Ever since it has had the ability to deliver nuclear bombs, the US government has targeted China - long before it acquired nuclear weapons - and would have used them if war had broken out with the USSR.
Back in the 1960s, as a whizz-kid consultant to the Pentagon, Daniel Ellsberg had a tour of top-level US ships and bases in the Pacific. He saw things that even generals and admirals weren't allowed to.
"Many operations and plan centers and command posts in Okinawa, Formosa, Guam, and Tokyo, and on several carriers and command ships in the Pacific that I visited, had a large map showing nuclear targets. It was their most secret map, usually covered by a screen or curtain when people who lacked authorization (unlike me) were being briefed in the room. These maps, typically, did not demarcate at all between China and Russia. The Sino-Soviet bloc appeared as one giant landmass, with arrows and pins indicating the various targets...
All these factors combined to create a situation in which, if we were under attack, it would be simply physically impossible to retaliate against Russian or Chinese targets alone, even if the president ordered his forces to do so...
"I never found anyone in Washington who had any idea that there was this kind of problem".
Ellsberg, Daniel (2017). The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner
AFAIK they had always intended to strike China at the same time as the USSR. The thinking was if US and USSR wiped each other out, then China would "win" being barely harmed.
So the launchers in the Pacific would have launched at both simultaneously.
"... arguing that assuming the Soviets shared a desire for mutual stability was a psychological delusion".
Nothing "psychological" about it, but it was a delusion. The Soviets wanted mutual stability, but they couldn't have shared that desire as the USA didn't have it.
Well, when the pointing may be wild, but you look and see a huge white elephant sitting in the corner in the same direction, it's hard to mistake the meaning. ;)
And tbh, it was quite straightforward anyway. <3
Only cognitive dissonance would come from Empire loyalists!
Funny, I was just talking to someone about the American way of doin' business - the guy argued that China must have its own selfish interests and it was "naive" to think otherwise - and replied that bandits tend to see banditry everywhere, if only because that's what they would do in their place. A thief, born and raised by thieves, immersed in a culture that promotes and celebrates thievery, simply cannot conceive anyone *not* stealing. The neocons assumed the USSR wanted domination because *they* wanted domination and find inconceivable that anyone would *not* want it and settle for peaceful coexistence. Textbook narcissistic psychopath behaviour. The only sensible course of action, back then, would have been to lock the lot of them into a clinic for the criminally insane for life.
That would have been sensible, yes... but, almost unbelievably, it would have been unpopular! Things have not changed much in the century since H. L. Mencken published this diagnosis:
"The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth. A Galileo could no more be elected President of the United States than he could be elected Pope of Rome. Both posts are reserved for men favored by God with an extraordinary genius for swathing the bitter facts of life in bandages of soft illusion".
- H.L. Mencken (“The Art Eternal”, New York Evening Mail 1918, as quoted in Alistair Cooke, “The Vintage Mencken”)
It accounts for a lot; and you have to bear in mind that Mencken had as yet no evidence except the personalities of men like Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt. Compared to Biden and Trump, courtly geniuses; compared to Obama, paragons of morality. Compared to G. W. Bush, at least obviously human.
It's interesting to conjecture how the Pentagon would plan to deliver nuclear bombs against Iranian targets. Apparently the type of bomb required to bore into a mountain must be dropped from bombers, and I would be surprised if the USA has any bombers that Iran can't shoot down if push comes to shove. I suspect that Russia, China, and probably Iran cracked the problem of stealthy aircraft years ago. They haven't needed to destroy any yet, so they haven't. It would make waves, the Pentagon would have a tantrum, and the White House - who knows? Besides, it would tip their hand.
I remember Major-General Konashenkov (as he was then) briefing about the Syrian situation at least 10 years ago. Just once he dropped a typically Russian terse remark about how disappointed some people would be if they put their reliance in "invisible aircraft".
AFAIK even the F35's have been radared* over Iran, with some forced to break off missions when they were missile-locked.
Stealth is just a reduction in radar visibility, hollywood's "Becoming invisible tech" fantasies are for the plebs.
