RUSSIA’S IRAN-MADE SUICIDE DRONES INVADE UKRAINE – The Russian military is deploying hundreds, even thousands of suicide drones made in Iran called Shahed drones. The drones are relatively cheap to make and even if only a few get through they are still most cost efficient, and target efficient, than artillery or missiles. The Ukraine war is accelerating the rise of drones as the pre-eminent battle platform.
….In Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, drones have cemented their reputation as a potent, hard-to-stop and cost-effective weapon to seek out and destroy targets while simultaneously spreading the kind of terror that can fray the resolve of soldiers and civilians alike.
They’re also quickly surpassing missiles as the remote weapon of choice because they can be put into any combat theater in greater numbers much more cheaply.
Russia’s unleashing of successive waves of the Iranian-made Shahed drones over Ukraine has multiple aims — take out key targets, crush morale and ultimately drain the enemy’s war chest and weapons trying to defend against them as the conflict evolves into a longer war of attrition.
CHINA UNVEILS DRONE AIRCRAFT CARRIER – A Chinese State Television Program shows plans to develop a massive drone carrier that can launch missiles and drones. The program also suggests that human-piloted carriers could also deliver drones to the battlefield.
A Chinese state television program has provided a look at possible future People’s Liberation Army crewed-uncrewed teaming and swarming capabilities, including the employment of H-6K large missile carrier aircraft as launch platforms for LJ-1 drones. The LJ-1 is ostensibly intended for use as an aerial target and for other training purposes. However, Chinese state media reports, as well as independent experts and observers, have noted that its modular design and various features inherently found on aerial targets might allow it to be readily configured as a lower-end tactical uncrewed air vehicle that could operate together with crewed combat aircraft like the J-20 stealth fighter or even the H-6.
No matter how you consume your news, whether from the “mainstream” or from more “alternative” sources, recent months have been all abuzz about the “mighty HIMARS“; and the HIMARS is, indeed, a very capable system…for those who either have friends, or who can afford it. But — what about us? What about the “poor’s“? Every weapon has a development cycle, and HIMARS is no exception. In this article, we will take a (very) brief look at the history of rocket artillery, and a singular weapon that is everything the HIMARS is not: cheap, simple, flexible, and readily available for anyone or any group with even a modest mount of cash.
Rocket artillery is far from ‘new.’ In fact, rockets were arguably the first practical use for gunpowder when it was invented in China, in the 9th Century AD. As gunpowder migrated westward, however, the idea of rocketry largely disappeared, until the late 18th-early 19th century, when rocketry began to reappear, most famously in the form of the Congreve Rocket. These early attempts were wildly unreliable, including having a nasty habit of exploding on their own, or returning to their owners in the most unpleasant of manners. Thus, it should not be surprising that rockets mostly disappeared from European-style warfare after about 1850 or so.
Fireships firing rockets and details of storage and launch. Colonel Congreve, 1814. Public Domain.
As a result, it would take until World War 2 to resurrect rocket artillery in a meaningful way, with the German introduction of the “Nebelwerfer” (or, ‘smoke mortar’) multiple rocket launcher (MRL) system. The system fired a variety of rockets, normally 5 – 7 at a time, depending on their exact size and weight. While initially intended to deliver chemical weapons, the distaste – and fear – from all sides outside of Asia about using such weapons caused the Germans to quickly develop high-explosive rounds for the various calibers. These were used to devastating effect by the Germans, initially…not so much for their raw destructive power, but for their terrifying psychological effects on troops who had never imagined the sound the rockets produced.
Nebelwerfer crew in action, Soviet Union, 1944. German Federal Archives.
All of the major Allies quickly copied the concept, and by the end of the war, were deploying far larger and more capable designs. However, the love affair with short-range multiple rocket systems wouldn’t last. By the mid-1950’s, most “First World” nations had largely begun to abandon the battlefield MRL; the notable exception was the Soviet Army and it’s subject armies, who maintained the devastating BM-21 ‘Grad’ into the present day. The reason for this abandonment of MRL’s was that, despite the MRL’s decided advantages (they were cheap and lightweight, compared conventional artillery, and were capable of firing truly impressive amounts of rounds in a time far shorter than regular artillery when grouped into batteries), they had significant disadvantages: their range tended to be shorter; they took far longer to reload; they were nearly impossible to use in “direct fire”, a feature of conventional artillery; and their rockets’ velocity was far too low to actually penetrate dug-in shelters or tank armor.
Nebelwerfer crew moving into action, France, 1944. German Federal Archives.
The reason the Soviet Bloc hung on the BM-21, was that while it had all of the disadvantages cited above, it had a very powerful warhead, a long range, was simple and easy to maintain, and was far cheaper and easier to build than conventional artillery. The Soviets accepted the downsides of the MRL idea, and found a way to incorporate it into their artillery fighting doctrine.
BM-21 Grad on display at the Karen Demirchyan Complex, Armenia. CCA/4.0
The Chinese Communists, following their disastrous – if effective – intervention in the Korean War (1950-1953), had a terribly disorganized arsenal. As China had spent the previous fifty years alternating between civil wars and hellish foreign invasions (WW2 actually begins in 1937, in China, instead of Poland in 1939), the PLA was stuck with a hodge-podge of weapons from at least six or more sources, they were badly in need of a complete rearmament strategy, literally from the top, down.
The immediate problems for the CCP was that their manufacturing base had to be completely rebuilt – which, being fair, was a problem for most of the active participants of the war, although Mao Tse Tung’s “Great Leap Forward” almost destroyed the country wholesale – but, more cripplingly, they had very little money to buy foreign equipment. Unable to pay even the Soviet Union for enough field artillery, the PLA went looking for an alternative.
And, in 1963, they created one of the most important, but least-known, pieces of artillery in modern history: the 107mm Type-63 MRL.
