Skip to main content

Home/ Socialism and the End of the American Dream/ Group items tagged naval-deployments

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Paul Merrell

Dangerous Crossroads: US-NATO To Deploy Ground Troops, Conduct Large Scale Naval Exerci... - 0 views

www.globalresearch.ca/...5397415

war & peace Russia NATO WWIII Pivot-to-the-East

shared by Paul Merrell on 26 Aug 14 - No Cached
  • The World is at a dangerous Crossroads. The Western military alliance is in an advanced state of readiness. And so is Russia. Russia is heralded as the “Aggressor”. US-NATO military confrontation with Russia is contemplated. Enabling legislation in the US Senate under “The Russian Aggression Prevention Act” (RAPA) has “set the US on a path towards direct military conflict with Russia in Ukraine.”  Any US-Russian war is likely to quickly escalate into a nuclear war, since neither the US nor Russia would be willing to admit defeat, both have many thousands of nuclear weapons ready for instant use, and both rely upon Counterforce military doctrine that tasks their military, in the event of war, to preemptively destroy the nuclear forces of the enemy. (See Steven Starr, Global Research, August 22, 2014) The Russian Aggression Prevention Act (RAPA) is the culmination of more than twenty years of US-NATO war preparations, which consist in the military encirclement of both Russia and China:
  • On July 24, in consultation with the Pentagon, NATO’s Europe commander General Philip Breedlove called for “stockpiling a base in Poland with enough weapons, ammunition and other supplies to support a rapid deployment of thousands of troops against Russia”.(RT, July 24, 2014). According to General Breedlove, NATO needs “pre-positioned supplies, pre-positioned capabilities and a basing area ready to rapidly accept follow-on forces”: “He plans to recommend placing supplies — weapons, ammunition and ration packs — at the headquarters to enable a sudden influx of thousands of Nato troops” (Times, August 22, 2014, emphasis added) Breedlove’s “Blitzkrieg scenario” is to be presented at NATO’s summit in Wales in early September, according to The London Times.  It is a “copy and paste” text broadly consistent with the  Russian Aggression Prevention Act (RAPA) which directs President Obama to:
  • “(1) implement a plan for increasing U.S. and NATO support for the armed forces of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia, and other NATO member-states; and (2) direct the U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO to seek consideration for permanently basing NATO forces in such countries.” (S.2277 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)) More generally, a scenario of military escalation prevails with both sides involved in extensive war games. In turn, the structure of US sponsored military alliances plays a crucial role in war planning. We are dealing with a formidable military force involving a global alliance of 28 NATO member states. In turn, the US as well as NATO have established beyond the “Atlantic Region” a network of bilateral military alliances with “partner” countries directed against Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
  • ...11 more annotations...
  • t is worth noting that FLEETEX is one among several US-NATO naval war games directed against an unnamed enemy. In July, NATO conducted naval exercises in the Black sea, in an area contiguous to Russia’s maritime borders.
  • NATO’s “Breeze” formally hosted by Bulgaria took place from July 4 to July 13, with the participation of naval vessels from Greece, Italy, Romania, Turkey, the U.K. and the U.S. The underlying scenario was the “”destruction of enemy ships in the sea and organization of air defense of naval groups and coastal infrastructure.” The exercises were “aimed at improving the tactical compatibility and collaboration among naval forces of the alliance’s member states…” (See Atlantic Council , see also Russia, U.S. ships sail in competing Black Sea exercises, July 7, Navy Times 2014) Ironically, NATO’s July Black Sea games started on exactly the same day as those of the “unnamed enemy”[Russia], involving its Crimea Black sea fleet of some 20 war ships and aircraft:
  • Russia has made it clear they don’t welcome NATO’s presence in the Black Sea. Russia’s navy let it be known that it is following the exercises with reconnaissance aircraft and surveillance ships. “The aviation of the Black Sea Fleet is paying special attention to the missile cruiser USS Vella Gulf which, though not formally the flagship of the ‘Breeze’ exercises, effectively is leading them,” a Russian naval source told NTV. (Ibid)
  • Since 2006, the US has been building up its weapons arsenal in Poland on Russia’s Western border (Kalingrad). The deployment of US forces in Poland was initiated  in July 2010 (within 40 miles from the border), with a view to training Polish forces in the use of US made Patriot missiles. (Stars and Stripes, 23 July 2010). In recent developments, the Pentagon announced in early August the deployment of US troops and National Guard forces to Ukraine as part of a military training operation. US-NATO is also planning further deployments of ground forces (as described by NATO General Breedlove) in Poland, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania as well as in Georgia and Azerbaijan on Russia’s southern border. These deployments which are envisaged in the draft text of the “Russian Aggression Prevention Act” (RAPA) (S.2277 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)) are also part of a NATO “defensive” strategy in the case of a “Russian invasion”: Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the conflict in eastern Ukraine have alarmed Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania – like Ukraine, former Soviet republics with Russian-speaking minorities. NATO’s 28 leaders are expected to discuss plans to reassure Poland and the Baltics at a summit in Wales on Sept. 4-5.
  • Deployment on Russia’s Southern border is to be coordinated under a three country agreement signed on August 22, 2014 by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan: Following the trilateral meeting of Azerbaijani, Turkish and Georgian defense ministers, Tbilisi announced that the three countries are interested in working out a plan to strengthen the defense capability. “The representatives of the governments of these three countries start to think about working out a plan to strengthen the defense capability,” Alasania said, adding that this is in the interests of Europe and NATO.“Because, this transit route [Baku-Tbilisi-Kars] is used to transport the alliance’s cargo to Afghanistan,” he said. Alasania also noted that these actions are not directed against anyone. (See Azeri News, August 22, 2014, emphasis added)
  • In the Far-east, Russia’s borders are also threatened by Obama’s “Pivot to Asia”. The “Pivot to Asia” from a military standpoint consists in extending US military deployments in the Asia-Pacific as well as harnessing the participation of Washington’s allies in the region, including Japan, South Korea and Australia. These countries have signed bilateral military cooperation agreements with Washington. As US allies, they are slated to be involved in Pentagon war plans directed against Russia, China and North Korea: Japan and South Korea are also both part of a grand U.S. military project involving the global stationing of missile systems and rapid military forces, as envisioned during the Reagan Administration. (Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Military Alliance: Encircling Russia and China, Global Research, October 5, 2007) This Pentagon strategy of military encirclement requires both centralized military decision making (Pentagon, USSTRATCOM) as well coordination with NATO and the various US regional commands.
  • On August 12, the US and Australia signed a military agreement allowing for the deployment of US troops in Australia. This agreement is part of Obama’s Pivot to Asia: The U.S. and Australia signed an agreement Tuesday [August 12] that will allow the two countries’ militaries to train and work better together as U.S. Marines and airmen deploy in and out of the country. “This long-term agreement will broaden and deepen our alliance’s contributions to regional security,” U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Tuesday. He described the U.S.-Australia alliance as the “bedrock” for stability in the Asia-Pacific region.
  • Ironically, coinciding with the announcement of the US-Australia agreement (August 12), Moscow announced that it would be conducting naval exercises in the Kuril Islands of the Pacific Ocean (which are claimed by Japan): “Exercises began involving military units in the region, which have been deployed to the Kuril Islands,” Colonel Alexander Gordeyev, a spokesman for Russia’s Eastern Military District, told news agency Interfax. (Moscow Times, August 12, 2014)
  • While this renewed East-West confrontation has mistakenly been labelled a “New Cold War”, none of the safeguards of The Cold War era prevail. International diplomacy has collapsed. Russia has been excluded from the Group of Eight (G-8), which has reverted to the G-7 (Group of Seven Nations). There is no “Cold War East-West dialogue” between competing superpowers geared towards avoiding military confrontation. In turn, the United Nations Security Council has become a de facto mouthpiece of the U.S. State Department. US-NATO will not, however, be able to win a conventional war against Russia, with the danger that military confrontation will lead to a nuclear war. In the post-Cold war era, however, nuclear weapons are no longer considered as a  “weapon of last resort” under the Cold War doctrine of “Mutual Assured Destruction” (MAD).  Quite the opposite. nuclear weapons are heralded by the Pentagon as “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground”. In 2002, the U.S. Senate gave the green light for the use of nuclear weapons in the conventional war theater.  Nukes are part of the “military toolbox” to be used alongside conventional weapons.
  • When war becomes peace, the world is turned upside down.  In a bitter irony, nukes are now upheld by Washington as “instruments of peace”. In addition to nuclear weapons, the use of chemical weapons is also envisaged. Methods of non-conventional warfare are also contemplated by US-NATO including financial warfare, trade sanctions, covert ops, cyberwarfare, geoengineering and environmental modification technologies (ENMOD). But Russia also has  extensive capabilities in these areas.
  • The timeline towards war with Russia has been set. The Wales NATO venue on September 4-5, 2014 is of crucial importance. What we are dealing with is a World War III Scenario, which is the object of the Wales NATO Summit, hosted by Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron. The agenda of this meeting has already been set by Washington, NATO and the British government. It requires, according to PM David Cameron in a letter addressed to heads of State and heads of government of NATO member states ahead of the Summit that: “Leaders [of NATO countries] must review NATO’s long term relationship with Russia at the summit in response to Russia’s illegal actions in Ukraine. And the PM wants to use the summit to agree how NATO will sustain a robust presence in Eastern Europe in the coming months to provide reassurance to allies there, building on work already underway in NATO.” (See PM writes to NATO leaders ahead of NATO Summit Wales 2014)
Paul Merrell

