crazy people think, and only when they are dreaming."

    Faced with the need to keep the budget spigot open, a Cold War-inspired Beltway commentariat continues to ratchet up "protective measures" against Moscow’s "aggression," by installing a missile defense system in Romania and constructing another similar missile defense system in Poland. NATO is now considering deploying permanent troops on the border between Poland and Russia, while undertaking a series of costly and polluting military exercises, steps from Russian lands.

    The latest war-drum-beating report is provided by the Center for Strategic & Budgetary Assessments, whose scholars Bryan Clark and Mark Gunzinger not only call for spending more money on lasers, railguns, and hypervelocity projectiles, but also posit fail-safe artificial intelligence systems capable of shooting down incoming missiles, again from Russia.

    The two note that while existing missile defense systems like the Navy’s Aegis have an automatic mode, the system lacks the kind of sophistication required to counter large incoming salvos. The paper proposed a plan modeled after a pet project of deputy Defense secretary and, coincidentally, a former vice-president of the Center for Strategic & Budgetary Assessments, Bob Work, who has led efforts to combine artificial intelligence with unmanned missile defense.

    In addition to calling for widely expanding appropriations to upgrade the US missile defense system against a hypothetical Russian attack threat, the think tank analysts suggest preemptive strikes against Russia, China, or any other nation, in the event diplomatic relations deteriorate.

    The two spell out their enhanced rules of engagement in text that clearly violates international law, detailing a "blinding campaign" of coordinated strikes against hostile headquarters, satellites and radar, using cyberattacks, jamming, and long-range bombing, in anticipation of an attack.


    Trump, Clinton Tie as Most Unpopular US Presidential Candidates Ever - Poll
    Some US Teachers Should Have Guns in Classrooms - Trump
    Trump Presidency to Put US Youth at Risk of Bigotry, Violence - Clinton
    Clinton Slams Trump's Proposal to End Gun-Free Zones in US Schools
    preemptive strike, nuclear war, anti-ballistic missile defense, missile defense system, missile defense, NATO, Pentagon, US Military, US Navy, Aegis Defense Services, US Department of Defense (DoD), U.S. Department of State, Kremlin, White House, US Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Bob Work, Mark Gunzinger, Bryan Clark, Ash Carter, Sergei Lavrov, John Kerry, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Barack Obama, China, United States, Russia
    Community standardsDiscussion
    Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik
    • Сomment
    • Marc Nonnenkamp
      Amazing that people which such horrific ideas can spread their poison legally.
    • Nordaf
      Now Russia knows what to expect from her Western "partners" and the Neocons who rule supreme in Washington.
    • Arius Armenian
      Lock up these lunatics and throw away the key. Add shock therapy.
    • avatar
      The giant arm business in the USA cannot survive without its lobbyists doing deals with congressmen about the Russia threat. It is a complete win-win strategy usually devised by people in power between the 45 and 65 years old (rich) who visualize a nuclear war after they are death. Corrupt governments people of ex-soviet countries want to live like the USA rich people, and they agree with the philosophy that after we die rich, the world can have a nuclear war

      Russia must also consider the USA and the puppet governments of the EU as a threat to the Russia people survival. By having nuclear missiles few miles from the Russia capital, they expect to blow out Moscow in 3-minutes. All the Russian missiles will take at least 15-30 minutes to reach Washington and according to its powerful super computer war simulation software; the USA will obliterate Russia in the first 10-minutes of initiation a nuclear war. Russia will have a big problem to responds.

      Nuclear missiles submarines close to the USA centre of power must be planned to equalize this inequality. Also, North Korea must be given all the support in its fight against the USA by attacking its puppet allies. Most probably, the USA will have nuclear submarines close to NK.
    • avatar
      " in the event diplomatic relations deteriorate"....with their forked tongue "diplomats" in place to make sure it does
    • avatar
      Looks like the Bush gang politic...make war in order to have the peace.
      Attacking first in order to defend ....
      Now, what are the people under the atomic bomb think about that.
      Do you think there is one nut guys that would agree to receive an atomic bomb in his yard.
      Not the majority, for sure....not even a small percentage....So, why ?
    • sepheronxin reply to (Show commentHide comment)
      Theon Lyreal, too much hollywood had clouded their brains.