Type-63 107mm MRL. 2016. CCA/4.0
A 12-shot launcher mounted on a 2-wheeled trailer, the system weighed in at about 1,300lbs/602kg, and only needed a crew of five. It was capable of firing a wide variety of ammunition (albeit limited to HE-types, as well as incendiary and smoke rounds) to (initially) c.5mi/8km; ranges were quickly improved. Some models could be broken into 2-tube loads for transport through rough terrain, by either people or mules. Eventually, a variety of single-tube launchers were developed for the rocket ammunition. The PLA realized that they had a good thing, and eventually equipped each infantry division with 18 units.
It was also quickly realized that the unit’s light weight made it easy to mount on small vehicles, giving the launcher the ability to quickly fire its rockets, and quickly relocate to avoid counter-battery fires.
IRGC Ground Force Commandos loading a Type-63 type MRL. 2017. CCA/4.0
As word got around, and the units began to be used by Communist guerrillas and regular armies, the system became a source of hard currency through exports and licensing; at least seven countries would eventually obtain legal production licenses for both the launchers and their ammunition.
Naturally, the advantages of the Type-63 became apparent to every rebel, guerrilla and terrorist group in the world, and those entities quickly began competing with small armies to buy, steal or beg units on both the legal and black markets.
The Type-63 has proved itself to be a significant game-changer in “low intensity conflicts” because it allows small forces operating on a shoe-string budget to seriously threaten adversaries who cannot afford the advanced systems, like battlefield radars or C-RAM (which are fantastic to have, if you can afford or get them, somehow), to counter the fast-moving artillery. As a result, lightweight, highly mobile “technical” units can add a significant punch to their operations.
While susceptible to well (and expensively) equipped Western armies, the Type-63 remains a significant threat to anyone without powerful “friends” willing to commit to their aid.
The Type-63 has been reshaping battles for nearly 65 years, at this writing. There seems to be no end in sight for this venerable weapon…not least, because it is now being deployed on high-speed inshore craft…Newer may often be better, but old weapons will still harm you.
As any sane person in the world nervously watches the continuous back-and-forth between Russia and the West over Ukraine, wondering if they are going to see mushroom clouds start sprouting over their cities, Emperor Joe and his deranged courtiers are doing their absolute best attempt at impersonating Emperor Nero (or, perhaps, Elagabalus). With the potential of World War 3 looming (not that the dissolute Imperial Swamp Court believes that it could really happen, so why not play with nuclear toys?), the Imperial Court (I could call them the “Legion of Doom,” but they’re not cool enough) have decided that they need to continue the geopolitical game – the one they should have been paying more attention to, that is – by plotting to be invited to invade, of ALL places…Haiti.
…What?
Oh, yes. Haiti.
Haiti has long been ranked as one of the poorest nations in the world. With a low-end economy based on minuscule agricultural and mining sectors, the country’s only real manufacturing sector involves pennies-on-the dollar clothing manufacture; in fact, the country’s only real claim to economic fame, is that it supplies around half of the world’s supply of “vetier oil” (an essential oil used in high-end perfumes). Otherwise, the country is, almost literally, a “banana republic.” As a result, Haiti can’t even capitalize on a tourism industry, although it is well-suited to one, since most vacationers dislike chilling on the beach while the country literally disintegrates around them.
Royal Decameron Indigo Beach Resort & Spa, Cote des Arcadins, Haiti, 2015.
The main reason for this disintegration, is the political instability that followed the demise of the Duvalier dynasty in 1986. After “Baby Doc” was forced to flee the country, Haiti tried to recover from the depredations of that regime, but it suffered from continual economic decline, political instability, repeated coups d’état, and a wave of major earthquakes.
Haitian President Jovenel Moïse, 2019. US Dept. of State photo.
Elected to the Presidency of Haiti in early 2017, Moïse had started out as a local businessman. His ideas earned him the attention of a center-right political policy, that would catapult him into the Presidency of the island nation. Despite accusations of a corrupted election, Moïse did make notable progress in developing both infrastructure projects, as well as launching new initiatives to expand Haiti’s agricultural sector, by improving rice production.
However, continued controversy over when Moïse’s actual term of office was supposed to end continued to simmer. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, a group of what can only be described as “hitmen” stormed Moïse’s residence in the early morning hours of 7 July 2021. Like many rulers in the world, Moïse’s residence had little real security; in fact, only six police officers were present that night – two were active informants to the attackers and the other four did their best to do nothing at all.
What followed could be favorably described as a “Keystone Kops” caper, had no one actually died. The survivors of the 26 actual attackers would later claim that they had been hired – via WhatsApp, of all things – to be security for Moïse…who were then informed that the mission was actually to kidnap the president, although several of them apparently knew well in advance that the real plan was to assassinate him. Video and audio evidence showed the attackers shouting via a bullhorn that the operation was a US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) operation, which at least help to momentarily confuse Haitian authorities.
Port Au Prince, Haiti, 2012
There followed a wild chase through the capital of Port-au-Prince, as police and civilians tried to hunt down the suspects who were now fleeing in panic, as it seems that no one had thought through what might happen afterwards. Eleven of the suspects broke into the Embassy of Taiwan, apparently seeking sanctuary, but were promptly arrested after Taiwan waived the embassy’s extraterritoriality status to allow the attacker’s arrest.
Bookmark that last – we’ll come back to it.
The subsequent investigation revealed a tangled web of conspirators, spanning Haitians, Americans, Colombians, among others, who seemingly accreted out of thin air, on a jumble of ideas about what kind of operation they were running: Were they seizing power in a coup? Were they launching a revolution? Were they arresting the president? Were they simply hitmen? The answer to all of these questions, at one point or another, was “Yes”. In this regard, the planning and execution of this operation make 2020’s “Operation Gideon” look like D-Day.
Venezuelan authorities detaining Operación Gedeón militants, 2020. Venezuelan Government photo.
As a result, Haiti began to spiral out of control. That descent continues a year later, as certain parties are now calling for international – and specifically American – intervention…Which is odd, given Haiti’s history of intervention with the United States…Doubly so, when the United States is currently “eyeball to eyeball” with Russia, in an international confrontation that is more serious than anything since the early 1980’s.
So — why Haiti? Why the push for intervention? Haiti’s politics aside, who would be behind such an attack? There are only three real possibilities:
Christian Emmanuel Sanon, an over-60 year old Haitian-American doctor from South Florida, who was identified as a possible front-man for the operation.