Russia Plans Permanent Naval Base in Tartus as Middle East War Escalates - nsnbc intern... - 0 views

nsnbc.me/...s-as-middle-east-war-escalates

war & peace Russia foreign-bases Tartus Syria Viet-Nam Latin-America Africa Southeast-Asia

shared by Paul Merrell on 10 Oct 16 - No Cached
  • Russia plans to transform its auxiliary naval base in Tartus, Syria, into a permanent Russian military base. Situated at the eastern Mediterranean coast, the permanent base would not only increase Russia’s presence in the Mediterranean but help circumvent the Bosporus bottleneck in NATO member State Turkey. The decision comes against the backdrop of a widening Middle East war and tensions over Crimea.
  • Pankov’s announcement about Russia’s plans for Tartus came only days after the Russian Defense Ministry announced that it was considering to re-establish a presence at military bases it used before the discontinuation of the Soviet Union. Talks between Russia and Vietnam are reportedly ongoing, as part of the Russian Federation’s new posture. The Deputy Chairman of  the international affairs committee of Russia’s State Duma (parliament), Alexey Chapa also called for restoring Russian military bases in Latin America, Southeast Asia and Africa. The naval base in Tartus at the northwestern coast of Syria is currently used as auxiliary bas. That is, as a logistics supply base for Russian vessels and as a base to support Russian operations in Syria via the Hmeymim Air Base in Latakia province. Russia recently deployed S-400 surface to air missile batteries in Tartus. The State Duma on October 7 ratified a Russian-Syrian agreement on the open-ended deployment of the Russian air group in Syria. The agreement was signed in Damascus on August 26, 2015. Nearly a year later President Vladimir Putin submitted it to the State Duma for consideration. The Federation Council will consider the agreement on October 12.
  • The  establishment of a permanent naval presence in Tartus involves political posturing, An unequivocal sign that Russia, as already forecast by this author in 2012, draws a red line in the Syrian sand. The transformation of Tartus into a permanent Russian base has, however, geopolitical and strategic implications within a wider context than Syria. The Russian Black Sea fleet in Crimea would have to pass through the Bosporus and the narrow Dardanelles to reach the Mediterranean. This “choke point” is controlled by NATO member Turkey. Moreover, NATO member States have increased their naval presence in the Black Sea since the eruption of the crisis in Ukraine and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, or Crimea’s accession into the Russian Federation. Which of the two constructs one considers as valid largely depends on whether one interprets international law to the effect that self-determination has primacy over territorial integrity or whether territorial integrity has primacy over self-determination. The outcome is the same; The Russian Black Sea fleet and its access to the Mediterranean has been threatened by the escalation of the situation in Ukraine.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Russia is reportedly also negotiating the presence of Russian naval vessels in Egypt to further boost its footprint in the Mediterranean, a development that is closely correlated to the construction of a Russian industrial zone along the new Suez Canal. The decision to transform Tartus into a permanent Russian naval base also comes as the wars in Syria and Iraq have developed into what must be described as a wider Middle East war.
  • Paul Merrell on 10 Oct 16
     
    Russian military expansion around the globe. So the U.S. wants Cold War 2.0? Russia will play that game.
Paul Merrell

Farsnews - 0 views

english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx

war & peace Iran navy U.S.-maritime-borders negotiations Iranian-nukes-myth

shared by Paul Merrell on 09 Feb 14 - No Cached
  • "The Iranian Army's naval fleets have already started their voyage towards the Atlantic Ocean via the waters near South Africa," Commander of Iran's Northern Navy Fleet Admiral Afshin Rezayee Haddad announced on Saturday. The admiral, who is also the commander of the Iranian Army's 4th Naval Zone said, "Iran's military fleet is approaching the United States' maritime borders, and this move has a message." In September 2012, Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari reiterated Iran's plans for sailing off the US coasts to counter the US presence in its waters in the Persian Gulf. Sayyari had earlier informed of Tehran's plans to send its naval forces to the Atlantic to deploy along the US marine borders, and in September 2012 he said that this would happen "in the next few years". The plan is part of Iran's response to Washington's beefed up naval presence in the Persian Gulf. The US Navy's 5th fleet is based in Bahrain - across the Persian Gulf from Iran - and the US has conducted two major maritime war games in the last two years.
  • In September 2011, Sayyari had announced that the country planned to move vessels into the Atlantic Ocean to start a naval buildup "near maritime borders of the United States". "Like the arrogant powers that are present near our maritime borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to the American marine borders," Sayyari said. Speaking at a ceremony marking the 31st anniversary of the start of the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, Sayyari gave no details of when such a deployment could happen or the number or type of vessels to be used. Sayyari had first announced in July, 2011 that Iran was going to send "a flotilla into the Atlantic".
  • Paul Merrell on 09 Feb 14
     
