Posted on by Daniel Sullivan

FIRESTORM

MP3: https://planetarystatusreport.com/mp3/20220620_FIRESTORM.mp3

Donate: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/doctorfreckles

Firestorm …

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/eu-just-implemented-risky-anti-russia-measure-could-trigger-ww3-few-are-taking-notice

Assumptions:

  1. No one is respecting treaty obligations. This particularly includes NATO, I expect NATO to evaporate, along with many western European governments, if the USA gets involved in a conventional war with Russia.
  2. All governments are currently in a precarious situation vis-a-vis there own people, but the major powers have serious issues with their populations.
  3. That the US government is not remotely honest about its readiness for war.
  4. That nuclear powers will use nukes, if the opportunity arose.
  5. Putin might not be a “nice guy”, but he’s a rational actor … not sure how to slot his invasion of Ukraine – some see it as a rational response to NATO expansion, others see it as a land grab.

Outstanding nuclear scenarios:

  1. USA vs Russia
  2. USA vs China
  3. USA vs Russia/China weak alliance
  4. Israel VS Iran
  5. Pakistan VS India
  6. *** North Korea? – probably piles on in a China VS USA Scenario

Conjecture:

  1. US military doctrine, going back to the end of the Cold War, plans for a 2.5 “medium sized or regional” conflict scenario.
  2. As a former US Army officer, I can testify that from my first duty assignment it was my job, in part, to lie about readiness – troops, equipment etc.
  3. There is evidence that between 10 and 20 trillion dollars are missing from the US military budget – no amount of Hanlon’s Law helps you with this one … some of these trillions were missing when I was stationed at Ft. Lewis – and we were told there wasn’t budget to replace engine packs in M1 tanks. I describe this too, to point out, that our “readiness” might not be what we claim it is.
  4. Our nuclear deterrence is based upon the assumption that US technological superiority is absolute – but what if that’s not true? What if even the replacement, manufacture and overhaul of nuclear weapons is currently impacted by our increasingly incompetent society? This would mean MAD is no longer operable.
  5. Our “rapid deployment force” model is similar to, and based on, the late Roman Empire strategy of mobile legions VS in place mile-post systems. This marked the decline of Rome’s military capability.
  6. 2 person game theory is functional when dealing with only two antagonists, but what happens when you have multiple scenarios involving different conflict scenarios?
  7. What does a nation do, that’s been waiting to use nukes, if other nations start using them? What does India or Pakistan do if Iran launches a nuke at Israel? What does Israel do if the US or Russia launches a nuclear attack? What does China do if Russia attack the USA with nukes? Because of this strategic complexity, nuclear war becomes a morass of indeterminacy almost from the get go.
  8. What happens to US forces overseas if they find themselves stranded, in countries, that no longer want them there? Japan? Germany? Africa? Persian Gulf? During a dollar collapse scenario, how do we get those troops home? And do we end up abandoning trillions in equipment and technology?
  9. NATO will dissolve if the US initiates conventional war with Russia other than the NATO proxy war in the Ukraine.

Fire-storm was a theory I developed in graduate school, but could not really find an advisor to work with me on it, and in retrospect I can understand why. The idea is simple:

Any given state seeking conflict with the USA is discouraged by the superiority of US forces, especially the air supremacy problem. But as states engage with the US, the relative threats change. The more nations that “gang up” on the USA, during a conflict scenario, the greater the likelihood more nations will take advantage – during a dollar collapse scenario, resources are king and so this will have a greater impact than fiat money. Does the US have enough available REAL resources to buy off possible participants in these conflicts? – this is a good question.

The other issue is this: having “reserve currency status” means we are stuck EVERYWHERE, involved everywhere, even in conflict regions that are a net negative with respect to our national interest – for example, Turkey. But this also means we MUST maintain this status, and that becomes a yoke around our necks in the USA. And, it means that even conflict between states that don’t involve our national interests BECOME our national interests.

I no longer believe much of this conflict is that “organic” – it is managed, and perhaps managed at a high level. But I think the Russia Ukraine scenario, when you consider US forces are also nearby Russian forces in Syria, presents a problem.

If your nuclear deterrence is in reality no longer the same threat? – then nations like China and Russia will consider, even if only obeying oligopic game theory in small markets … they don’t need a “treaty” they just need the incentive, and either nation attacking the USA provides an incentive for the other.

I believe China is in civil war or near to. As such, the Chinese Communist leadership might see war with the USA as a way to save it, to unify the people against a common enemy. An invasion of Taiwan really doesn’t have to happen, the Chinese could simply launch a coup, as the US does often, with limited unconventional forces involved. I do not believe China would initiate a nuclear war against the US, but they would definitely join in if the Russians launched an attack.

If a conventional war between the US and Russia begins, it will be a classic “come as you are” scenario, and Russia will have production and logistic advantage. The US simply DOES NOT build weapons that can scale up for production, so we will run out of planes, missiles, and other high tech weapons FAST, and will not be able to replace them. It also means that the risk of nuclear war increases after the first few weeks of conventional conflict.

If it remains conventional, you will have a pause of up to a year – where the US will be struggling to upscale its production capacity and military recruitment, this at a time when the US is on the verge of civil conflict and dissolution. Even with a false flag that kills millions of Americans, it is unlikely that civil conflict will be avoided.

The Russians and Chinese have some advantage given they have built many systems, over the years, they can mass produce. Combined they have a greater population, and if India gets involved? – they have the capacity. Pakistan is a wild card, but in a dollar collapse scenario, Pakistan might choose to remain neutral.

European leaders will scramble to maintain neutrality to assuage Russia.

Since both China and the US run risk of civil war, Russia might end up winning – not by invasion, but via negotiated defeat.

Ganges …