Tag: war

There Will Be No Draft

While there are some obvious flaws in analysis provided by the linked article – chief among them the fact that it is China, not the USA, that will obviously win a naval war in the South Pacific, due to its massive superiority in shipbuilding capacity – his overall point stands.

I’ve read almost a dozen paper now suggesting the US reinstitute a draft or that it would need a draft in a war with China. I’ve not seen a single paper suggest how that could be achieved…

Functionally America is an hourglass-shaped empire.

It’s really two empires barely connected.

It is a 19th-century land empire conquered by the American settler populace, and it is a 20th-century Maritime and global empire conquered by the US Navy and the barely closeted communist bureaucrats of the federal government, along with the foreigners they funded.

These two empires barely interact, indeed America is amongst the most autarkic economies in the world with 90% of its trade flows isolated to North America.

The place they meet, the narrow center of this hourglass, is Washington DC.

And here’s the thing, whereas Washington is consistently able to push about its overseas maritime empire sending troops and its agents into Afghanistan or Korea or Vietnam or Ukraine whilst all of its bureaucrats and tax collectors remain safe behind the twin moats of its oceans, and the mountain that is the curvature of the earth and the north pole on its third side… and its completely open border with Mexico on its fourth, (but no one cares about that)

Whilst Washington remains completely safe from any threat to its 20th-century Maritime empire…

Washington’s 19th-century land empire has it by the throat.

A military draft is one of the very few things that could stir a very fat and very torpid Heritage America into rebellion against the federal government. Unlike the poor Ukrainians, who are being sacrificed en masse to the Russian slaughter machine with about as much ability to resist as a 12-year-old Mexican maiden being carted up an Aztec pyramid, Americans possess the wherewithal to effectively resist 21st century press gangs.

If forced to choose, most Americans would rather find themselves facing jackboots than hypersonics and tactical nukes. Which is why they won’t be forced to choose, and the neoclowns will do their best to find a few Asian proxies to play the role of sacrificial victims.

Besides, there are no shortage of paper-seeking immigrants who can be offered citizenship in return for being hurled at the People’s Liberation Army. If anyone is going to be impressed into the US military, it will be those who cannot resist.

Then again, the neoclowns have never shown any hesitation before leaping into the abyss of obvious and inevitable failure. And one of the papers to which the article refers is published by the US War College (PDF).

The US Army is facing a dire combination of a recruiting shortfall and a shrinking Individual Ready Reserve. This recruiting shortfall, nearly 50 percent in the combat arms career management fields, is a longitudinal problem. Every infantry and armor soldier we do not recruit today is a strategic mobilization asset we will not have in 2031. The Individual Ready Reserve, which stood at 700,000 in 1973 and 450,000 in 1994, now stands at 76,000. These numbers cannot fill the existing gaps in the active force, let alone any casualty replacement or expansion during a large-scale combat operation. The implication is that the 1970s concept of an all-volunteer force has outlived its shelf life and does not align with the current operating environment. The technological revolution described below suggests this force has reached obsolescence. Large-scale combat operations troop requirements may well require a reconceptualization of the 1970s and 1980s volunteer force and a move toward partial conscription.

Against this is the fact that war with China requires ships, not manpower. And those are mostly ships that the US Navy doesn’t have and cannot build.

DISCUSS ON SG

“We Will Lose” – Zelensky

In fairness, he’s not lying:

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has pegged his nation’s continued fight against Russia to sustained US military assistance, according to US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. “There was a single sentence that summed it all up, and I am quoting him verbatim. Mr. Zelensky said: ‘If we don’t get the aid, we will lose the war,’” the lawmaker told journalists after meeting Zelensky on Capitol Hill on Thursday.

Of course, NATO’s Ukrainian puppet is leaving out the small matter of how if Ukraine does get the aid, it will still lose the war.