By some accounts, when Trump/Iran agreed to the show bombing in the first round last year, the Iranians tracked the B2s but had agreed not to shoot them down, as long as only show damage was done.
*It works, it's understandable. Shut up pedants. :P
What's special about F35s? I know they hold the world records for most expensive fighter, most expensive fighter/bomber, most expensive aircraft, etc. But apart from "American Values"?
The story about the B2s fits with what I intuitively guessed. They didn't want to stress the Donald too much, in case he cried.
As I understand it (layman) the F35 sacrifices everything else for "stealth". But actually stealth aircraft are quite visible on some older, simpler radar systems that everyone but the Americans still use. The resolution is poor, but once they know how many and roughly where they are, even an S400 could be left to do the rest. Maybe an S300.
The F35 is slow - any proper fighter could run rings round it. It has one engine, which belches flame hot enough so any infra-red detector for miles can pick it up. And of course it's visible to ground observers or fighters flying above and behind it.
Oh, and any external load or opening the bomb bay doors ruins its "stealth".
A little conjecture on my part about the 2025 Kabuki exchange: It was clear that Iron Dome was on its last legs as increasing numbers of Iranian hypersonic re-entry vehicles were hitting sensitive Izzie targets, so they cried uncle, and Uncle Donnie cut a deal. The US bombs Fordow and declares victory, and Iran and Israel live to face off another day.
What was in it for Iran? US doctrine was based on B-61s penetrating deep enough so that a much greater quantum of energy would transmit into the granite to deliver a lethal seismic shock to anything under the rock. For the Iranians it was a chance to test their engineering prowess. Uncle Don had no doubts that his superior weaponry would finish the job.
Except that it didn’t, which is why Bibi had to push Cheetoh Jesus for another go in 2026.
The US might consider recommissioning the old Mk/B53 warhead canned sub-assemblies, ostensibly being held for planetary defence, and wrap them in a similar penetrating delivery vehicle and see if 9 megatons might do the job.
Seriously, setting off nukes over Iran would show that the US cupboard is bare at a time when the US and its pit-chihuahuas are kicking up shit at several hotspots around the world. It would almost certainly require its adversaries to consider their own first use to preëmpt the widening of nuclear exchange on US terms.
In a sane world, the GCC and other interested parties would do something along the lines of the Montreaux Convention and let Iran and Oman collect administrative and service fees for passage through their waters in much the same way Türkiye does for passage through the Bosphorous. Instead, the US is willing to spend trillions of its own treasure to wrest “free passage” back from those rascals in Tehran.
They don’t want a deal or peace. It’s almost as if the cabal pulling the strings of the Western “leaders” want to “Pull it,” in the memorable words of Larry Silverstein on 11 September 2001.
Yeps, I've heard all that as well, and frankly sounds legit.
Whenever I hear a talking head proclaim "It's the most advanced fighter in the world!" I know I'm dealing with an Empire idjit.
Sadly, unlike Ike, today's media and politicians don't tell us that 2 F35s = one brand spanking new hospital for the public's benefit.
And for what? A flying brick that is broken 80% of the time, still has 1000s of terminal faults especially in the software, and is only good for dropping bombs on civilians in tents who couldn't possibly fire back.
So maybe numbskulls judge everything by money. I could be in the business. If they give me a couple of trillion, I could give them nothing for 10 years.
Just an educated guess - if anything, DaIranian FIASCO has demonstrated the decrepid state of USRAEL military logistics - why would DaNuclear option be any different?
The American Empire is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons not once but twice, which includes killing civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And it has a openly admitted nuclear doctrine that seeks to expands the pretexts in which the Americans will use nuclear weapons.
What's worse, this American Empire wages wars of aggression rationalized by propaganda about preventing other nations from developing "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (see America's wars against Iraq or now Iran).
And these American wars have murdered hundreds of thousands of people, if not more.
Yet, this American Empire markets itself as a "force for good", "defender of democracy," and "leader of the free world."
This is the United Sociopaths of America and its Orwellian national character....