    Iran adds to its leverage in negotiations with the U.S. over the Iranian nukes myth.  Should the U.S. decide to launch missiles against Iran, Iran will be positioned to launch a few of its own at the U.S. East Coast before the Iranian naval forces are neutralized.
Paul Merrell

Report: Russia to send marines to Syria - Yahoo! News - 0 views

news.yahoo.com/d-marines-syria-144713980.html

war & peace Syria Russia U.S. Pipelinestan deployments propaganda Israel neocons

shared by Paul Merrell on 19 Jun 13 - No Cached
  • Two Russian navy ships are completing preparations to sail to Syria with a unit of marines on a mission to protect Russian citizens and the nation's base there, a news report said Monday. The deployment appears to reflect Moscow's growing concern about Syrian President Bashar Assad's future.
  • The Interfax news agency quoted an unidentified Russian navy official as saying that the two amphibious landing vessels, Nikolai Filchenkov and Caesar Kunikov, will be heading shortly to the Syrian port of Tartus, but didn't give a precise date.
  • Each ship is capable of carrying up to 300 marines and a dozen tanks, according to Russian media reports. That would make it the largest known Russian troop deployment to Syria, signaling that Moscow is becoming increasingly uneasy about Syria's slide toward civil war. Interfax also quoted a deputy Russian air force chief as saying that Russia will give the necessary protection to its citizens in Syria. "We must protect our citizens," Maj.-Gen. Vladimir Gradusov was quoted as saying. "We won't abandon the Russians and will evacuate them from the conflict zone, if necessary." Asked whether the air force would provide air support for the navy squadron, Gradusov said they will act on orders.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Asked if the Pentagon is concerned about the plan, officials in Washington said it depends on the mission. They had no comment on the stated goal of protecting Russian citizens and the Russian military position there, something the U.S. would do in a foreign country if in a similar situation. "I think we'd leave it to the Russian Ministry of Defense to speak to their naval movements and their national security decision-making process," said Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, adding that it's not the business of the U.S. Defense Department to "endorse or disapprove of an internal mission like that."
  • What would greatly concern the U.S., he said, is if the Russian naval ships were taking weapons or sending people to support the Assad regime in its crackdown. "The secretary of defense (Leon Panetta) remains concerned about any efforts by external countries or external organizations to supply lethal arms to the Syrian regime so that they can turn around and use those to kill their own people," Kirby said.
  • Ta rtus is Russia's only naval base outside the former Soviet Union, serving Russian navy ships on missions to the Mediterranean and hosting an unspecified number of military personnel.
  • Opposition groups say more than 14,000 people have been killed since the Syrian uprising began in March 2011 with mostly peaceful protests against Assad's autocratic regime. But a ferocious government crackdown led many to take up arms, and the conflict is now an armed insurgency.
  • Paul Merrell on 19 Jun 13
     
    The U.S. propaganda effort is in full bloom in this article rife with "Red Menace" Cold War overtones: "'The secretary of defense (Leon Panetta) remains concerned about any efforts by external countries or external organizations to supply lethal arms to the Syrian regime so that they can turn around and use those to kill their own people,' Kirby said." Even as the U.S. has decided to now do openly rather than through its Saudi and Qatari proxies? More than 14,000 killed in Syria since the "uprising" began? The U.N. reported about a week ago that its tool stands at 93,000, up from its previous figure of 80,000. The U.N. numbers are undoubtedly understated. They only count the dead whose names are reported to avoid duplicate counting. The nameless are ignored. "[T]he Syrian uprising began in March 2011 with mostly peaceful protests ..." Syria has been on the Israeli/Neocon hit list for many years as part of Israel's empirical ambitions, which requires destabilizing and  balkanizing surrounding nations. But the Syrian ambitions came to the fore after U.S. deployments to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya wound down and Israel, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia decided they wished to exploit large natural gas deposits in Qatar and off the Israeli coast via a pipeline through Syria to connect with an existing pipeline supplying the E.U. with a terminus in Turkey, all at the expense of an existing Russian monopoly on natural gas sales in the E.U. To boot, Syria is the ally of Iran, which is also on the Israeli hit list.  "[T]he conflict is now an armed insurgency."  Vocabulary please? "An insurgency is an armed rebellion against a constituted authority (for example, an authority recognized as such by the United Nations) when those taking part in the rebellion are not recognized as belligerents." It's not a rebellion; it is a proxy war against Syria being waged mostly by foreign mercenaries and jihadists. An "insurgency" is a military rebellion by citizens of the nation being
Paul Merrell

Use of US Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2014, and More from CRS - 0 views

fas.org/...armed-forces-abroad

war & peace U.S.-foreign-policy U.S.-foreign-wars

shared by Paul Merrell on 24 Sep 14 - No Cached
  • Noteworthy new products of the Congressional Research Service that Congress has withheld from online public distribution include the following. Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2014, September 15, 2014
  • Proposed Train and Equip Authorities for Syria: In Brief, September 16, 2014
  • The No Fly List: Procedural Due Process and Hurdles to Litigation, September 18, 2014
  • Paul Merrell on 24 Sep 14
     
    This report lists hundreds of instances in which the United States has used its Armed Forces abroad in situations of military conflict or potential conflict or for other than normal peacetime purposes. It was compiled in part from various older lists and is intended primarily to provide a rough survey of past U.S. military ventures abroad, without reference to the magnitude of the given instance noted. The listing often contains references, especially from 1980 forward, to continuing military deployments, especially U.S. military participation in multinational operations associated with NATO or the United Nations. Most of these post-1980 instances are summaries based on presidential reports to Congress related to the War Powers Resolution. A comprehensive commentary regarding any of the instances listed is not undertaken here. The instances differ greatly in number of forces, purpose, extent of hostilities, and legal authorization. Eleven times in its history the United States has formally declared war against foreign nations. These 11 U.S. war declarations encompassed 5 separate wars: the war with Great Britain declared in 1812; the war with Mexico declared in 1846; the war with Spain declared in 1898; the First World War, during which the United States declared war with Germany and with Austria-Hungary during 1917; and World War II, during which the United States declared war against Japan, Germany, and Italy in 1941, and against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania in 1942.  Some of the instances were extended military engagements that might be considered undeclared wars. These include the Undeclared Naval War with France from 1798 to 1800; the First Barbary War from 1801 to 1805; the Second Barbary War of 1815; the Korean War of 1950-1953; the Vietnam War from 1964 to 1973; the Persian Gulf War of 1991; global actions against foreign terrorists after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States; and the war with Iraq in 2003. With the exception of
Paul Merrell