The US government of Joe Biden.
The government of Communist China.
The first case, of the 60-something doctor, is more than a little bizarre. An operation like this requires a lotof money, and the rewards need to balance out the risks. While it has never been illegal (mostly) for Americans to travel to a foreign country to fight in a war, it has always been illegal to plan and conduct such operations from within US borders. As in, serious and very real jail time to those involved. In this regard, it is not really credible to assume that this came solely out of a Florida office complex.
The second case is more interesting, but verges into “4-D Chess“. It is barely – just barely – possible that Joe Biden’s administration may have set up a deliberately bungled operation to send Haiti over the edge. Why? Because that would please the Communist Party of China, who were very upset about the strengthening ties between its claimed ‘province’ of Taiwan and Haiti, while giving the US an excuse to play the White Knight, riding to Haiti’s rescue, yet again.
On Communist China’s part, they could have easily concocted the same plot, for mostly the same reasons, and ran such an operation with the help of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro’s intelligence services, who were actually embedded into the aforementioned “Operation Gideon” from basically the start. For Communist China, implying tacit Taiwanese support to the operation (recall some of the plotters fleeing to the Taiwan embassy compound) could give Taiwan a black eye, locally inside Haiti. On Maduro’s part, getting the United States to launch another intervention into a Caribbean nation would be a spectacular win, that he can make hay from for the next decade or so, while burnishing his image with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, of general purposes.
My own assessment? The sordid affair is most likely a combination of #2 and #3, because of the confused nature of planning, and the byzantine levels of actors involved. The US has to maintain the image of being in control of its own back yard, and with fires burning all around it, Imperial Joe’s Court of Jesters needs to distract its populace from evermore ridiculous gaffe’s and disasters…
…Until, of course, scary noises and bright lights commence.
Which, naturally, does nothing for the long-suffering people of Haiti.
Despite the title, this article is not about politics, per se. Nor is it any kind of product endorsement. This is an advisory, drawn on current events. As well, these are strictly my own opinions, based on my own training and experience, and are not necessarily the position of FreedomistMIA.
I have frequently stated that fifteen or twenty years ago, I would never have imagined that this aspect of CBRN(Chemical/Biological/Radiological/Nuclear) would be what I would find myself advising people about. The first three, certainly: chemical spills happen all the time, as do pandemics (COVID is only the latest, and the one that hit me, personally), and as someone who both watched the real Chernobyl on the news when it happened, and received briefings on it later, accidents at nuclear power plants and storage areas are nothing to sneeze at.
But full-scale nuclear war, between Russia and the United States? In the early 21st Century? I’d have told you that Hollywood was no longer accepting derivative scripts like that.
Now, however, that very term is being tossed around blithely by many “leaders” in the world, and very seriously by one in particular. This has generated the usual, shockingly uninformed response from the shrill and the trolls, to scare people for the “lulz.”
So — I am going to talk to you about nuclear war, in order to inform you, rather than scare you.
The picture below is a “before and after” image of the city of Nagasaki, Japan, following it’s destruction by an atomic bomb on August 9, 1945. This was the “other” atomic bomb that week. I have been to the memorial site in Hiroshima (familial connection…on the Japanese side); should you, the Reader, ever get to Japan, you need to put it on your must-see list.
Just try to avoid going in the first week of August.
Nagasaki, Japan, before and after the atomic bombing of August 9, 1945.
This is the image most people have about nuclear war. That it is mostly wrong, is not something the wider news media is going to waste time talking to you about. The general consensus about nuclear war, as presented in such movies as The Day After, On The Beach, and Threads and reinforced by scientists of a certain political persuasion, is that after the bombs drop, those who live through that, will soon join the rest.
The reality is going to be closer to a downmarket, Road Warrior rip-off. No zombies; sorry.
While the notion of being turned into a shadow on a street by a nuclear blast is very real, the simple truth is that you have to be almost directly underneath the blast. For most Americans, that is simply not going to happen. To find out why, take a stroll through the Nuke Map website, and find the closest major city to you. This is one of the most educational sites of its kind on the internet, and a great companion to Alternate Wars’ World War 3 section.
Most people who live near a major urban area don’t actually live “in” said city, but in the surrounding suburbs. For example, I tell people that I live in “Dallas, Texas” – the reality is that I live well outside the city, itself; in fact, I don’t even live in the same county. That is a conscious choice on my part, because – in my heart of hearts – I never trusted the political leadership of the USA to not do something monumentally stupid, so I try to live outside target zones.
Nuclear weapons are expensive and complicated, so anyone deciding to fire one at an enemy long ago realized that they needed to think very carefully about targeting. Targeting enemy commands and military facilities are almost always not the first option, because – under the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) – it was assumed that as soon as you launched your missiles, the other side would launch theirs. As a result, there was no point in targeting empty air bases and missile silo’s. Likewise, targeting command elements (i.e., the President, et al) was not a good idea, because if you succeeded, there was no one left to negotiate with. So, the target planners settled on “economic and communications nodes.”
In short – cities.
If you look at a map of almost any major city, there are almost always a confluence of major highways in or near the city centers, conveniently close to major office towers housing the headquarters of companies that control “war production industries“…meaning, essentially anything that can be useful in warfare…which is virtually everything.
But, what if you don’t live in one of these “target-rich environments“? If you live “out in the ‘burbs,” like me, at most, you will get a certain amount of damage to your home (unless you are staring directly at the blast when it goes off; that will make your life…problematic). If you live in an actual rural area, you might not notice that a nuclear event has happened, until your local emergency services suddenly turn out in force.
For those thinking that the recent “advisory” posters and videos from various governments around the country, warning you to head indoors and wait for instructions in the event of a nuclear attack, means that the government will actually tell you how they are going to save you in the aftermath…they won’t. Those poster’s job is to keep you off the roads, to lessen traffic jams caused by fleeing people.
In short, the government wants you done. Well done, that is.
So…The foregoing naturally begs the question: If you’re outside a target area, a nuclear exchange does happen, and you’re alive afterwards — what do you do?