      This think tank wants money. Comes up with stupid ideas. But the good thing about all of this? Is that they boast about it. They talk openly about it and give incentive to both Russia, China and others to prepare themselves for such a scenario, so it completely removes the "surprise" element to it all. These idiots love to talk big, and talk a lot. We have witnessed with Iran how much the US loved to threaten Iran. But then what happened? Nothing. US had all those bases set up near Iran, sent many navy ships off the coast of Iran, and threatened to actually bomb them (not like Russia where they get a bunch of blowhard, but I mean actual senators and officials in US wanted to bomb Iran), and they didn't, cause they know they couldn't succeed. Chances against both China and Russia are significantly less than Iran for a success. So all in all, they are just talking while giving Russia, China and others incentive to develop workarounds and build up their defenses and offenses.
    • avatar
      Wouldn't it be a lot easier and cheaper for someone, anyone, to just get rid of these guys who talk like that?
    • avatar
      Bryan Clark and Mark Gunzinger escaped from a mental asylum.
      They call for killing of millions. Better if we save the millions and sacrifice these two in a cement barrel.
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tol.(Show commentHide comment)
      l., The American leadership already has underground bases to live in in case of a nuclear war. They are quiet willing to sacrifice the rest of the American population, and the rest of life on the planet, in order to achieve their goal of world domination. American leadership are thinking like DEMONS not human beings.
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply toNordaf(Show commentHide comment)
      Nordaf, It is my true belief that if The US completes its missile defense system right on Russia's borders it will soon be followed by a nuclear first strike against Russia. If Russia strikes before it is completed then a nuclear exchange will result. If Russia doesn't have a nuclear arsenal themselves they guarantee a nuclear attack on themselves by the US.
      If the nuclear war can be limited to the Northern Hemisphere then the Southern Hemisphere will be left mostly intact. American leadership obviously intend to survive even if all of the Global North is laid waist. They then would likely move their operations to somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere.
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, With all due respect, you have overlooked one very important fact. The leaders of the United States are not rational people, but rather they are criminally insane. If they were not completely mad then your point would be perfectly valid. They are destroying the USA itself already in their insane pursuit of total world domination, but they could care less, just as long as they are successful. Ultimately it is not about the American Empire, but instead it is about their Personal Empire. They are more than willing to sacrifice the means to achieve the end.
    • Reginald Frackenwhip Spaulding
      You mean a NON-think tank. These ANALysts should be tarred and feathered and stockaded on K St. in all weather...
    • avatar
      Even if the missile sites are defensive only it's bad to put it simply. These mk41 launchers can be used offensively as well though with tomahawk cruise missiles which are nuclear capable. Anyone know what happens when a low flying nuke is shot down? I don't but don't want to see it happen in combat but worry about the sanity of nato leadership and what will happen if nato launches on Russia. Not only for Russia but the world.
    • Reginald Frackenwhip Spauldingin reply toMarc Nonnenkamp(Show commentHide comment)
      Marc Nonnenkamp, It IS, isn't it? These 'people' are threats to Humanity....
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomadison0873(Show commentHide comment)
      madison0873, The nuclear material that makes up the targets warhead will be strewn over the ground and in the air., contaminating both with radiation.
    • nuclearstarr
      2 billion hungry people in the world and all these jerks can think about is making more insane weapon systems they can aim at Russia.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, as usual, thanks and point taken. :)
    • avatar
      Clark and Gunzinger would do far better for the United States if they took into consideration in their "preemption scenario" the wide, wide, open, unprotected, southern border of the United States.

      Why have Clark and Gunzinger , comfortably doing "blue sky" thinking in their ivory-towered "thinking tank", possibly have overlooked America's totally exposed southern border?

      Donald Trump hasn't forgotten it. He's been telling everybody about it during his Presidential campaign. So why have Clark and Gunzinger ignored it?

      How could those two dreamers, Clark and Gunzinger, actually, really, truly believe that there could even BE swift Israel-like preemptive strikes initiated without there being no retaliatory Russian nuclear missile strikes launched in return, and a retaliatory strike launched within microseconds of the American launch?

      Unbelievable. And especially for such an idiotic idea coming from Mr. Bryan Clark, an ex- submariner who is supposedly an "expert" in undersea warfare and personnel readiness and management. Did he accidentally on purpose neglect the existence of the many Russian nuclear-missile carrying submarines cruising the world's seas and oceans, all of them READY for such an attack?

      Obviously, ex-submariner Clark knows where every single Russian nuclear missile submarine is at every moment in time -- and that the U.S. has the ability to 'take out' ALL of those Russian missile-carrying submarines in the U.S.'s preemptive nuclear strike he envisions in his imagination.

      And where in Clark's imagination is "personnel manager" Clark going to get the necessary DIVISIONS of U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps combat troops to stem the overwhelming tide of land and property grabbing Hispanics from Central and South America that will swarm across the U.S. southern border -- an unprotected 1,700-mile (2,736 kilometers) stretch of totally exposed and unprotected land between Mexico and an America that is totally involved in a nuclear war with Russia?

      Mark Gunzinger (Ret. Col., USAF) on the surface appears to be much better qualified at doing strategic planning than his colleague Bryan Clark. However, Gunziner's stiff-necked U.S. Air Force career (he's a 1977 graduate of the highly selective and prestigious United States Air Force Academy) seems to have prevented him from accepting the obvious -- THERE ARE NO WINNERS in a nuclear war, preemptive strike or not.

      Get real, you two.

      Мир !
    • Drain the swamp
      Its the unlimited dollar printing press of the great satan, if we can destroy it everything will become OK - over to you Max Keiser !!
    Show new comments (0)