Modern Weapons and the Multi-Racial Empire
The Los Angeles Times of March 19, 1996 had a fascinating front page article on the new military technology that is changing the face of warfare.
The thrust is that real-time satellite technology can observe troop concentrations so that our commanders can see them, know exactly where they are at all times, and fire artillery at them from great distances with guidance from global positioning satellite systems.
The focus of the story was primarily on foot soldiers and how vulnerable they were to this new technology.
Actually, unsupported foot soldiers have been helpless in the face of tanks and aircraft for almost one hundred years now. Yes, modern technology increases that vulnerability but it does not fundamentally change the situation of the individual infantryman.
But it was a message that the typical Times reader in West Los Angeles wants to hear.- - Don't worry about these racists and right-wing militias armed with rifles - modern technology puts US firmly in control.
We should rejoice that the Los Angeles Times feels comforted by the rapid evolution of weapons systems.
But I think they may have it wrong.
I was paging through Clauswitz "On War" a few days later and came upon a famous passage:
"Now, being convinced that the superiority of the defensive (rightly understood) is very great, and much greater than may appear at first sight, we conceive that the greater number of those periods of inaction which occur in war are thus explained without involving any contradiction."
Indeed standard doctrine 30 years ago at the Infantry School at Fort Benning Georgia was that the attacker needs three times the number of troops to prevail over a force defending a fixed position.
The defense has always been superior to the offense.
But inexpensive global positioning satellites and inexpensive conventional cruise missiles can decapitate a government very easily with very little collateral damage to civilians. Unlike nuclear weapons that kill millions of ordinary people, these small, exceptionally accurate weapons do very little collateral damage, killing only the leaders. The average citizen has little or nothing to fear.
Presidents and cabinet members can be killed in their bedrooms from a thousand miles away. The parliaments of democratic countries are easy targets. You can kill all the leaders, cut off electric power, knock out computers and communications and cut off water supplies in a single day.
A sudden attack also might interrupt command and control of the military (although this would be more difficult than getting rid of the civilian government).
In any event, it is hard to argue that a nation possessed of this technology benefits from waiting and being hit with it first.
It is vital that you decapitate your enemy first, before he decapitates you. Modern technology grants an extreme advantage to the attacker.
But the extent of the advantage is going to depend on whether the target is a homogeneous nation like Japan or Sweden, in which case the advantage will be limited to its military effects, or a multi-ethnic empire like India, Sri-Lanka, Somalia, Rwanda, Malasia, South Africa, or the United States, in which case destroying government leaders could lead to a disintegration of the empire and an end to hostilities.
As Clausewitz says:
"Thus, therefore, the political object, as the original motive of the War, will be the standard for determining both the aim of the military force and also the amount of effort to be made."
In multi-racial or multi-ethnic empires the original motive for War is seldom understood or agreed upon by the competing population groups within that empire. Further, the original motive effects the interests of only a very small group of the elite and is hidden from public view. The "original motive of the War" may not survive the loss of the elite's political leaders.
For example, does anyone pretend to know why the U.S. is patrolling Bosnia? Any clue as to why we sent expeditionary forces to Somalia? Any hints as to why we publicly sail carrier groups to shadow Chinese naval exercises?
For 50 years, the United States has launched wars under lofty sounding slogans like "making the world safe for democracy," and establishing a "New World Order." Whatever the real reasons might be for these wars, the American Peoples (to use the multicultural term) have been left in the dark. Further, there is no country on earth in which the military is more profoundly isolated from the liberal elites who make the real decisions than the U.S. Thus, although the U.S. military command might survive a decapitating attack more or less intact, our generals simply would not have a clue how the real establishment thinks or what its real objectives are. It certainly would not instinctively duplicate ZOG's propaganda.
While the military's instincts would be to retaliate, there is an overwhelming probability that the original political aim of the conflict would be lost, particularly if the attacker threatens no further harm. The generals are not likely to continue a war that has no perceptible purpose.
The one critical piece of information for an attacker to understand about the U.S. that may be different from the other multi-racial and multi-ethnic empires of the World is the importance of shutting down our mass media.
In the U.S. the TV broadcasters and the press set the agenda, whip up support within the Euro-American middle class, and ultimately force the politicians to act and behave in certain pre-determined ways. In the U.S., the real decision maker is the media and the press.
So the critical strategy for the attacker would be eliminate the political leaders and to shut down the television stations, newspapers and other media so that nobody will have the capacity to whip up the Middle Class with pictures of dead children killed by a stray missile or two.
With the media shut down, there will be no quick answers. Without the media, the Euro-American middle class and the military are not going to know how to "feel" about the situation or how to respond. The empire would be headless.
The basic problem confronting our elites is simply this: With Congress, the President and the Supreme Court gone, the IRS computers shut down, and the TV off, Euro-America will uncork the champagne.
In truth, the United States is at least 3 nations. The effective absence of a central government and its controlling private media would trigger a fierce competition between Black America, Mexican America and Euro-America to establish a new government and to redefine their relationships with one another. Elections for a new Congress and the grappling for power (or for self -determination) would be far more important than retaliation against a foreign power that is the source of their sudden opportunity and liberty.
While new weapons pose problems for all multi-racial empires, it seems clear that the vulnerabilities, at least for the U.S., will increase over time as a result of two forces, both of which are firmly in place and cannot be reversed.
First, U.S. vulnerability increases as the decreasing cost and increasing sophistication of new weapons systems lead more countries to acquire them.
While the U.S. and other nations scramble to develop defensive systems against their own technologies, the falling cost of computers drives the cost of the original offensive weapon down to a point where the less wealthy nation has two offensive options: buy the latest (stealth) system to evade the defenses, or buy thousands of the older and cheaper models, to overwhelm the defenses.
As the new offensive technologies get cheaper and proliferate, the defensive technologies become more expensive and threaten domestic spending agendas needed to keep the multi-racial empires together.
The offensive technology development cycle is shorter and less costly than the defensive development cycle.
Second, the gradual decline of the Euro-American majority over the next 50 years will exacerbate the tensions and make retaliation for a decapitating attack on the U.S. government far less likely.
Right now, much of the Euro-American population lives in communities that are 90%+ Euro-American. To them, America is a White nation. But as the effects of unrestrained immigration spread to the hinterland, it will be harder and harder to confuse the declining Euro-American majority about its place in this society and the interests our government really represents.
Most Americans know that their government exists to protect someone else, and not them. Further, most Americans are very isolated from the real thinking and motivation of our elites. The military has no lines of communication with these elites at all.
That is why we see such a massive effort for non-proliferation by the U.S. The more nations that acquire this technology, the more likely it will be used against the large, multi-racial empires. Over very long periods of time, with ZOG's penchant for military adventures, it is a near certainty that such an attack on the U.S. will take place. That is why the U.S. government puts so much effort into the "New World Order" and the U.N.
An international response to restore our Federal Government following such an attack is far more predictable and certain in the minds of our liberal elites than a domestic response.
Back to Main Page
(c) 1996 Yggdrasil. All rights reserved. Distribute Freely.