First, you need to plan ahead. If you think that I mean that you should become a “prepper” – you would be correct. But – should you stay in place, or go somewhere else? You know your area and your neighbors better than I do. If you live in an apartment complex, I strongly recommend that you have a plan to go somewhere else.
I am in a position where I have options in several directions. Again, I did this deliberately. That said, if you think that you are in a good position to stay where you are, that’s what you need to do. Hitting the road after a nuclear attack is, obviously, a pretty dangerous undertaking, no matter how well-prepared you think you are.
In addition to the requisite stocks of food – which is cheap to start, if you start now, by simply buying a few extra cans of beans and vegetables, and bags of beans and rice with every grocery run – you need to think seriously about water. Getting a couple of 55-ish gallon drums, along with several hand-pumped water purifiers for hiking, is a good step.
Next, I have to insert a disclaimer: the following is NOT medical advice. Do NOT “experiment” with the following. Short of a nuclear attack, do NOT take these products without consulting your doctor. Neither myself, nor FreedomistMIA are responsible if you violate this warning.
You have been warned.
The only specifically anti-radiation drug available to the general public in a pre-attack environment is Potassium Iodide. This is used as a protective for the thyroid glads from certain forms of radiation. The link above is to the Mayo Clinic’s advisory page on the drug – read that THOROUGHLY before taking. Potassium Iodide can be bought either as a product called “IOSAT“, which is sold in packets of fourteen 130mg pills. These are perfectly fine to use, but I do not recommend them, because in my opinion they are too expensive, and not as useful as the alternative. The better option are sold as tablets, by the bottle, usually coming as c.140 tablets of 130mg each (the standard dosage for an adult) to each bottle. The reason for this is simple: the IOSAT box is only good for protection after a single detonation — what do you do on Day 12, post-Attack, when their is another explosion? It’s a distinct possibility. Buy the bottle.
As well – calcium supplements. These are the only reasonable measure to counter the effects of Strontium-90 exposure. While there is no cure for Strontium exposure, calcium supplements can help you maintain bone health, since Strontium competes with calcium in the body. Again, talk to your doctor.
Last – multivitamins. Should an attack happen, your stress levels and changes in diet will throw your body out of whack for some time, until you can settle into a new normal. Multivitamins can help regulate the nutrients your body needs in the short term. Again, talk to your doctor.
Next, you need to consider, right now, what your gardening potential is. Start looking up your gardening zone, to see what kinds of food crops you can put in. As well, learn sprouting, because it really will keep you alive. Likewise, check out THIS video, as well.
That last thing we’ll talk about here, is personal defense and protection.
While I am fairly certain that many of those reading this article probably possess firearms of some sort, you need to think carefully about how to organize you personal and family protection strategies. Even if you live in a hyper gun-controlled state, you still have viable firearms options, such as pump shotguns, lever- and bolt-action rifles, and revolvers. Don’t do anything to run afoul of your local governments, but arm yourself, if you haven’t already.
Lastly, don’t neglect first aid. There are several products readily available, at very low cost that will significantly increase your chances of survival. Your options in this regard are vastly better than what was available 20-odd years ago. Also, there are plenty of training videos out there, on YouTube; “Dr. Bones & Nurse Amy” is one of the best.
Finally — I am not writing this to scare you. Even though I do not know you, I want you to live, should a nuclear attack happen…because the chances are very good that you willsurvive the attack, itself, and likely in relatively good physical condition. I find the idea of a person who survives a nearby nuclear explosion dying because they were not prepared beforehand, out of depression and ennui induced by sources that they should be able to trust, to be offensive in the extreme. You don’t have to know every single thing that I know, but what you need to know is that, if the worst comes, you and your family can survive, if you just exert the effort now.
I hope this helps. Good luck, check your six and keep your powder dry.
By Bill Collier- In an AP article, it is noted President Biden is essentially telling his own Party bosses that a. he doesn’t know Putin’s off ramp in Ukraine and b. he fears we are closer to nuclear war than ever, on par with the great nuclear scare of 1962. But why are we who once proudly felt our efforts had led to the end of the Cold War once again considering the possibility of a Soviet Snow?
President Joe Biden said Thursday that the risk of nuclear “Armageddon” is at the highest level since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, as Russian officials speak of the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons after suffering massive setbacks in the eight-month invasion of Ukraine.
AP News, October 6, 2022
The typical indeptness and “Americans last” attitude among Democrats and their little toady Biden led to this situation. Honestly, under a Republican like Trump, Reagan, or Eisenhower, Russia would have never taken such liberty. Only Democrats and their collaborators, the Bushes, would fumble so.
I still say SLAVA UKRAINI, HEROYIM SLAVA, I root for the Ukrainian PEOPLE, but I am not amused by and will not forget that the Democratic Party’s obsession with interventionism and Russophobia led to this more than anything Ukraine or even Russia did to provoke this tragedy.
On one hand, we cannot bow to nuclear blackmail but on the other hand the Democratic Party’s warmongering ways and ineptitude are the true cause of the crisis we face.
This should never have gotten this far.
It all started with Bush, the collaborator Republican, caving on Putin’s Georgia adventure and, before that, to Clinton’s insistence Ukraine surrender its nuclear arsena for a worthless “guarantee” of its territorial integrity.
But is nuclear war in the offing or is the banging of the war drums essentially the corpostate’s “wag the dog” scenario to bolster Democrats under the banner of Biden as a “war President?” The ground level truth here may be somewhat a wag the dog scenario that has gotten out from the control of its perpetrators. In orchestrating a war, the corpostate establishment meant to bleed Russia but not seriously threaten it, all in the service of the military-industrial complex, global corporate gains, and propping up Biden as a tough guy.
It is almost certainly improbable that Putin would fall for the bait and do something rash, like hit the Ukes with a tactical nuclear weapon. But so was it improbable that Putin, without massive numerical superiority or total control over the air space, would have launched a full-fledged invasion that would basically fail. This doesn’t mean Russia is out as this masisve and tough country has clawed back from defeat under much tougher circumstances.