Russian warships enter Mediterranean to form permanent task force - RT News - 0 views

rt.com/...acific-fleet-mediterranean-374

war & peace naval moves Syria Russia China NATO Israel

shared by Paul Merrell on 18 May 13 - No Cached
  • Warships from Russia’s Pacific Fleet have entered the Mediterranean for the first time in decades. Russia’s Navy Chief says the task force may be reinforced with nuclear submarines, as the country starts building up a permanent fleet in the region.
  • The Mediterranean has recently become a hotspot of military muscle flexing as global powers seemingly vie for influence. NATO has been staging major naval war games involving several countries, last October holding an exercise code-named Noble Mariner 12. Russia held its largest naval exercises in the region this January, with drills spanning both the Black and Mediterranean Seas. The media quickly linked both the NATO and Russian war games to the situation in Syria. Another recent naval display, seen as provocative by Israel, was the deployment of the Iranian Navy’s 24th Fleet to patrol the Mediterranean and convey a “message of peace.” Since then, Israel has acquired its fifth Dolphin-class submarine allegedly capable of launching cruise missiles with nuclear warheads. China has also been increasing its involvement in the area, with the country’s warships sailing through the Suez Canal, and several key ports of the region becoming partially China-owned.
  • Paul Merrell on 18 May 13
     
    On top of this, Israel has just launched its fifth submarine capable of firing nuclear missiles. 
Paul Merrell

Russia has ground troop battalion, advanced tanks in Syria: U.S. NATO envoy | Reuters - 0 views

www.reuters.com/...ria-nato-idUSKCN0S11UP20151007

war & peace Syria Russia boots-on-the-ground

shared by Paul Merrell on 11 Oct 15 - No Cached
  • Russia's military build-up in Syria includes a "considerable and growing" naval presence, long-range rockets and a battalion of ground troops backed by Moscow's most modern tanks, the U.S. ambassador to NATO said on Wednesday.Speaking on the eve of a NATO defense ministers meeting to be dominated by Russia's intervention in Syria's civil war, U.S. Ambassador to NATO Douglas Lute said Moscow had managed a "quite impressive" military deployment over the past week to its Syria naval base in Tartous and its army base in Latakia."There is a considerable and growing Russia naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean, more than 10 ships now, which is a bit out of the ordinary," he told a news briefing."The recent Russian reinforcements over the last week or so feature a battalion-size ground force ... There is artillery, there are long-range rocket capabilities, there are air defense capabilities," Lute said.
  • Western officials say that in strategic terms, Russia's new air strike campaign in Syria appears designed to help reverse rebel gains increasingly endangering Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, protect Russian military assets in the country including its sole Mediterranean port, and reassert Moscow’s place as a big international power competing with the United States. "The force that they have deployed down there is actually quite impressive for a rapid deployment of a week or so," Lute said. "(It is) all arms, combined arms, attack aircraft, it is the attack helicopters and artillery, rocket artillery." Russia's ground forces in Syria include some of its most advanced tanks, he added.
  • Paul Merrell on 11 Oct 15
     
    As though Russia would deploy no ground assets to protect its 50 fighter-bombers. 
Paul Merrell

U.S. deployed amphibious transport dock ship to Persian Gulf in response to Iraq crisis... - 0 views

www.upi.com/...8311403021116

war & peace Iraq U.S.-foreign-policy naval-deployment

shared by Paul Merrell on 19 Jun 14 - No Cached
  • (UPI) --U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has deployed an additional warship to the Persian Gulf in response to the lightning offensive launched by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Iraq.The USS Mesa Verde, an amphibious transport dock ship, joins USS George H.W. Bush, USS Philippine Sea, USS Truxtun, USS Arleigh Burke and USS Okane in the Persian Gulf.Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby announced Mesa Verde's repositioning on Monday."Its presence in the Gulf adds to that of other U.S. naval ships already there -- including the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush -- and provides the commander in chief additional options to protect American citizens and interests in Iraq, should he choose to use them."The USS Mesa Verde is "capable of conducting a variety of quick-reaction and crisis response operations," Kirby noted. The amphibious transport dock ship is transporting an unspecified number of MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft.
Paul Merrell

NATO Minesweepers Set off on Baltic Deployment - ABC News - 0 views

abcnews.go.com/...off-baltic-deployment-23419231

war & peace Ukraine U.S.-foreign-policy NATO naval moves

shared by Paul Merrell on 24 Apr 14 - No Cached
  • Five NATO mine-hunting ships set off Tuesday on a deployment in the Baltic Sea, part of the alliance's efforts to strengthen its presence in Europe's ex-communist east as members there worry about Russia's intentions in Ukraine.
Paul Merrell

Russia Deploys Fleet Off Syria - Says U.S. Preparing for Possible Attack - 0 views

www.informationclearinghouse.info/50135.htm

war & peace Syria Mediterranian Russia U.S. naval-deployments

shared by Paul Merrell on 29 Aug 18 - No Cached
  • The Russian Ministry of Defence said on Monday it had noticed Washington was building up its military forces in the Middle East in preparation for what Moscow feared was a possible strike on Syrian government forces, Russian news agencies reported. Major-General Igor Konashenkov was quoted by agencies as saying that the USS Ross, a guided-missile destroyer, had entered the Mediterranean on Aug. 25 armed with 28 Tomahawk cruise missiles capable of hitting any target in Syria.
  • Up to 13 Russian warships have crossed the Bosphorus toward Syria so far this week as tensions between the U.S. and Syria continue to rise, according to ship spotters based in the Bosphorus Strait. Now in Med Sea: CG Marshal Ustinov DDG Severomorsk DDG Yaroslav Mudryy FFG Admiral Grigorovich FFG Admiral Essen FFL Pytlivyy FSG Vyshniy Volochek FSG Grad Sviyazhsk FSG Velikiy Ustyug LST Orsk LST Nikolay Fil'chenkov MS Turbinist MS Valentin Pikul SS Kolpino SS Velikiy Novgorod — Capt(N) (@Capt_Navy) August 25, 2018 Russia ramping up its presence in the eastern Med for the conclusion of #Syria campaign: Rejoining Russian Navy’s Mediterranean deployment after 85 days, #ВМФ Project1135M #ЧФ BSF Krivak II frigate Pytlivy 868 transited Bosphorus towards Med en route to #Tartus. pic.twitter.com/56XWIWstKK — Yörük Işık (@YorukIsik) August 24, 2018 The deployment of the Russian fleet comes as the U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to strike the Syrian Army ahead of the long-awaited battle of Idlib. Syria, Turkey, Russia and U.S. are about to square off in the northern Syria city with millions of civilians in the crosshairs.
Gary Edwards