Since the Spanish Empire ruled the waves, the rule has always been that the side which can manufacture more of the primary war material, be it wooden ships, iron tanks, or AI-controlled drones, will win the war.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Artillery Dilemma

It’s obvious to any rational observer that NATO is losing the war in Ukraine, and is losing it badly. And by badly, I mean in terms that exceed Arabs vs IDF and are beginning to approach British regulars vs Zulus. But it was always perfectly clear to everyone who understood the nature of modern land war that the US military never had any chance whatsoever of winning either a direct or a proxy war against the Russians in Ukraine.

Just as the coming naval war with China will depend almost entirely upon shipbuilding capacity to replace the ships on both sides that are inevitably sunk, the war in Ukraine depends upon the production of artillery shells. Consider the following four points.

  1. Artillery is the king of the battlefield again, accounting for 85 percent of the casualties in Ukraine.
  2. One 155mm round made in the USA by USA contractors costs 5,500 dollars, while a 152mm round made in Russia costs 600 dollars.
  3. One 152mm made in North Korea probably costs less than 60 dollars. The Russians just bought 10 million of them, and due to their oil production, can afford to buy as many shells as the North Koreans can make.
  4. Outsourcing ammunition production to China is not exactly an option these days.

Quod erat demonstrandum. Apparently this new shell-supply arrangement is very upsetting to the South Koreans. Or rather, to their puppet masters in the US who are speaking through them. Only the USA is permitted to have allies, right?

SEOUL, Sept 19 (Reuters) – South Korea summoned Russia’s ambassador to warn Moscow against any military cooperation with North Korea on Tuesday after last week’s summit between North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and President Vladimir Putin raised concerns about a possible arms deal. First Vice Foreign Minister Chang Ho-jin summoned Russia’s ambassador in Seoul to urge “Russia to immediately halt any moves to expand military cooperation with North Korea and to abide by (UN) Security Council Resolutions,” South Korea’s foreign ministry said in a statement.

No doubt the Russians will be duly chastened and refrain from further military cooperation with the North Koreans. In the meantime, and in not-unrelated news, Poland is out of the Ukrainian arms business.

“Poland will no longer arm Ukraine to focus on its own defense,” Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki announced just hours after Warsaw summoned Ukraine’s ambassador related to a fresh war of words and spat over blocked grain, according to the AFP. Warsaw has throughout more than a year-and-a-half of the Ukraine-Russia war been Kiev’s staunchest and most outspoken supporter.

DISCUSS ON SG

Russia Unlocks Allies

I always thought it was strange that in all the mainstream analyses of the NATO-Russian war in Ukraine, the possibility that Russia could match and exceed Ukraine’s foreign equipment supply line by purchasing Chinese, Iranian, Turkish, and North Korean armaments was never taken into account. Now, a new deal between Russia and North Korea makes it clear that they should have been.

The most significant rumor from the North Korean parleys is that Russia has possibly made deals to obtain over 10 million 122mm and 152mm artillery shells from North Korea. If even remotely true, it represents a significant number that represents upwards of 1-3 years’ worth of shell useage, depending on intensity. Firing 30k shells a day equals just over 10M per year.

Such a massive shell boost—if true—could give Russia enough to comfortably launch a massive offensive in the future without worrying about dipping into emergency reserve. Recall what I said many times before: one weakness is that Russia always has to maintain a large reserve stock of shells for the contingency that NATO happens to launch some sort of sneak attack, and full scale war breaks out. That means Russia could have several million shells as an emergency reserve it doctrinally cannot touch.

For what it’s worth, SBU head Budanov, by the way, said that Russia has already begun receiving the shipments.

So, not only can Russia exceed the total manufacturing capacity of the USA and Europe itself, but it can multiply its own resources by more than a factor of 2 by turning to its allies for additional support.

The important question here is why Russia feels the need to significantly expand its ammunition supply when it is a) winning the war and b) successfully increasing its own domestic manufacturing capabilities. An offensive is one possibility. But the attempt by the USA to open fronts on Russia’s borders in Armenia and Georgia should not be discounted.