For instance, the Ukrainians have more than tacitly agreed a rules of engagement (ROE) that says they cannot hit Russia proper despite the fact Russia is free to strike their state in any location. This notion an enemy can cross your border to attack you and annex your country but you must not strike them anywhere except for inside your country is as foolhardy as giving up Ukrainian nuclear weapons was.
But will Putin hit the button and lob a nuke into his enemy’s country?
It is more likely that if the Russians do a nuclear demonstration it will be in as sparsely populated an area as possible, followed by an ultimatum that Davos/DC will either stand up to or bow to. Whatever Kyiv wants to do, the decision will not be theirs in the end.
Full on nuclear war is unlikely and if this scenario plays out it is hard to see what will follow. Even if the Davos Axis (the Powers, state and corporate, under the control of Davos shot-callers) caves and demands Kyiv accept its role as the Czechoslovokia to a modern Munich Accord, they will inflict harsh and unrelenting sanctions on the Russians that will not be worth their phyrric victory.
This is a war on two levels. Locally it is Putin’s armies versus the sovereign people of Ukraine. But the meta reality of this war is that it is between the Davos Axis and Putin’s Russian state, which is the property of the oligarchs. The “national interests” of Western countries, Ukraine, and Russia are irrelevant, even if the Russian cannon fodder and Ukrainian frontline patriots are caught in the middle and forced to die for agendas in Davos/Brussels/DC or Moscow that do not serve them.
If you think the Democrats and their lapdog President have American interests at heart or really care for the Ukrainian people, then you are living in a bubble of fantasy not reflective of reality in the slightest.
It is possible to truly want to support Ukraine. The Davos Axis vis the instruments of American power which they now control may have caused all this. But the people of Ukraine do not deserve to be abandoned and even if the quisling Democrats are routed and American government is returned to the People, we should recognize our moral obligation to the people of Ukraine. One can both have eyes wide open as to the true cause and motive behind this war and yet also wholly support the people of Ukraine who did not choose this war.
So we face the potential of nuclear war, something we old Cold Warriors thought was in our past and something we fought to prevent. We face this because the Democrats did not know how to stand up to Putin while constantly engaging in Russophobia and incendiary rhetoric which drove the Bear into irrational fears until he lashed out. The Davos Axis wanted a quick Russian victory in the East followed by a long protracted guerilla war. The staunch bravery and fighting skill of the Ukrainians prevailed enough that arming them, after years of a military equipment moratorium, became a political necessity.
At each stage Biden resisted the next level, dragging feet on what arms would be sent, each an escalation, and now Ukrainian victories are making Putin panic and reach for the Big Red Button. Even now, Biden openly states he has no idea what Putin’s off-ramp to this war is, beyond going nuclear to level the playing field.
Thus, nuclear war looms ever closer, more than ever, and the Democrats as Davos Axis stooges wring their hands desperately without having any answers.
In light of current events in Russia, we’re going to take a look at something long forgotten in the United States: Civil Defense, and how the US government has been failing it’s citizenry since 1979.
Prior to World War 2, there wasn’t really a notion, nor a need, for a “civil defense” structure within the United States as we understand the term. While there had been efforts to mobilize the nation’s non-military workforce, including women, during World War 1, there simply wasn’t that great of a threat of external attack, and the false start was quickly dismantled after that war ended.
Photograph taken from a Japanese plane during the torpedo attack on ships moored on both sides of Ford Island shortly after the beginning of the Pearl Harbor attack. View looks about east, with the supply depot, submarine base and fuel tank farm in the right center distance.
Once large-scale war returned to Europe in 1939, however, it became clear that the United States would be facing severe challenges. As a result, the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) was established on May 25, 1940, to coordinate a national strategy for mobilizing the population to defend the country in the event of a direct attack. These preparations, as tentative as they were, came into sharp focus following the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the staggering Japanese offensive throughout the Western Pacific Ocean. Very shortly, German U-Boats swarmed towards American waters, and promptly sank over 100 merchant vessels along the US Atlantic and – some in sight of land – in the first three months on 1942, alone. Pearl Harbor-style raids by Japanese aircraft carriers along the Pacific Coast were seen as a real possibility. As well, there was a real fear of Japanese and German commandos sending landing parties ashore from submarines to sabotage everything from industrial plants to railroads and bridges; machine gun-equipped security posts were set up to guard Hoover Dam.
Allied tanker torpedoed in Atlantic Ocean by German submarine. US Navy photo.
Even though the feared attacks never went further than U-Boat raids on shipping and one of the strangest series of raids ever seen (aside from the actual invasion of Alaska), an extensive network of air raid shelters and local security was established, and remained functional until the end of the war, when it was disbanded.
That document led to the establishment of a huge network of programs, studies, shelters and supplies, that placed some level of planning for the civilian population of the United States to survive a projected nuclear attack. The resulting Civil Defense program continued it’s attempt to prepare American civilians for surviving a nuclear attack until the early 1970’s, when it’s oversight began to be dismantled, and its functions dispersed out to other agencies. Everything from food, water storage, tools and medications (even a 200-bed emergency hospital) were available from the Civil Defense system, direct to homeowners and small communities, at either no or little cost…But that wouldn’t last. There were, of course, problems and failures, but at least the government was trying.
Survival Supplies for the Well-Stocked Fallout Shelter, c.1964. US Gov’t photo.
FEMA is a “reactive” agency – aside from providing some free information on their website, there is no longer any systematized response to any sort of disaster, be that a hurricane, earthquake or nuclear war. “Proactive measures” are not in the wheelhouse of any US government agency, when it comes to protecting the civilian population. While there are certainly “survivalists” and “preppers” out there, those people are frequently ridiculed and shoved into the category of “kooks” and “weirdos” for trying to coherently prepare for any sort of catastrophe – after all, if something should ever happen, the government will help you far better than you can on your own, right?
Hurricane Katrina survivors at the Houston Astrodome Red Cross Shelter. US Gov’t photo.