» Moving Closer To War Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind! - 0 views

www.infowars.com/moving-closer-to-war

Paul-Craig-Roberts Ukraine

shared by Gary Edwards on 27 Apr 14 - No Cached
  • The Obama regime, wallowing in hubris and arrogance, has recklessly escalated the Ukrainian crisis into a crisis with Russia. Whether intentionally or stupidly, Washington’s propagandistic lies are driving the crisis to war. Unwilling to listen to any more of Washington’s senseless threats, Moscow no longer accepts telephone calls from Obama and US top officials. The crisis in Ukraine originated with Washington’s overthrow of the elected democratic government and its replacement with Washington’s hand-chosen stooges. The stooges proceeded to act in word and deed against the populations in the former Russian territories that Soviet Communist Party leaders had attached to Ukraine. The consequence of this foolish policy is agitation on the part of the Russian speaking populations to return to Russia. Crimea has already rejoined Russia, and eastern Ukraine and other parts of southern Ukraine are likely to follow. Instead of realizing its mistake, the Obama regime has encouraged the stooges Washington installed in Kiev to use violence against those in the Russian-speaking areas who are agitating for referendums so that they can vote their return to Russia. The Obama regime has encouraged violence despite President Putin’s clear statement that the Russian military will not occupy Ukraine unless violence is used against the protesters. We can safely conclude that Washington either does not listen when spoken to or Washington desires violence.
  • As Washington and NATO are not positioned at this time to move significant military forces into Ukraine with which to confront the Russian military, why is the Obama regime trying to provoke action by the Russian military? A possible answer is that Washington’s plan to evict Russia from its Black Sea naval base having gone awry, Washington’s fallback plan is to sacrifice Ukraine to a Russian invasion so that Washington can demonize Russia and force a large increase in NATO military spending and deployments. In other words, the fallback prize is a new cold war and trillions of dollars more in profits for Washington’s military/security complex. The handful of troops and aircraft that Washington has sent to “reassure” the incompetent regimes in those perennial trouble spots for the West–Poland and the Baltics–and the several missile ships sent to the Black Sea amount to nothing but symbolic provocations. Economic sanctions applied to individual Russian officials signal nothing but Washington’s impotence. Real sanctions would harm Washington’s NATO puppet states far more than the sanctions would hurt Russia. It is clear that Washington has no intention of working anything out with the Russian government. Washington’s demands make this conclusion unavoidable. Washington is demanding that the Russian government pull the rug out from under the protesting populations in eastern and southern Ukraine and force the Russian populations in Ukraine to submit to Washington’s stooges in Kiev. Washington also demands that Russia renege on the reunification with Crimea and hand Crimea over to Washington so that the original plan of evicting Russia from its Black Sea naval base can go forward.
  • In other words, Washington’s demand is that Russia put Humpty Dumpty back together again and hand him over to Washington. This demand is so unrealistic that it surpasses the meaning of arrogance. The White House Fool is telling Putin: “I screwed up my takeover of your backyard. I want you to fix the situation for me and to ensure the success of the strategic threat I intended to bring to your backyard.” The presstitute Western media and Washington’s European puppet states are supporting this unrealistic demand. Consequently, Russian leaders have lost all confidence in the word and intentions of the West, and this is how wars start. European politicians are putting their countries at great peril and for what gain? Are Europe’s politicians blackmailed, threatened, paid off with bags of money, or are they so accustomed to following Washington’s lead that they are unable to do anything else? How do Germany, UK, and France benefit from being forced into a confrontation with Russia by Washington? Washington’s arrogance is unprecedented and is capable of driving the world to destruction. Where is Europe’s sense of self-preservation? Why hasn’t Europe issued arrest warrants for every member of the Obama regime? Without the cover provided by Europe and the presstitute media, Washington would not be able to drive the world to war. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West is now available.
Paul Merrell

Ukrainian Parliament sets Sights on NATO: CSTO Counters | nsnbc international - 0 views

nsnbc.me/...s-sights-on-nato-csto-counters

war & peace U.S.-foreign-policy Russia CSTO EEU

shared by Paul Merrell on 24 Dec 14 - No Cached
  • The Ukrainian Parliament, on Tuesday, December 23, voted for abandoning Ukraine’s neutral status and set the country on course for a NATO membership. The CSTO countered by integrating its constituent armed forces with the Russian Command and Control Center. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov described Kiev’s decision as counterproductive while Belarus President Lukashenko asserted his country’s commitment to the collective defense within the CSTO and within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union. 
  • Lavrov noted that the decision escalates confrontations and creates the illusion that the profound internal crisis in Ukraine can be resolved through the adoption of such laws. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev noted on his Facebook page that Ukraine’s no-aligned status was “in essence an application to enter NATO, turning Ukraine into a potential military opponent of Russia”. Russia’s Ambassador to the OSCE, Andrei Kelin commented on Kiev’s decision, describing it as unfriendly, and as adding trouble and tension to the Russian-Ukrainian relationship.
  • It is noteworthy that former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas, who participated in the negotiations about Germany’s reunification, repeatedly stressed that the understanding that NATO wouldn’t station weapons or troops in any of the former Warsaw Pact member States or expand eastwards was “the essence of peace”. In an interview with l’Humanité.fr in September, Dumas said: “This was the essence of peace. Everyone was in agreement… Well, the Americans do not heed. They transported weapons to the Baltic countries and Poland. Hence the controversy when Putin came to power”.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko asserted that the CSTO has been created and operates to protect the interests of all of its member states, reports the Belarus news agency BelTa. The news agency quotes Lukashenko added: “As the common economic space grows larger and more advanced within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union, which members are now virtually identical to those of the CSTO, the importance of protecting economic interests will be pushed to the forefront. .. The existing mechanism of interaction between the special services and other services can be used for that. The services are capable of putting a stop to organized criminal groups, which are now trying to find loopholes and exploit the new economic conditions for their criminal gains.”
  • The members of the post-Soviet Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) countered the push for a NATO expansion to Ukraine by incorporating their national military forces into the National Defense Control Center of Russia. The announcement about the move was made by Putin, during the opening of the CSTO session in Moscow on December 23, that was held parallel to a final meeting before the formal establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) on January 1, 2015.
  • Moscow repeatedly warned against NATO’s eastwards expansion. Earlier this year Russian President Putin noted that one of the important reasons behind Moscow’s acceptance of the Crimean referendum and Crimea’s accession into the Russian Federation was the prospect of the deployment of NATO forces, especially naval forces to Crimea. Putin commented that Russia was more comfortable with Russia’s Western “Partners for peace” visiting a Russian naval base in Crimea than the other way around.
  • Among the primary initiatives following the CSTO’s counter-moves to NATO’s eastward expansion in Ukraine is the integration of CSTO member states’ Air Forces, a highly sophisticated electronic command and control center, and thus far, the delivery of new Russian-built, state of the art jets to Belarus.
  • Paul Merrell on 24 Dec 14
     
    Russia and its neighbors who don't have NATO membership aspirations enter into a collective defense agreement, coordinated by the Russian military. 
Paul Merrell

State Dept: US Considering 'Military, Other Options' Against Russia In Syria - 0 views

www.mintpressnews.com/...221135

war & peace U.S.-foreign-policy Syria Russia war-threats

shared by Paul Merrell on 12 Oct 16 - No Cached
  • Once again focusing on escalations of tensions with Russia, State Department spokesman Mark Toner today said that in addition to the “diplomatic” efforts the US is making in Syria, they are also considering conducting “military or other options.” The US demonstrably is not conducting diplomatic efforts in Syria anymore, despite Toner’s claims to the contrary, as the US made a very public show of withdrawing from the diplomatic track yesterday, and condemning Russia on the way out. Adding to the uncomfortable talk about military possibilities, Toner also declared the US to “always consider unilateral options when looking at a situation like Syria,” and while he insisted the US prefers to work with its coalition, it’s unlikely much of the coalition will eagerly follow them into a war with Russia.
  • Earlier today, Russia announced they are deploying S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to their naval base at Tartus, to defend naval personnel against any potential attacks. With the US-led campaign materially the only air operations in Syria not directly aligned with Russia, the underlying message is that they’re preparing for a unilateral US attack. That US officials reacted negatively to the deployment of purely defensive missiles only adds to this.
  • Paul Merrell on 12 Oct 16
     
