Search This Blog

Monday, April 10, 2017

Sorcha Faal says Russia Calculates US-NATO Defeat In 2 Weeks, Issues Total War Ultimatum



Russia Calculates US-NATO Defeat In 2 Weeks, Issues Total War Ultimatum

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

A truly horrifying Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today states that the Ministry of Defense (MoD) has “assessed/calculated” that both United States and NATO military forces can be brought to the brink of defeat in 2 weeks or less before atomic weapon decisions have to made—thus allowing President Putin to issue to President Donald Trump a “red line ultimatum” warning that any further illegal war actions caused by the Americans in the Levant War Zone (Syria) will be met with immediate counterstrikes—and causing the Federations London Embassy to ask the peoples of the West “Are you ready for a real war?”. [Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]





Majority of 41% answered “war of the clowns”, with another majority of 59% saying they’d be “appalled” to have Trump and Johnson lead the West into war against Russia



According to this report (and as we have detailed in our reports “Where Did They Go?” Asks Russia After 36 US Missiles Fired At Syria Fail To Arrive” and “Russia Cuts Off Last Contact With US, Orders Pilots To “Attack At Will”), last week the American “Deep State” perpetrated a false flag attack in Syria they then used as a propaganda platform to accuse the Assad regime of using chemical weapons (and now Russia too)—and as accurately described by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova who said “they demanded a probe into those aircraft and the equipment used in the strikes, and then they deliver strikes right on that equipment”—in the process killing innocent civilians.

The true American “Deep State” objective in perpetrating this false flag attack, this report details, was revealed this past week by the Trump administrations National Security Council Advisor, General Herbert “H. R.” McMaster, who is pushing for 150,000 US soldiers to be deployed in this war zone, and Sebastian Gorka, a White House Deputy assistant to President Trump, who says that the main US plan is to divide Syria up into 3 separate nations.





Want to know the truth about this false flag attack? Click HERE.



To what gives the US any right to divide up any nation it so chooses, this report continues, no one in the West is able to explain—but whose efforts to accomplish this globalist plan have cost the lives of over 500,000 innocent people in Syria, nearly 270,000 in Iraq, up to 25,000 in Libya, 25,000 in Afghanistan, 10,000 in Yemen, and nearly 10,000 in Ukraine too—with not any of these nations having any type of peace, only continual war.

As to why these nearly 1 million innocent civilians have had to die at the hands of their American “protectors” over these past 15 years (not to mention the tens-of-thousands of US and NATO soldier casualties too), this report explains, is due to the “critically flawed” US military strategy of relying on overwhelming air power to achieve their war aims—that didn’t work in either the Korean War (stalemate) or the Vietnam War (US lost), and, in fact, has never been a success in all of history.







Unlike this “critically flawed” US military strategy, this report notes, Russian military tactics have always conceded that Western air forces would “rule the skies” during a war—thus enabling Russian military commanders to focus their efforts on creating an unstoppable conventional army force able to rapidly deploy and use overwhelming force to achieve victory.

To the success of Russia’s military strategy, this report continues, was fully evidenced in 2008 when Georgia used this failed US strategy of war in attempting to re-take two of its Russian speaking regions under Federation peacekeeping protection—but who were quickly met by a full-scale Russian military invasion bringing this war to a short conclusion—and even more importantly, keeping the death toll in this conflict down to less than 300 people.

Following the success of Russia’s military strategy in relying on conventional ground forces, instead of air power, to bring conflicts to a swift end, this report says, it was further employed in Ukraine (2014) and Syria (2015)—thus creating a stalemate in the former, and “turning the tide” against Islamic terror forces in the latter.







Of the greatest critical flaw in the US militaries war strategy, and the greatest cause of civilian deaths, has been detailed by many experts, this report says—and as, perhaps, best articulated by the Russian military commentator publication Vzglyad who in 2016 wrote (ENGLISH):

“The main mistake of the Atlantic doctrines was and remains arrogance. Only in the last year began convulsive and overly politicized attempts to reconsider blatant psychological distortions, but in general the problem did not go away.

Almost the entire American tactical system of the ground forces and marines (despite the loud name and valiant history, the modern Marine Corps is the same infantry as the rest) is built on the fact that with the slightest resistance of the enemy it is necessary to lie down, call for aircraft and wait a little while until the road is treated with napalm.

In all wars involving American troops since the landing in Normandy, they worked in an atmosphere of exceptional air superiority. And they simply do not know anything else, they have not seen anything and, probably, they do not even represent it on a theoretical level.”







To Russian strategic military strategy, however, this report continues, Vzglyad military commentators further noted (ENGLISH) that all US war gaming of a war with Russia found the West losing—and as they explained:

“Firstly, the Russians are clearly aware that people are killed in the war and there is no practical sense to slow down during offensive operations because of every padded tank. Fluctuations ultimately lead to defeat and, as a result, to even greater losses.

Secondly, those parts and those directions that achieve success are subject to support and reinforcement, and the loser remains alone with himself.

In practice, it looks something like this. You have four battalions. Three advance, one - in reserve. At the same time, the left-flank battalion successfully breaks through the enemy's defense, the central battalion achieves local success, while the right-flank battalion slows down and bears losses. Question: on which flank do you throw the reserve as an amplification?

NATO officers did not give the correct answer: it was necessary to forget about the central and left-flank battalions, having left a reserve for the help to the successfully erupting right-wing. It is also desirable to collect all the artillery to the aid of the left flank. In addition, the Russian doctrine has always been built on "echelons".

And all the new arrivals, in addition to the already existing reserve battalion, would also rush to the aid of a successful flank. So his breakthrough would be strengthened constantly, as the speed and power of the offensive would increase.

German General Friedrich Wilhelm von Mellenthin in his memoirs belatedly claimed that, for example, the Soviet bridgeheads for the crossing of large rivers (the Dnieper, the Vistula) had to be destroyed in the bud, because then massive reinforcement was beginning to arrive on them. The soldiers crossed themselves on boats, rafts, swimming. The reinforcement successfully arrived independently from anything. So a successful breakthrough was fixed once and for all, and already in a day there was nothing to do. Only run away.

Thirdly, the Russian side attaches great importance to the massive support of the offensive by artillery. Hence the development of multiple-launch fire systems.

Surprisingly, in NATO armies there are still no worthy analogs of Russian MLRS comparable to at least Grad, and after all Russian engineering thought in this direction has already reached the "Tornado", after which the earth has been smoking for several days, and the fragments of technology are spreading on the space in several football fields.

Another unexpected consequence of realizing the "features of the Russian national war" was the understanding that in the foreseeable future, Russians do not intend to fight in conditions of air superiority.”





Russia doesn’t have a large navy because they are obsolete in 21st warfare. Want to know more? Click HERE.



With Russia’s superior military strategy being supported by some of the most lethal land weapons of war in the world coupled with 47 million “fit for service” troops ready to fight at a moments notice, and its having the globally acknowledged best air defense systems in the world, and with US and NATO conveniently stationing nearly all of their military bases within a weeks march from the Federations borders, this report grimly states, within at most 2 weeks, the entire US and NATO military power structure currently existing in Europe would be destroyed.







What remains “unknown/unknowable” at this point, this report concludes, is what happens while these US and NATO military forces are being destroyed—specifically if President Putin will have to authorize the use of the feared RK-55 (NATO designation SSC-8) atomic warhead armed cruise missile currently being deployed to their strike points throughout the Federation—and that at least one sane person in the West, US Air Force General John Hyten, last week warned the US Congress that neither the US nor NATO has any defense against.





April 10, 2017 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com 

No comments:

Post a Comment