For once you’ve got it right-almost. Trump retreats before Labor Day declaring victory to boost election results against the DSA led Dems, who have shattered any hope of taking the Senate with their nonsensical and economically destructive agenda.
Gives a wink and a nod to Bibi, who declares that the Iranians are minutes away from using nukes. So he uses them first.
Bibi is reelected, Trump has plausible deniability going for him and gas prices quickly slide and the American people, now ecstatic because gas is $1.19 a gallon vote Republican across the board.
There’s peace in our time and any excess radiation just floats northward toward Russia aiding the flagging Ukrainian cause
All of this is academic in a world of LOGIC: of course the US will use nukes. It's not even a question. This coward bitch of an "empire" only understands ONE thing: FORCE.
We do not live in a world of logic - demonstrably so.
The sooner Putin an Xi wrap their heads around this, the better: the US is Desperate, and will do ANYTHING to save their position as head 🤡...🍊🤡 _will nuke Iran_ - unless saner heads in the Pentagram refuse orders - I don't hold out much hope for that.
Russia - and China - need to take out UK and French nuclear subs as a pre-emptory Object Lesson. And even that lesson has a low probability of being understood.
🤡phobia is a 'thing' for a reason. One must slay one's demons.
Those old Trident missiles on the UK subs probably don't work. The UK and the French are also IMO way more sane and rational than Israelis and less of a threat.
I would be very happy if the Russians or Chinese or somebody took out the 5 or so subs Israel has. I would be ecstatic if somebody took out Israel completely.
Ever since it has had the ability to deliver nuclear bombs, the US government has targeted China - long before it acquired nuclear weapons - and would have used them if war had broken out with the USSR.
Back in the 1960s, as a whizz-kid consultant to the Pentagon, Daniel Ellsberg had a tour of top-level US ships and bases in the Pacific. He saw things that even generals and admirals weren't allowed to.
"Many operations and plan centers and command posts in Okinawa, Formosa, Guam, and Tokyo, and on several carriers and command ships in the Pacific that I visited, had a large map showing nuclear targets. It was their most secret map, usually covered by a screen or curtain when people who lacked authorization (unlike me) were being briefed in the room. These maps, typically, did not demarcate at all between China and Russia. The Sino-Soviet bloc appeared as one giant landmass, with arrows and pins indicating the various targets...
All these factors combined to create a situation in which, if we were under attack, it would be simply physically impossible to retaliate against Russian or Chinese targets alone, even if the president ordered his forces to do so...
"I never found anyone in Washington who had any idea that there was this kind of problem".
Ellsberg, Daniel (2017). The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner
AFAIK they had always intended to strike China at the same time as the USSR. The thinking was if US and USSR wiped each other out, then China would "win" being barely harmed.
So the launchers in the Pacific would have launched at both simultaneously.
Because that's how psychopaths think.
I am happy to know that the Chinese are fully aware of these facts.
Don't know if they knew then, but they certainly do since it was all declassified years ago.
"... arguing that assuming the Soviets shared a desire for mutual stability was a psychological delusion".
Nothing "psychological" about it, but it was a delusion. The Soviets wanted mutual stability, but they couldn't have shared that desire as the USA didn't have it.
100.
I'm glad to see that at least one person was able to figure out that rather convoluted statement! 8-)
Well, when the pointing may be wild, but you look and see a huge white elephant sitting in the corner in the same direction, it's hard to mistake the meaning. ;)
And tbh, it was quite straightforward anyway. <3
Only cognitive dissonance would come from Empire loyalists!
Funny, I was just talking to someone about the American way of doin' business - the guy argued that China must have its own selfish interests and it was "naive" to think otherwise - and replied that bandits tend to see banditry everywhere, if only because that's what they would do in their place. A thief, born and raised by thieves, immersed in a culture that promotes and celebrates thievery, simply cannot conceive anyone *not* stealing. The neocons assumed the USSR wanted domination because *they* wanted domination and find inconceivable that anyone would *not* want it and settle for peaceful coexistence. Textbook narcissistic psychopath behaviour. The only sensible course of action, back then, would have been to lock the lot of them into a clinic for the criminally insane for life.