    From October 5, 2016.
Paul Merrell

The US/NATO Enlargement Project » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names - 0 views

www.counterpunch.org/...rtmentnato-enlargement-project

war & peace Russia NATO U.S.-foreign-policy Ukraine

shared by Paul Merrell on 14 Apr 14 - No Cached
  • In February, 1990, US Secretary of State James Baker (1989-1992), representing President George HW Bush, traveled to Moscow to meet with Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev regarding the possible reunification of Germany and the removal of 300,000 Soviet troops. There is little serious dispute that as the Berlin Wall teetered, Baker promised Gorbachev “there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.” Gorbachev is reported to have taken the US at its word and responded “any extension of the zone of NATO is unacceptable.” “I agree,” replied Baker.” Unfortunately, Gorbachev never got it in writing and most historians, at the time, agreed that NATO expansion was “ill conceived, ill-timed, and above all ill-suited to the realities of the post-Cold War world.”
  • President Bush’s National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft and Bill Clinton’s Defense Secretary were also in agreement. But by 1994, that verbal contract had not deterred the concerted efforts of a handful of State Department policy professionals to subdue the overwhelming bureaucratic opposition according to James Goldgeier in his classic “Not Whether but When: The US Decision to Enlarge NATO.” By 1997, the Gorbachev-Baker-Bush agreement was a forgotten policy trinket as Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic were accepted into NATO. In 2004, former Soviet satellite countries Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were admitted and in 2009, Croatia and Albania joined NATO. Currently, the former Soviet republics of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan are pending membership and all five former Soviet republics in Central Asia (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan) provide NATO with logistical support for the US war in Afghanistan. As the US-led NATO alliance tightens its grip on the Caucasus countries, the American public has not been informed about the Ukrainian Parliament’s approval for a series of NATO military exercises that would put US troops on Russia’s border, even though the Ukraine is not yet a member of NATO. Rapid Trident is a 12-nation military ‘interoperability’ exercise led by the US who will commit the majority of participating troops and Sea Breeze is a naval exercise that will take place on the Black Sea adjacent to Russian ports. The NATO buildup includes joint ground operations with Moldova and Romania.
  • Most recently, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen announced that the military alliance has cut Russia off from civilian and military cooperation and that there would be the deployment and reinforcement of military assets including increased air patrols over the Baltic Sea and AWACS surveillance flights over Poland and Romania. It goes without saying that the NATO build up is in addition to the deployment of US troops and F-16 warplanes to Poland, F-15C warplanes to Lithuania and aircraft carriers to the Black and Mediterranean Seas. All this raises the question about whether a promise and handshake in the world of international diplomacy is a real commitment and what is a 1991 international promise made by a Republican Administration worth in 1994 to a Democratic Administration? Apparently zilch.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • What all this means is that, behind the diplomatic landscape of verbal jujitsu and summit meetings, there had been a concerted effort at the US State Department with the creation of a NATO Enlargement Office to establish what has become a Russian Wall – an impenetrable US – defined barrier of estrangement along the Russian border meant to cut the country off from land and sea access – as NATO, itching for war, continues to bait Russia with isolation and threats.
Paul Merrell

Israel deploys a new weapons system in Gaza - Intellihub.com - 0 views

www.intellihub.com/eploys-new-weapons-system-gaza

war & peace Israel Gaza energy-beam war-crimes

shared by Paul Merrell on 20 Aug 14 - No Cached
  • Reports, including photographic evidence reveal that Israel is using an energy weapon to attack targets in Gaza. The destructive beam, thought to be a high energy laser, is emitted from a plane identified as a Boeing KC707 “Re’em,” originally configured for Electronic Warfare. Those observing the attacks cite a beam from a 4 engine jet hitting a target which immediately turns “white hot.” After these attacks, the target area is then hit with either bombs or artillery to destroy evidence of the use of an American designed and built energy weapon illegally given to Israel. BACKGROUND The weapon used is identified as part of the YAL 1 system, a COIL laser (chemical, oxygen/iodine laser), originally intended as an aircraft mounted system to shoot down ICBMs. Boeing approached the Department of Defense in 2002 and by 2004 had mounted its first system on a 747/400 previously flown by Air India. Boeing had convinced Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that this system, mounted on as many as 7 aircraft, could fly 24 hours a day around Iran and defend “the free world” against nuclear tipped ICBMs that Rumsfeld believed Iran was planning to use. Please note that it was Rumsfeld that told television audiences that Afghanistan was “peppered” with underground cities serviced by rail links that supported division sized Al Qaeda units that, after ten years, no one was able to locate.
  • Boeing tested the system in 2007. The Department of Defense claimed the system could shoot down low earth orbit satellites and that in tests conducted in 2010, destroyed multiple test missiles. There is no reliable confirmation of this other than a press release from then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. CANCELLATION AND MYSTERIOUS DISAPPEARANCE The Center for Strategic Studies, in an interview with then Defense Secretary Gates published the following: “I don’t know anybody at the Department of Defense who thinks that this program should, or would, ever be operationally deployed. The reality is that you would need a laser something like 20 to 30 times more powerful than the chemical laser in the plane right now to be able to get any distance from the launch site to fire.” So, right now the ABL would have to orbit inside the borders of Iran in order to be able to try and use its laser to shoot down that missile in the boost phase. And if you were to operationalize this you would be looking at 10 to 20 747s, at a billion and a half dollars apiece, and $100 million a year to operate. And there’s nobody in uniform that I know who believes that this is a workable concept.”
  • After $5 billion was spent, the functioning prototype only capable of being fired directly at nearby targets, a system very capable of acquisition and destruction of ground targets with no air defense protection only, was said to have been flown to a scrap yard. The plane itself is still there, at Davis Monthan Air Force Base, with other failed dreams and nightmares. However, the weapons system disappeared, only to reappear in Israel as a “missile defense” project, an adjunct to the “Iron Dome” system. Israel’s Rafael Defense had been trying to develop laser weapons on its own to intercept rockets being fired from Gaza. It was never able to neither deploy a laser powerful enough nor develop a radar system able to be effective.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • “Friends of Israel,” within the US defense community were convinced by Israel that the system could be finished and deployed to protect Israel against a purported “missile onslaught” from Tehran. In truth, there was no such intention. Instead, as in the film “Real Genius,” the laser system was always intended to be deployed against ground targets, for terrorism and assassinations. The “delivery system,” a Boeing airliner configured for AWAC, electronic warfare or refueling, could easily be modified to “clone” commercial air traffic and attack targets thousands of miles away or as close as Gaza, Lebanon, Syria or Iraq with total impunity.
  • McLeod and Rogers, in The Law of War, examine the history of prohibition of incendiary weapons. Israel’s use of white phosphorous, intended as a “smoke market” as a corrosive anti-personnel weapon against civilian populations in Lebanon and Gaza skirts initial language, as cited below, in the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868, but falls well short of evading later prohibition on the use of chemical agents. “The first treaty to deal with weapons was the St Petersburg Declaration of 1868. Here states were concerned about the development of explosive or incendiary bullets for use against the wagon trains of enemy forces. It was felt that these bullets might be used against enemy personnel15 and cause unnecessary injury. The Contracting Parties agreed ‘mutually to renounce, in case of war among themselves, the employment by their military or naval troops of any projectile of a weight below 400 grammes, which is either explosive or charged with fulminating or inflammable substances’.
  • The declaration does not seem to have affected the practice of states in using tracer for range finding, even mixed with normal ammunition, nor the use of small explosive projectiles for anti-aircraft and anti-material uses. It did not prevent states from using four pound, thermite-based incendiary bombs during the Second World War. These, obviously, were more than 400 grammes in weight. Furthermore it could be argued that they were not ‘projectiles’, a term that certainly would not include illuminating flares or smoke canisters.” The use of energy weapons for assassinations and terrorism had, prior to only a few short days ago, been subject of speculative fiction only. No one had imagined that a failed American weapons system would be pirated for deployment in acts of terrorism by a rogue state. A greater question arises, if this “failed system” costing many billions has been shipped off “in the dark of night” without public knowledge or official authorization for use in a criminal manner, what other systems may have been similarly pirated? There is conclusive evidence that W54/Davy Crocket nuclear weapons made their way to Israel after 1991 after an accident at Dimona is reputed to have made that facility useless for weapons development.
  • Similarly, when the Ukraine retired its “fleet” of SS21 tactical nuclear missiles, Israel took possession of the warheads, servicing their deuterium booster gas all these years to keep them ready for deployment. Intercepted communications between the Kiev junta and Israel now indicate that Israel is ready to “repatriate” some of these nuclear weapons to the Ukraine for use against pro-Russian separatists. Ukrainian leaders have spoken of the intent to deploy and use these nuclear weapons publicly on several recent occasions. From USA Today: “KIEV, Ukraine — Ukraine may have to arm itself with nuclear weapons if the United States and other world powers refuse to enforce a security pact that obligates them to reverse the Moscow-backed takeover of Crimea, a member of the Ukraine parliament told USA TODAY. ‘We gave up nuclear weapons because of this agreement,’ said Rizanenko, a member of the Udar Party headed by Vitali Klitschko, a candidate for president. ‘Now there’s a strong sentiment in Ukraine that we made a big mistake.’”
  • With the recent bombing of a UN refugee facility in Gaza, with the use of chemical and now energy weapons, with Israel’s planned sale of nuclear warheads to Ukraine, there is little more that could be done to establish Israel, not only as a rogue state, but as a “clear and present danger” to not only regional but global security as well. As Jim W. Dean of Veterans Today recently stated, “Their fingerprints are at every crime scene.”
Paul Merrell