Today, with the proverbial “wars and rumors of wars,” as well as economic and energy chaos around the world, civilians (and even some military’s troops) are increasingly worried, because the governments of the world offer little in the way of assurance, let alone practical solutions, and quite literally seem to be attempting to make things worse. There have been too many years between serious, practical planning, done by actual specialists, to prepare people for “Disaster X”.
The bottom line is this: You are on your own. The government is not going to be there to help you..in fact, the government may very well decide that whatever you have, what you have spent your own money to stockpile for your family, is not actually yours, and that they will take it from you, by force, if they deem it necessary. If you doubt this, read it in their own words, HERE – the language is intentionally broad, and it can be changed on a whim.
Again: You are on your own. If you don’t have a plan, you’d better get started. Rice and beans are cheap…for the moment.
For more information, visit the website of the Civil Defense Museum HERE
Educators and administrators running K-12 education on America’s military bases are indoctrinating the children of military personnel in radical gender ideology, critical race theory, and left-wing activism. In a new Claremont Institute investigative report, my colleague Scott Yenor and I document this latest evolution in America’s culture war.
This development at military-run schools tracks broader trends in American education. In recent months, Chris Rufo has exposed the rampant woke indoctrination occurring in our nation’s K-12 schools, with striking examples from Los Angeles, Portland, and San Diego. In 2020, Rod Dreher wrote about the creeping woke rot at America’s oldest military academy.
A year after request, West Point turns over mostly illegible documents
The College Fix recently received more than 50 pages of emails from the United States Military Academy at West Point –15 months after a student reporter filed a public records request.
Many of the pages were blacked out with the exception of several articles included in the communications or the initial greeting or ending. The redactions on the initial request were done by The Fix to protect the mailing address of former student reporter and current Fox News employee Ashley Carnahan, who filed it.
At a June 13, 2022 TE School Board meeting, a parent asked the board whether his special needs child would be taught about his “white privilege” when the child gets to high school. Earlier in the evening, Superintendent Richard Gusick had glibly insisted, “We do not teach critical race theory in our classrooms.” Yet, now, he delivered a carefully worded response:
Currently, that’s [i.e., teaching white privilege is] not part – a direct part of our…
We all like nice things. Especially new, nice things. New things tend to have that “new” smell and/or touch. They “feel” better, and give us all a certain sense of accomplishment – after all, “new” tends to be expensive, in comparison to older things, and “buying new” gives us a feeling of accomplishment, because the new thing is a physical representation of our hard work paying off.
But – is “new” actually “better“?
In the realm of consumer products, the reality of new items hitting the shelves (literally or figuratively) is very much hit or miss. Many times – perhaps even most times – the new stuff offers new features, or is lighter, or does things more efficiently than what it is replacing. Conversely, many times, the new product – while looking very snazzy or streamlined on the outside – is actually flimsy, cheaply made and has a very good chance of failing if you look at it sideways, usually the day after its warranty expires (if it even came with a warranty). This can lead the frustrated consumer to try and return the product for a replacement or a refund (which sometimes, they are actually able to receive), and often going out and buying a similar product from a more reliable and trusted brand.
But in reality, buying a “new and improved” coffee maker on sale and having it fail on you after three months, while frustrating, really isn’t a monumental problem; annoying, certainly, but no one is dying over it…In the military realm, however, the consequences of untested tools – and worse, untested structural models – can be catastrophically disastrous.
Let’s look at two examples, one a matter of hardware, the other, a matter of organization.
Boom Sticks
First, with the rise of the AK-47, militaries around the world began to clamor for a rifle chambered in an “intermediate cartridge“, in short, something more powerful than a pistol-calibersubmachine gun, but not as massive as a full-power cartridge. The path to the intermediate cartridge idea is one of those dark secrets of firearms history, that will make for a good, more in depth article down the line, but here, it will be sufficient to outline a brief overview.
Intermediate rounds are, on average, smaller and lighter than their larger cousins, which equals less use of materials (i.e., gunpowder and various metals); while the savings are tiny, per cartridge, when you are producing billions of rounds at a time, those tiny figures become very significant, very quickly. On the side that really matters to a land army – infantry combat – the “field experiment” of the last sixty or so years, initially seemed to validate the idea of the intermediate cartridge: the intermediate class of round seemed to be perfectly effective at its intended role. But looks, as usual, can be deceiving.
Comparison of Pistol, Rifle and Intermediate cartridge. From left: 9 × 19 mm Parabellum (Pistol cartridge) 7.92 × 33 mm Kurz (Intermediate cartridge) 7.92 × 57 mm Mauser (Rifle cartridge)
While fine at ranges out to 300 meters or so (the intermediate’s intended range), when ranges moved out past that, the rifles rapidly became very ineffective, more so because – since the “maximum effective range” was accepted worldwide as 300 meters – the militaries of the world saw little reason to train the average recruit to shoot any further than that…and besides, the few times where the ranges opened up, military forces had General Purpose Machine Guns (GPMG’s), Heavy Machine Guns (HMG’s), mortars, artillery, sniper rifles and even air support to deal with anything “out there.”
The resulting twenty-plus year long series of wars and interventions around the world began to show cracks in the armor of the intermediate cartridge idea. As infantry combat moved out of jungles and cities, and into vast deserts and mountain ranges, combat ranges opened up considerably, well outside the range (pdf link) of intermediate cartridge weapons. And this is where the US military hit a wall.
After going “all in” on the intermediate cartridge during the Vietnam War, the US military was stuck with an entire ensemble of weapons, equipment, training foundations and doctrines that revolved around the intermediate M-16. But now, they were finding themselves being engaged by guerrilla’s firing near century-old rifles, shooting at ranges well beyond 1200 (YouTube link) meters (pdf link). In those instances, US troops generally only had a few GPMG’s and HMG’s to respond. The US military’s response was to develop a completely new (and, inevitably, veryexpensive) rifle and light machine guncombination, along with a completely new type of cartridge that is best described as “intermediate plus“, that had longer range and better “hitting power” than the 60+ year old 5.56x45mm rounds.
U.S. Soldiers with the firing party with the 69th Infantry Regiment, New York Army National Guard prepare to fire a rifle salute during the Pearl Harbor Day ceremony in New York Dec. 7, 2012. US Army photo.