DISCUSS ON SG

The True Goal of the WereWest

Simplicius answers questions about the NATO-Russian war in Ukraine:

Many people are wondering where is this all leading? Surely the West must know Ukraine stands no real chance of “winning” in any appreciable way, whether we define victory as completely destroying the Russian army or recapturing all the borders back to pre-2022 or even pre-1991 (Crimea).

I believe they do know this. Thus the ultimate goal is not to win kinetically or militarily, but rather to stretch out the conflict for as long as possible in order to create time and space for them to work the more subversive, under the surface war against the Russian public, elites, government, etc. In short, they want to increase the pressure on Russia’s political structures to maximize societal tension and eventually bring about some sort of political turmoil. A coup/maidan-style scenario would of course be ideal for them, even if it’s unlikely.

This is what economic sanctions were all about, as well. Not to mention the blocking of SWIFT, the destruction of Russian culture and repressions against their citizens all over the world—whether it’s bans from Olympics and other international competitions (chess, etc.), or restrictions like the ones just announced, where Russian cars are being banned from entering Europe, Russian people humiliated by customs inspections, etc.

All of this is meant to generate dissatisfaction and most importantly societal fatigue, such that the people will have “had enough” and begin to agitate against Putin and the elites. The Russian presidential election is coming up in March 2024. One ideal scenario for Western planners would have been for people to have gotten so fed up that they oust Putin by choosing a new candidate who promises to “bring an end to the pointless war, and restore Russia’s cherished economic relationships with the West.”

The problem is, all the sanctions failed, all the repressions and humiliations have only unified the Russian people with even more solidarity. New poll numbers just this week show Putin’s approval rating still sky high at 77% while new economic numbers show Russia again making record profits as oil prices have recently gone up, not to mention Russia began decreasing its ‘discounts’ to India and others.

So that was the true goal of the West—to make the war last long enough for them to demoralize Russian society into overthrowing or voting out Putin. Though it’s clearly failed, they likely believe that given enough time it can still succeed eventually, so they will probably keep trying.

When all Clown World has is a hammer, they have to assume the problem is a nail.

DISCUSS ON SG

The US Will Lose the Next War

The US military of 2023 is not the US military of 1943. More to the point, the US military production infrastructure of 2023 is not the US military production infrastructure of 1939. The media is finally beginning to figure this out in the aftermath of Russia’s comprehensive defeat of NATO’s proxy army in Ukraine.

Our country could very well lose a large-scale war for lack of weapons and ammunition—but not because of aid to Ukraine. In a major conflict, the U.S. would run out of munitions in a few weeks, and in less than a week for some crucial categories. The quantity of weapons we are providing Ukraine is marginal compared with necessary weapons that we have not stocked… Nor can we rely on our allies to supply themselves or engineer a lend-lease program to send us weapons if we should be fighting but they are not. For instance, even before it began sending weapons to Ukraine, the British military was so poorly stocked that in a major war, it would have run out of ammunition in a week.

In 1942, Admiral Chester Nimitz fought on the Midway Islands with only three aircraft carriers at his disposal. Less than three years later, he commenced operations against the Marianas with 15 new, larger, and faster carriers to feed into the fight. China has built a defense industry capable of such rapid production—but today, the United States couldn’t pull it off.

No, the US Navy will lose an attrition war with China, even if it wins an initial battle or two. The situation is actually worse than the situation that Japan faced in 1941. The neoclowns thought there would be no need for peer-level warfare because history had ended in favor of liberal democracy, and everyone knows that nation-states that harbor McDonalds never go to war with each other. Hence their obsession with turning every Main Street from Albania to Vietnam into a clone of a mall circa 1989.

But both the Chinese and the Russians have been gearing up for full-scale conflict with the US military for more than 20 years. And they’re just about ready, if the recent decision to sanction two of the five US corporations still producing military vehicles is any guide.

China Daily: Lately the US has provided advanced weaponry to China’s Taiwan region through arms sales, military assistance and loans. China’s foreign ministry spokesperson said earlier that China would take strong measures to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. I wonder if you have anything new on that?