China submarines outnumber U.S. fleet: U.S. admiral | Reuters - 0 views

www.reuters.com/...bmarines-idUSKBN0LT2NE20150225

war & peace armaments-race China U.S. submarines

shared by Paul Merrell on 28 Feb 15 - No Cached

  • (Reuters) - China is building some "fairly amazing submarines" and now has more diesel- and nuclear-powered vessels than the United States, a top U.S. Navy admiral told U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday, although he said their quality was inferior.

    Vice Admiral Joseph Mulloy, deputy chief of naval operations for capabilities and resources, told the House Armed Services Committee's seapower subcommittee that China was also expanding the geographic areas of operation for its submarines, and their length of deployment.

    For instance, China had carried out three deployments in the Indian Ocean, and had kept vessels out at sea for 95 days, Mulloy said.

    "We know they are out experimenting and looking at operating and clearly want to be in this world of advanced submarines," Mulloy told the committee.

     
     

    U.S. military officials in recent months have grown increasingly vocal about China's military buildup and launched a major push to ensure that U.S. military technology stays ahead of rapid advances by China and Russia.

  • Mulloy said the quality of China's submarines was lower than those built by the United States, but the size of its undersea fleet had now surpassed that of the U.S. fleet. A spokeswoman said the U.S. Navy had 71 commissioned U.S. submarines.
  • He said the U.S. military did not believe China carried nuclear missiles on its submarines, but that it had been producing missiles and testing them.
Paul Merrell

The Aviationist » U.S. aircraft carrier and part of its escort "sunk" by Fren... - 0 views

theaviationist.com/...-aircraft-carrier-sunk-by-subs

war & peace U.S.-Navy aircraft-carrier-defense France submarine

shared by Paul Merrell on 11 Mar 15 - No Cached
  • If you thought aircraft carriers were invincible you were wrong.On Mar. 4, the French Ministry of Defense released some interesting details, about the activity conducted by one of its nuclear-powered attack submarine (SNA) in the waters of the North Atlantic Ocean.According to French MoD website (that is no longer online, even if you can still find a cached version of the article titled “Le SNA Saphir en entraînement avec l’US Navy au large de la Floride”), the Saphir submarine has recently taken part in a major exercise with the U.S. Navy off Florida.The aim of the exercise was joint training with U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12 made by the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, several Ticonderoga cruisers or Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and a Los Angeles-class submarine, ahead of their operational deployment.The scenario of the drills saw some imaginary states assaulting American economic and territorial interests; threats faced by a naval force led by USS Theodore Roosevelt.During the first phase of the exercise, the Saphir was integrated into the friendly force to support anti-submarine warfare (ASW) by cooperating with U.S. P-3C Orion P-8A Poseidon MPA (Maritime Patrol Aircraft): its role was to share all the underwater contacts with the other ASW assets.In the second phase of the exercise, the Saphir was integrated with the enemy forces and its mission was to locate the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt and its accompanying warships and prepare to attack the strike group.
  • While the fictious political situation deteriorated, the Saphir quietly slipped in the heart of the multi-billion-dollar aircraft carrier’s defensive screen, while avoiding detection by ASW assets.On the morning of the last day, the order to attack was finally given, allowing the Saphir to pretend-sinking the USS Theodore Roosevelt and most of its escort.Although we don’t really know many more details about the attack and its outcome, the scripted exercise its RoE (Rules of Engagement), the simulated sinking of a U.S. supercarrier proves the flattop’s underwater defenses are not impenetrable.This is the reason why modern subs often train with aircraft carriers: they pose a significant threat to powerful Carrier Strike Groups.Obviously, this was not the first time a submarine scored a simulated carrier kill with torpedo attacks.For instance, in 2007 HMCS Corner Brook, a Canadian diesel-electric submarine “sunk” UK’s Illustrious during an exercise in the Atlantic.
  • Paul Merrell on 11 Mar 15
     
    Thus proving that we need many more aircraft carrier groups, I guess.
Paul Merrell