That would have been sensible, yes... but, almost unbelievably, it would have been unpopular! Things have not changed much in the century since H. L. Mencken published this diagnosis:
"The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth. A Galileo could no more be elected President of the United States than he could be elected Pope of Rome. Both posts are reserved for men favored by God with an extraordinary genius for swathing the bitter facts of life in bandages of soft illusion".
- H.L. Mencken (“The Art Eternal”, New York Evening Mail 1918, as quoted in Alistair Cooke, “The Vintage Mencken”)
It accounts for a lot; and you have to bear in mind that Mencken had as yet no evidence except the personalities of men like Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt. Compared to Biden and Trump, courtly geniuses; compared to Obama, paragons of morality. Compared to G. W. Bush, at least obviously human.
It's interesting to conjecture how the Pentagon would plan to deliver nuclear bombs against Iranian targets. Apparently the type of bomb required to bore into a mountain must be dropped from bombers, and I would be surprised if the USA has any bombers that Iran can't shoot down if push comes to shove. I suspect that Russia, China, and probably Iran cracked the problem of stealthy aircraft years ago. They haven't needed to destroy any yet, so they haven't. It would make waves, the Pentagon would have a tantrum, and the White House - who knows? Besides, it would tip their hand.
I remember Major-General Konashenkov (as he was then) briefing about the Syrian situation at least 10 years ago. Just once he dropped a typically Russian terse remark about how disappointed some people would be if they put their reliance in "invisible aircraft".
A word to the wise.
AFAIK even the F35's have been radared* over Iran, with some forced to break off missions when they were missile-locked.
Stealth is just a reduction in radar visibility, hollywood's "Becoming invisible tech" fantasies are for the plebs.
By some accounts, when Trump/Iran agreed to the show bombing in the first round last year, the Iranians tracked the B2s but had agreed not to shoot them down, as long as only show damage was done.
*It works, it's understandable. Shut up pedants. :P
What's special about F35s? I know they hold the world records for most expensive fighter, most expensive fighter/bomber, most expensive aircraft, etc. But apart from "American Values"?
The story about the B2s fits with what I intuitively guessed. They didn't want to stress the Donald too much, in case he cried.
As I understand it (layman) the F35 sacrifices everything else for "stealth". But actually stealth aircraft are quite visible on some older, simpler radar systems that everyone but the Americans still use. The resolution is poor, but once they know how many and roughly where they are, even an S400 could be left to do the rest. Maybe an S300.
The F35 is slow - any proper fighter could run rings round it. It has one engine, which belches flame hot enough so any infra-red detector for miles can pick it up. And of course it's visible to ground observers or fighters flying above and behind it.
Oh, and any external load or opening the bomb bay doors ruins its "stealth".
A little conjecture on my part about the 2025 Kabuki exchange: It was clear that Iron Dome was on its last legs as increasing numbers of Iranian hypersonic re-entry vehicles were hitting sensitive Izzie targets, so they cried uncle, and Uncle Donnie cut a deal. The US bombs Fordow and declares victory, and Iran and Israel live to face off another day.
What was in it for Iran? US doctrine was based on B-61s penetrating deep enough so that a much greater quantum of energy would transmit into the granite to deliver a lethal seismic shock to anything under the rock. For the Iranians it was a chance to test their engineering prowess. Uncle Don had no doubts that his superior weaponry would finish the job.
Except that it didn’t, which is why Bibi had to push Cheetoh Jesus for another go in 2026.
The US might consider recommissioning the old Mk/B53 warhead canned sub-assemblies, ostensibly being held for planetary defence, and wrap them in a similar penetrating delivery vehicle and see if 9 megatons might do the job.
Seriously, setting off nukes over Iran would show that the US cupboard is bare at a time when the US and its pit-chihuahuas are kicking up shit at several hotspots around the world. It would almost certainly require its adversaries to consider their own first use to preëmpt the widening of nuclear exchange on US terms.
