A new study by the Rand Corp. warns that the US could “lose the next war they are called upon to fight, despite the United States outspending China on military forces by a ratio of 2.7 to 1 and Russia by 6 to 1.”
The US is losing ground on technology superiority, according to Gordon England, a former secretary of the Navy and deputy secretary of Defense and currently the chairman of the National Academy of Engineering. He writes:
“The Heritage Foundation recently released its index of military strength. After analyzing various essential components, Heritage ranked the capability of the U.S. Army and U.S. Marines as “marginal” and the U.S. Navy as “weak.” Reviews of our nation’s research capability — by Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and the American Academy of Arts & Science — likewise show that we’re losing ground. Assessments like these are always problematic, but they all indicate a common troubling finding: The U.S. is on a downward trend.”
The highlights of the Heritage 2017 Index of US Military Strength are summarized here.
“Achieving a 355-ship Navy is now national policy, but the goal is still a long way off,” Defense News reports.
Ground-based THAAD interceptors aren’t enough
An effective missile defense system is especially urgent. Rather than build a space-based system that could be effective against Russian and Chinese capabilities to wipe out the US, the present ground and ship-based platforms were intended to just be effective against accidental launches or attacks by an Iran or North Korea. In point of fact, these platforms are not assured of a high degree of reliability even against those reduced threats.
The necessity of a space-based system is mentioned, almost as an afterthought here, but nowhere except from defense and intelligence analyst Angelo Codevilla, here and here, have we encountered the clarion call urgently required.
Axis powers update
Russia is “Sharply Expanding Nuclear Arsenal, Upgrading Underground Facilities,” The Washington Free Beacon reports. Russia’s alarming missile expansions indicates that it
“is preparing to break out of current nuclear forces constraints under arms treaties, including the 2010 New START and 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaties. Russia violated the INF accord by testing an illegal ground-launched cruise missile.”
Russian President Putin at his annual end-of-year press conference
Russian President Putin at his annual end-of-the-year press conference stated:
“I have full confidence that cooperation with China is beyond any political agenda. We will always remain strategic partners, for a long period of time. We have similar approaches to the development of the international system. We are both interested in joint [economic] projects, including integration of [the China-dominated] OBOR [One Belt One Road trade and infrastructure agreement] and the [similar Russian-dominated] Eurasian Union.”
Translation: We’re both committed to one-man rule and are in close military and diplomatic alliance against all things Western and especially the US.
In his press conference Putin also noted the other partners of the axis: Iran, Syria, North Korea. (Turkey should also be regarded as such.)
What about the goals of Russia’s ever more powerful Chinese ally? Dan Blumenthal, director of Asian studies and a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, summarizes:
“China’s grand strategy requires much of its military and security forces. President Xi Jinping’s ‘China dream’ of ‘national rejuvenation’ calls for the reunification of the lost Qing imperial territories of Taiwan and Hong Kong, the continued suppression of the imperial holdings of Tibet and Xinjiang, the coercion of countries abutting the seas around China’s coast to make good on expansive maritime claims, the protection of seaborne trade that passes through the Indian Ocean into the western Pacific Ocean and on to China’s coasts, the preparation of contingencies on the Korean Peninsula, and preparation for a fight with the United States, should Washington’s strategic position in Asia become untenable for Beijing.”
Russian collusion? What about China and President Clinton?
The attempt by foreign rivals and enemies to influence US politics is old hat — one more indication of how ridiculous the Democratic Party and press instigated Russian collusion narrative against the Trump administration is. Britain and France both intervened massively in US politics in the nation’s first decade, the 1790s. President Bill Clinton’s campaign notoriously took money from the Chinese. Hillary Clinton was involved in that scandal. Subsequently, she and her husband set up the Clinton Foundation as a slicker way to harvest campaign funds for her own unsuccessful presidential campaigns. Bill Clinton raked in one-half million dollars for one short speech to a Russian financial group and $550,000 from China. Talk about collusion with foreign interests! All well documented, unlike anything the CNN, Washington Post, and New York Times scandal sheet have been publishing against Trump.
The Chinese continue to intervene in US and other foreign countries’ elections and political processes: in Europe, in the US, and in Australia.
But all this enemy influencing is minimal in effect by comparison with the domestic subverters of the administration, such as the Washington Post.
hat tip: Eaglebeak
Click here to go to yesterday’s Founders Broadsheet (“Rubio almost scuttles GOP tax bill on verge of going to President for signing”)
Leave a Reply