For those who might be scratching their heads and wondering why the US military went this route, congratulations – many other people have been doing the same thing: Why not simply adopt an older cartridge, specifically the 7.62x51mm M80, that was already in the system (such as the M240-series), and any of a number of older-pattern rifles of proven design…after all, new manufacturing techniques and materials would surely make those older designs very competitive, weight-wise, right?
The answer for the US military was, simply put, politics: with a Congress facing a public tired after twenty years of inconclusive war, and massive budgetary issues, there was no way that the military could go to Congress and ask them to fund a step “backwards”. On the other hand, they couldask Congress to fund something “new and improved” – they just had to put the right “bells and whistles” on it…or, to be peckish, a nicer ribbon.
In contrast, stands India: Faced with a rifle that just wasn’t working, no matter what they did, India bit the bullet, admitted defeat, and inked deals to both purchase and manufacture the AK-203 rifle in 7.62x39mm (a total of 670,000 – 70,000 directly from Russia, with the remainder to be manufactured under license) in Uttar Pradesh, while also purchasing slightly modified SIG 716 G2 Patrol rifles in 7.62x51mm.
Indian Army soldier armed with a modified AK-type rifle. Indian Ministry of Defence photo.
The bog-standard 7.62x51mm M80 cartridge has been standard for most western GPMG’s since at least 1983 – it just works.
Whether switching to a “new and improved” weapons suite is a good idea for the US military or not, remains to be seen. Hopefully, it will work.
Hopefully. Troops’ lives depend on it.
Misusing An Organizational Idea
The current war between Russia and Ukraine brought into focus the Russian idea of the “Battalion Tactical Group” (Russian: Батальонная тактическая группа, batal’onnaya takticheskaya gruppa). The BTG is one of those oddities that is rather hard to define, primarily because it only works in a very narrow area of military operations, that being as a “cadre force.”
On paper, a BTG is a combined arms formation that is technically a “battalion” of mechanized infantry, with a number of smaller specialist units (i.e., engineers, medical, air defense, etc.) being assigned as needed, and kept in a high state of readiness. Conceptually, a BTG is similar to the Western “task force” at various levels…except in artillery, where the BTG – with fewer than 1,000 troops assigned – has more long-range firepower than a US Brigade Combat Team (BCT).
There are, however, problems.
The first, is a lack of infantry support. One of the mistakes many civilians make in studying modern warfare, is the idea that tanks can do everything on their own. They cannot. A tank crew is seriously restricted in seeing what is happening around them, specifically in that they cannot see enemy infantry armed with lightweight anti-tank missiles that are more than capable to turning a tank into burning scrap metal. This is not a feature unique to Russian tanks – it is a feature of all main battle tanks in the world, in general. The only viable solution to this problem, was training specialist infantry to escort and guard the tanks against enemy infantry.
Obviously, this requires a lot of infantry…Yet Russian BTG’s, on average, have about 250 infantry escorting them, somewhere between 1/3 and 1/4 of what they actually need. Why?
The BTG dates from the end of the Soviet era, when the Soviet Army was refining its plans for invading Western Europe, and were carefully studying how to deal with Western company, battalion and brigade task forces. BTGs were deployed as an experiment in Afghanistan, before the final collapse of the Soviet efforts in that country in 1989, and worked well enough in that level of fighting that they were kept on, until the Soviet Union dissolved. At that point, the rancid Soviet economy that Russia inherited simply could not support the expense of permanently established combat units that required careful tactical training to work effectively. Worse, the necessary reforms to make all of this happen required a long-serving, professional corps of non-commissioned officers (NCO’s, i.e., Corporals and Sergeants), which was something the Soviets had never really tried to build. This, coupled to the political upheavals of the day, and the general Russian attitude towards their military as a barely-necessary evil (unless the enemy is literally inside the gates…and sometimes, not even then) which made an “all-volunteer” force of the likes of the United States or Great Britain an impossibility, made mass formations and a rigid conscription system moot points. While the Russian army retained the idea of brigades and divisions, at their hearts, they were really just a collection of sketchily-trained, down-market BTG’s.
A farewell ceremony for the 331st Airborne Regiment of the 98th Airborne Division withdrawn from Chechnya. www.kremlin.ru
As a result, while the concept of the BTG was retained after the Soviet Union became Russia again, the training of the troops in those formations was very haphazard. As the Russian economy began to rebound in the late-1990’s, training and readiness began to improve, and combat experience in forming ad hoc BTG’s during the wars in Chechnya showed that the concept was a viable way of fighting minor forces and guerrillas. This culminated in the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, where the BTG idea seemed to work very well against the Western-trained Georgian Army (yet another article for the future). All of this led to the 2008 Russian military reform, an all-out attempt to revamp the Russian military establishment into something like a 21st Century force.
When Russia began its “intervention” in Ukraine in 2014, the BTG finally seemed to find its niche. While it had glaring weaknesses against comparable Western formations, Russian BTG’s being sent into eastern Ukraine were able to augment themselves with swarms of thousands of local anti-Kiev insurgents who, while poorly armed and scarcely trained, were able to advise and guide Russian units through local terrain, and were also able to help screen the BTG’s against Ukrainian anti-tank teams, backed up by the more professional Russian infantry and artillery. And, when Russia intervened in Syria in 2015, the Russian commanders on the scene quickly duplicated this model with local Syrian auxiliaries. The concept worked there, as well.
It seemed that Russia had found the perfect balance: BTG’s were simultaneously long-service soldiers, not conscripts, and – not being manpower-intensive – thus would not unduly upset the Russian population when they were sent out. At the same time, they seemed to be able to get the job done, and were very cost-effective in comparison to the older-model, mass formations of past wars.
“Scene of Gen. Custer’s last stand, looking in the direction of the ford and the Indian village.” Unknown author, ca. 1877. From the US National Archives.
Unless carefully controlled, Victory Disease can rapidly infect a population with the idea that their forces are nigh-invincible. If left alone to fester, this breeds an arrogance that the nation can take on any opponent, anywhere, anytime, without too much effort or thought.