Mao Ning: In disregard of China’s firm opposition, the US government deliberately supplies weapons to China’s Taiwan region. This seriously violates the one-China principle and the stipulations of the three China-US joint communiqués, contravenes international law and basic norms governing international relations, and undermines China’s sovereignty and security interests. The US is going further down the wrong and dangerous path of arming Taiwan.

Lockheed Martin Corporation, St. Louis, MO directly participated in the US arms sale to Taiwan announced on August 24 as the principal contractor. Northrop Grumman participated in several US arms sales to Taiwan. In accordance with the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law of the People’s Republic of China, China decides to impose sanctions on these two above-mentioned US defense corporations.

Let me stress, the Chinese government never wavers in its resolve of safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity. We call on the US to earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the stipulations of the three China-US joint communiqués, stop arms sales to Taiwan, stop military collusion with Taiwan, and stop arming Taiwan, otherwise it will be met with China’s resolute response.

Even though it should, the US will not preemptively surrender on the issue of Taiwan. This means that war is coming to the West, probably sooner than most people expect. And it isn’t going to end well, because the rulers of the West are not Western in any way, nor do they care in the least for the people of the West over whom they presently rule.

DISCUSS ON SG

A Decade of War

Germany is prepared to support Ukraine through 2032, even if that means fighting to the very last Ukrainian.

Germany is not daunted by the prospect of a protracted conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and will back Kiev for the next decade, Brigadier General Christian Freuding has said. He added that Berlin is seeking to ensure that Ukraine retakes all the territory within its 1991 borders.

Appearing at the Yalta European Strategy (YES) forum on Sunday, Freuding was asked whether Germany was prepared to support Ukraine if the hostilities with Russia ended up becoming a “long war” spanning several more years. The German military official replied by saying it was unrealistic to expect the conflict to end in the near future.

Freuding went on to claim that “we’ve got the support of our parliament… for our military support for our Ukrainian friends up to the year 2032.”

At the current rate of economic contraction and casualties, another nine years of proxy war with Russia will see Germany’s economy further devastated and virtually every Ukrainian male between the ages of 15 and 70 dead. Especially when Russia is quite clearly prepared for an extended war against NATO and the USA.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday indicated he was bracing for a long war in Ukraine, saying that Kyiv could use any ceasefire to rearm and that Washington would continue to see Russia as an enemy no matter who won the 2024 U.S. election.

Speaking for several hours at an economic forum in Russia’s Pacific port city of Vladivostok, Putin said Ukraine’s counteroffensive against Russian forces had so far failed and the Ukrainian army had sustained heavy losses of 71,000 men in the attacks. Only when Ukraine was exhausted when it came to men, equipment and ammunition would it talk peace, he said in reply to questions from a Russian television presenter acting as a moderator.

Russia controls about 18% of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea which it annexed in 2014, and a swathe of eastern and southern Ukraine which it seized after invading Ukraine on Feb. 24 last year in what it called a special military operation.

DISCUSS ON SG

Desperately Seeking Allies

The US appears to have made at least a modest amount of headway in signing up Vietnam for its Asian NATO after Biden’s recent visit:

Vietnam and the US have agreed to dramatically upgrade their bilateral relations and strengthen defense cooperation, while hailing several major deals worth billions of dollars. The announcement comes amid strained relations between both Hanoi and Washington with China.

In a statement released on Monday following a meeting between US President Joe Biden and Vietnamese leader Nguyen Phu Trong, the White House said that the two countries elevated their relations to ‘Comprehensive Strategic Partnership’ status, the highest tier in Hanoi’s hierarchy of bilateral ties, “for the purposes of peace, cooperation, and sustainable development.”

On security, the US and Vietnamese leaders welcomed “further cooperation in defense industry and defense trade in accordance with each side’s conditions,” according to the statement. In addition, the US said that it “is committed to continuing to assist Vietnam to develop its self-reliant defense capabilities.”

Vietnam is more than happy to acquire some outside assistance, and certainly, the Vietnamese diaspora in the USA makes the rapprochement easier in some ways. However, there is no way that the Vietnamese are going to sign themselves up as a Ukrainian-style proxy army in service to the West.