Russia & France to Coordinate Attacks against Daesh: US & Turkey to close Border to Syr... - 0 views

nsnbc.me/...urkey-to-close-border-to-syria

war & peace Syria Russia France Turkey bombers border-crossings U.S.-foreign-policy

shared by Paul Merrell on 17 Nov 15 - No Cached
  • Following in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday, November 13 and Moscow’s conclusion that the Russian Airbus 321 that crashed in Egypt’s North Sinai province on October 31; and following recent talks on Syria in Vienna and talks on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in Antalya, Turkey, the military dynamics pertaining Syria and the international fight against the self-proclaimed Islamic State has changed, significantly. 
  • French President Francois Hollande and his administration responded to the attacks in Paris by declaring a three months state of emergency while deploying the French aircraft carrier Charles De Gaulle to the Mediterranean to upscale French participation in the fight against the self-proclaimed Islamic State, a.k.a. Daesh, ISIS or ISIL. Hollande announced that the carrier would leave port on September 19., adding that: “This is going to triple our military power [as part of the operation against the Islamic State]. I am not talking about deterring the IS but about eliminating it totally.” On Tuesday the Chief of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), Alexander Bortnikov, announced that the crash of the Russian Kogalmavia (Metrojet) Airbus 321 in Egypt’s North Sinai on October 31 had been caused by a bomb on board the plane.
  • The of Flight KGL9268 claimed the lives of all 224 passengers and crew on board. The plane was brought down about one month after Russia launched its airstrikes against Daesh, Jabhat al-Nusrah and other insurgencies in Syria. President Putin has briefed the Russian military command on the deployment of the French aircraft carrier and instructed the Russian naval forces in the Mediterranean and the Russian air forces in Syria to cooperate with the French military and to coordinate their military operations.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Russia has further up-scaled its military engagement in Syria by including Tu-160 and Tu-95MS strategic bombers in the operations in Syria. On Tuesday Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu informed President Vladimir Putin on the deployment of the bombers, saying: “Today, in a period from 05:00 a.m. to 05:30 a.m. Moscow time, twelve Tu-22 bombers hit Islamic State targets in Raqqah; in a period from 09:00 a.m. to 09:40 a.m. Tu-160 and Tu-95MS strategic bombers fired 34 air-launched cruise missiles at terrorist targets in the provinces of Aleppo and Idlib. A total of 127 sorties against 206 terrorist targets were scheduled for Tuesday, of which 82 sorties have already been flown and 140 targets have been hit. The operation is underway.” Russian air forces have thus far delivered about 4,000 air strikes in Syria, report official Russian military sources. A greater number than delivered by the US-led coalition against Daesh within one year. Putin noted, however, that this was not the time to focus on differences, but time to focus on an international effort aimed at defeating Daesh and terrorism.
  • The administrations of Turkish President R. Tayyip Erdogan and the administration of US President Barack Obama, for their part, have reportedly agreed on closing the entire Turkish – Syrian border. Turkey has previously been strongly criticized for allowing the illegal import of oil from Daesh while allowing the flow of weapons, munitions and insurgents for Daesh at the eastern part of the border while allowing Jabhat al-Nusrah to cross the border in the western section of the border. Whether the latest developments result in the formation of a genuine international alliance against Daesh and other terrorist organizations in the region remains to be seen. Moscow has reportedly begun to communicate with insurgents which it designates as “reasonable opposition” to avoid bombing their positions, while Moscow, in return, receives intelligence about Daesh and Jabhat al-Nusrah.
  • Paul Merrell on 17 Nov 15
     
    Is the U.S. finally getting serious about taking down ISIL? Closing the Turkey border crossings that have allowed ISIL resupply is a strong measure, if actually implemented effectively. Russian movement of bombers into the fray likewise cranks up the heat on ISIL and al Nusrah.
Paul Merrell

WASHINGTON: US looks to bypass Karzai on Afghanistan security deal, sources say | Natio... - 0 views

www.adn.com/...ass-karzai-on-afghanistan.html

war & peace Afghanistan negotiations

shared by Paul Merrell on 29 Nov 13 - No Cached
  • U.S. officials seeking to resolve a tense standoff with Afghan President Hamid Karzai were exploring on Tuesday whether they could bypass him and get other senior officials to sign a security deal authorizing American troops to remain in the country after 2014. A day after Karzai abruptly said he would not sign unless Washington agreed to additional conditions, the Obama administration was pushing for Foreign Minister Zarar Ahmad Osmani or another official to endorse the agreement on behalf of the government in Kabul, Afghanistan, several U.S. officials said. The Pentagon has been saying for months that it needs the security pact in place by the end of the year to give planners time to draft deployment schedules and secure funding for post-2014 operations. Without a signed agreement, U.S. officials say, they will begin planning a complete withdrawal of the remaining 47,000 American troops next year. That means Afghanistan could be left to face a still-potent Taliban insurgency without substantial foreign military assistance.
  • Susan Rice, Obama's national security advisor, told Afghanistan's Tolo television station that it was not possible for the United States to postpone signing the deal until the spring, as Karzai has called for. She brushed aside Karzai's call for the release of all Afghans held at the naval prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and other demands. "We've concluded the negotiations of the agreement," Rice said at the end of a three-day visit to Kabul. "We're getting the text ready, and we'll sign it at a high level," an apparent acknowledgment that someone other than Karzai could sign for the Afghans. But U.S. officials concede that the notion of bypassing Karzai poses enormous difficulties and is probably not a viable solution to the standoff unless Karzai himself accepts the idea. "The heads of state wouldn't have to sign the document, but they would have to delegate that authority," said a senior U.S. official in Kabul familiar with the discussions. "So I don't think it's clear here if it could be put into effect without (Karzai's) approval."
  • Paul Merrell on 29 Nov 13
     
    The Obama Administration dislikes puppets who protest having a string jerked.
Paul Merrell

Turkey to concentrate 1000 Units of Military Equipment at the Border - 1 views

southfront.org/litary-equipment-at-the-border

war & peace Turkey Syria invasion

shared by Paul Merrell on 09 Dec 15 - No Cached
  • According to the reports, about quater of the Turkey’s 1st Army is already located at the Syrian border. The Russian Air Force’s base in Latakia could be a target of the possible attack. On the other hand, relocation of troops is reported is authorized by the United States urging Turkey to deploy thousands of additional military personal along its border with Syria “to block the movement of ISIS terrorists”. “The game has changed. Enough is enough. The border needs to be sealed,” a senior US official said of Washington’s demand to Ankara. “This is an international threat, and it’s all coming out of Syria and it’s coming through Turkish territory.” US President Barack Obama recently ordered the deployment of dozens of Special Operations troops to Syria to “assist” militants operating on the ground. Earlier, Moscow deployed S-400 air defence systems at the Hmeymim air base where the Russian warplanes are located. Also, the cruiser Moskva armed with the Fort SAM system which is the naval version of the S-300, took up a position off the Latakia’s coast. In turn, Turkey sent to the border with Syria electronic warfare system KORAL (Radar Electronic Attack System) to counter the Russian air defences in the region.
1 - 20 of 20
Showing 20▼ items per page