Which brings us back to Ukraine, 2022.
Whatever the causes of the current war may be, this is not the article to discuss them. The Russian leadership clearly assumed that their forces would overrun Ukraine with relative ease, and would allow them to accomplish limited objectives that would not be too onerous on the Russian population. While this was mostly true in the southern sectors, it only appeared to be so, initially, in the northern theater. There, the BTG’s showed all of their glaring faults, as stalled convoys strung out along roads (an inevitable consequence in armored warfare – just ask the US Army and Marines about the advance on Baghdad in 2003) were suddenly cut to pieces by Ukrainian infantry and partisans operating behind the Russian advance. Without the mass of infantry that a more conventional organization would have had, the Russians were unable to defend those convoys as US forces had in 2003, as there was no way that the razor-thin film of infantry the Russians had access to could adequately protect the long columns of vehicles packed tightly into ready-made kill-zones. It was never that the Russians were “running out of infantry” – they simply never had the necessary numbers plugged into their organizational combat unit structures. The disastrous results of this oversight have now greatly lengthened the war, and have led – as of late-September, 2022 – to the Russian leadership calling for a “partial” national mobilization.
What impact this may have on the war, remains to be seen.
For the purposes of this article, Russia took a low-impact approach to military organization out of harsh necessity, and allowed it to become a dominant aspect of its military and – dangerously – its political psychology. When it then applied that approach to smaller wars, and saw that it worked, they made the assumption that it would work against larger opponents. With the inevitable failure of the model when it stepped outside its boundaries, Russia is now in the position of being forced to escalate the conflict to avoid defeat.
Chieftain. M1 Abrams. Leopard 2. Leclerc. Challenger. To anyone with a passing familiarity in the world of modern armored warfare, these names are well known, and rightly feared, should one come up in opposition to them. These vehicles all occupy the top tier of main battle tanks in the world of 2022.
However, even given the impressive combat record of all the vehicles listed above, none of them – combined – match the battle history, breadth of deployment nor numbers produced of the most numerous battle tank in history: the near-immortal T54/55.
Polish T-55A’s on the streets during Martial law in Poland, December, 1981. Public Domain.
As of this writing (September, 2022), an estimated 100,000 units – or more – are in current service, around the world, counting variants made in China.
The first prototype rolled out of the assembly bays at Nizhny Tagil, in the Sverdlovsk Oblast, near the end of 1945. Design work had begun in 1943, at the Morozov Design Bureau, in the desperate days of the Soviet Union’s battle against the juggernaut of Nazi Germany. With the end of the war, immediate pressure to crank out a new tank lessened, and the Soviets took their time to get the vehicle right.
The result was a vehicle that rivaled the legendary T-34 tank, as it had almost the same cross country performance as its predecessor, but had far better armor, running gear and much more powerful D10-T 100mm main gun. Going into production in 1948, a small initial batch of just under 1,500 vehicles were built, and – as usual with new designs – issues began to show up. Over time, enough of these corrections and redirections (including a focus on surviving nearby nuclear detonations) accumulated to give birth to the T55.
A T-55, one of several Somali National Army tanks (ca. 1981). US Army photo.
By then, the T54 had seen some of its first real combat actions, in both the Soviet Union’s invasion of Hungary in 1956, and in some of the very early stages of the Second Indochina War. But that was only the beginning.
As the production lines ramped up, and more units rolled off the lines, users around the world suddenly discovered that they had a relatively cheap, yet very effective, battle tank. While the T54/55 was quickly surpassed by newer and more advanced designs, in both its home country and in the West, it continued in production. The reason was simple: while the T54/55’s replacements (such as the T-62 and T-72, among others) might have been technically more capable and effective, the T54/55 was more effective than all of them, when it was the only tank on the field, and its enemies had either inferior tanks (or no tanks at all) to face it.
As it was simple to service in the field, and comparatively cheap (at c.US$200,000 in 1972), it became a favorite of Third World armies, in many cases, being the first battle tank of any sort that those countries had ever deployed. The D10-T main gun turned the tank – with certain limitations – into an effective mobile artillery piece. The platform also quickly proved highly adaptable, with multiple variants quickly appearing on the horizon, variants that further expanded the tank parks of many small countries. For many nations, the T54/55 became a pillar of their armed forces. Many firms around the world offer various types of upgrade packages for the design, as of this writing.
T-55AM2 Main Battle Tank of the Sri Lankan Army, 2012
Of course, as with all poorly handled equipment, if an operator just bought tanks for show, and then tried to use them for real, the results were…less than spectacular. Although suffering repeated drubbings at the hands of top-tier armies like the IsraeliIDF and the US military (and, embarrassingly, the Chadians), many other armies – like India, Vietnam, Tanzania and Sri Lanka – showed that when properly handled, the tank designed at the end of World War 2, was a highly dangerous combatant on the battlefield.
This remains the case. Around the world of 2022, this guttural steel monster continues to fight. There are better tanks, now, but that doesn’t matter, unless those tanks show up to oppose the ancient beast…and even then, it might surprise its younger cousin’s, depending on who is crewing it.
Tank driver, Lance Corporal Mudondo Zabina of the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces, manoeuvres her tank under the watch of her commanding tank officer, Lieutenant colonel Fred Kakaire. Zabina was a tank driver in Gulu befoe she was deployed to Somalia. AU/UN IST PHOTO / David Mutua
Back FREEDOM for only $4.95/month and help the Freedomist to fight the ongoing war on liberty and defeat the establishment's SHILL press!!
Are you enjoying our content? Help support our mission to reach every American with a message of freedom through virtue, liberty, and independence! Support our team of dedicated freedom builders for as little as $4.95/month! Back the Freedomist now! Click here
.jpg%2F1200px-M214_%25D0%2593%25D0%2595PA%25D0%259D%25D0%25AC-2_drone_remnants_near_Kupiansk%252C_Kharkiv_region_(1).jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=469b302c22afb737e97e49aa8089217aaab2218e3a34dd06723e2c483c921224&ipo=images "Ukraine Skies Become Proving Ground for Drone Warfare")