Also, it is the Vietnamese, and not the Chinese, that the other Asian nations have historically feared. As Lew Kwan Yew described it, they are regarded as “the Prussians of Asia” and fundamentally more warlike and aggressive than their neighbors. China, for all its power and population, is generally not feared because the Middle Kingdom has historically been uninterested in anything outside its borders. Even the limited Chinese invasion of Vietnamese-occupied Cambodia in the 1970s was instigated at the repeated request of the other Asian nations, led by Singapore.

The Chinese are not particularly concerned, but neither are they confused about Washington’s intentions.

“Let’s be honest, if there were no China-US tensions, Washington wouldn’t be so interested and have such strong intentions of upgrading its ties with Vietnam to this level,” Lü Xiang, a US studies research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times on Monday.

DISCUSS ON SG

A UATV Offer

It’s become clear that a lot of readers are very interested in contemplating what is likely to come next in WWIII. As a wargamer and game developer, it’s also of particular interest to me.

Here’s the deal. If there are 10 new Premium subscriptions or 25 new Basic subscriptions in the next 24 hours, I will broadcast a supersized Darkstream dedicated to reviewing in detail the 165-page report on the CSIS summary of the 24 US vs China wargames conducted in January, entitled The First Battle of the Next War: Wargaming a Chinese Invasion of Taiwan.

By the way, there are now 5,463 videos available on UATV, with 3-6 more being added every single day. The duplicate set of servers has already been installed at the European data center and is expected to go operational before the end of the month.

UPDATE: Apparently there is considerable interest in WWIII. The 24 hours aren’t even close to being up and BOTH targets were blown away. So it’s on. I’m up to page 30 already, and I’m also working on seeing if I can obtain the rules of the wargame. They’re not necessary for the detailed analysis as I should be able to glean their assumptions from the results, but I like to read wargame rules.

Also, in order to express my appreciation for the high degree of interest indicated and support provided, I’m going to add a second review of the CNAS wargame conducted in June 2022.

DISCUSS ON SG

This is WWIII

Even the NATO forces are openly admitting it now.

The head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council has claimed a third world war is already underway, with the Moscow-Kiev conflict pulling in countries far beyond the region. Speaking at the Kiev Security Forum on Tuesday, Aleksey Danilov argued that NATO needs Ukraine as a member, as global turbulence is set to continue. “We’re going to strengthen the alliance,” he insisted.

“If somebody thinks that World War III hasn’t started then it’s a huge mistake. It has already begun. It had been underway in a hybrid period for some time and has now entered an active phase,” he said.

Sitting on stage beside former CIA Director General David Petraeus, Danilov said that “if somebody thinks that it [the conflict in Ukraine] is about settling the scores between Kiev and Moscow then it’s a mistake. Things are much more complicated.”

He’s not wrong. I pointed this out months ago. This was never about Putin, his ego, or the revival of the Soviet Union. Don’t forget that WWII started with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, seven years before the Austrian Anschluss and ten years before the USA got openly involved. Even though we didn’t realize it until 2022, WWIII began in 2014 with the Maiden Coup in Ukraine, and it won’t be surprising if, ten years later, the US military gets openly involved in 2024.

The African front has already been opened. The Asian front will open soon, probably next year. The only serious question that remains to be answered is if there will be an American front as well.

UPDATE: Speaking of the African Front.

The crumbling house of French colonialism faces another blow as Chad demands the withdrawal of French troops from the country. This push gained momentum after the unfortunate killing of a local resident by French soldiers, sparking protests against the French colonial presence.

Ironically, France had contemplated pulling its colonial troops out of Niger and into Chad in response to demands for a definitive withdrawal date from the Niger military. Now, it seems they barely had time to leave Niger before facing expulsion from Chad. This follows previous expulsions of the French from the Central African Republic, Mali, and Burkina Faso, with Niger, Gabon, and Chad lining up as potential next exits.

DISCUSS ON SG