In a sane world, the GCC and other interested parties would do something along the lines of the Montreaux Convention and let Iran and Oman collect administrative and service fees for passage through their waters in much the same way Türkiye does for passage through the Bosphorous. Instead, the US is willing to spend trillions of its own treasure to wrest “free passage” back from those rascals in Tehran.
They don’t want a deal or peace. It’s almost as if the cabal pulling the strings of the Western “leaders” want to “Pull it,” in the memorable words of Larry Silverstein on 11 September 2001.
Yeps, I've heard all that as well, and frankly sounds legit.
Whenever I hear a talking head proclaim "It's the most advanced fighter in the world!" I know I'm dealing with an Empire idjit.
Sadly, unlike Ike, today's media and politicians don't tell us that 2 F35s = one brand spanking new hospital for the public's benefit.
And for what? A flying brick that is broken 80% of the time, still has 1000s of terminal faults especially in the software, and is only good for dropping bombs on civilians in tents who couldn't possibly fire back.
So maybe numbskulls judge everything by money. I could be in the business. If they give me a couple of trillion, I could give them nothing for 10 years.
Woah - 2 trillion! That MUST be the best nothing that ever existed EVER! THAT'LL show those Russkies and Chinese!!!
LOOK HOW MUCH WE'RE SPENDING, LOOOOSERS!!! 🤑
:facepalm:
🤣
That’s why we call it the F-35 Turducken.
Just an educated guess - if anything, DaIranian FIASCO has demonstrated the decrepid state of USRAEL military logistics - why would DaNuclear option be any different?
what comes before the fall ?
Talking snakes?
I've got my eye out for them. >_<
I've forgotten, but I think that chap Milton wrote a long poem about it.
So let's get this straight:
The American Empire is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons not once but twice, which includes killing civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And it has a openly admitted nuclear doctrine that seeks to expands the pretexts in which the Americans will use nuclear weapons.
What's worse, this American Empire wages wars of aggression rationalized by propaganda about preventing other nations from developing "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (see America's wars against Iraq or now Iran).
And these American wars have murdered hundreds of thousands of people, if not more.
Yet, this American Empire markets itself as a "force for good", "defender of democracy," and "leader of the free world."
This is the United Sociopaths of America and its Orwellian national character....
From the end of the article: "Love is remembering." How true!
For once you’ve got it right-almost. Trump retreats before Labor Day declaring victory to boost election results against the DSA led Dems, who have shattered any hope of taking the Senate with their nonsensical and economically destructive agenda.
Gives a wink and a nod to Bibi, who declares that the Iranians are minutes away from using nukes. So he uses them first.
Bibi is reelected, Trump has plausible deniability going for him and gas prices quickly slide and the American people, now ecstatic because gas is $1.19 a gallon vote Republican across the board.
There’s peace in our time and any excess radiation just floats northward toward Russia aiding the flagging Ukrainian cause
This is a WIN-WIN-WIN!!!!
The neocons won’t need to feel humiliated when dead .
USA dropping nuclear bombs opens up like retaliation upon America by anyone as it affects the whole planet.
All of this is academic in a world of LOGIC: of course the US will use nukes. It's not even a question. This coward bitch of an "empire" only understands ONE thing: FORCE.
We do not live in a world of logic - demonstrably so.
The sooner Putin an Xi wrap their heads around this, the better: the US is Desperate, and will do ANYTHING to save their position as head 🤡...🍊🤡 _will nuke Iran_ - unless saner heads in the Pentagram refuse orders - I don't hold out much hope for that.
Russia - and China - need to take out UK and French nuclear subs as a pre-emptory Object Lesson. And even that lesson has a low probability of being understood.
🤡phobia is a 'thing' for a reason. One must slay one's demons.
Those old Trident missiles on the UK subs probably don't work. The UK and the French are also IMO way more sane and rational than Israelis and less of a threat.
I would be very happy if the Russians or Chinese or somebody took out the 5 or so subs Israel has. I would be ecstatic if somebody took out Israel completely.
The "UK" nukes aren't really the UK's: the launch codes rest with the US...
...on 1960s 5" floppy disks...in some storeroom...in the Utah desert...somehwere