The 1930s, Again: A hard rain is going to fall.

National Review ^ | March 25, 2002 | Victor Davis Hanson

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

bump for later reading.

[DB]

Chechnya.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

BUMP BUMP BUMP

[aculeus]

BUMP BUMP BUMP

Okay!

[GOP_1900AD]

So, have those in Chechnya shot rockets at Russian cities? Have they flown airliners into the financial heart of Moscow or significant government buildings? When was the last time you heard of someone being beheaded in Chechnya for being a Jew or a Christian or, even being a Communist? You know, there are some who claim that the "rebellion in Chechnya" is a construct of the GRU, and was actually started by military brass still reporting to the Kremlin who were simply manipulating the locals by play acting as "war lords." Certainly, it's hard to prove and hard to refute. There have also been claims that the "war in Chechnya" is nothing more than a huge live fire exercise to train the new "Red Army" for a much larger mission, or, alternatively, to provide cover for strategic military preparations. Indeed, such claims are also not well supported by anything you or I have access to, but they raise interesting questions do they not? Are you familiar with "The Perestroika Deception", by Anatoliy Golitsyn? It raises many other interesting questions regarding the "collapse of the USSR" and the purported "end of the Cold War." What if?.....

[Cachelot]

Bump for the elephant in the parlor.

Bump for the elephant gun.

[El Gato]

the most we can hope for is to make damned sure we win.

And quickly, before things get totatly out of hand. That's more or less what happened in WW-I, which everyone expected to be brutal, but short, instead it was even more brutal than they imagined, and much much longer.

[El Gato]

President Bush: the Axis of Evil is out there, but it is far greater in scope and resources than the 3 thuggocracies you mentioned. You must know this, but you'll never be truly successful in the War on Terrorism until you truly explain our situation to the mass of the American public that doesn't know better (or doesn't want to know better). This is a war for our survival - we must begin to act like it, soon, or we will suffer grievous losses in the future and possibly lose. We must take the initiative and destroy the various terrorist regimes ASAP, before they have an opportunity to acquire and develop effective WMD arsenals. We'll need very large and well-equipped armed forces to accomplish this, along with near limitless ammunition. Currently we have neither. Tell the voters and taxpayers the dimensions of the problem, and we'll support nearly any measure necessary to prevail.

Agreed, but you know what? We don't have the resources to take on that big a job. Eight years of Clintonsizing of the military and supporting industry has left us unable to mount anything even approaching Desert Shield/Storm. Even the tiny effort in Afghanistan is straining our resources. Admittedly most of the "targets" are much better located for logistical purposes, but they are also much better armed.

The modest cuts under GHW Bush were followed by massive cuts under Clinton, aided and abetted by the Republican Congress that was put in office in '94 to damp the excesses of the Clinton regime. They did poorly is about all I can say. Even after 9-11, I see no real effort to expand the military, but rather only some modest measures to pay for unanticipated operational expenses, and buy a few more smart weapons, but still at rates below replacement level compared to expenditures. It will take time to build the military back up. Time we may not have. If it runs out, our only recourse will be to nuclear weapons. Yet another "unintended consequence" of Clintonian rule.

[DB]

Actually they have. They've leveled several large Russian appartment buildings and killed many.

[dennisw]

Very good piece from this very good writer Victor Davis Hansen.

[Kerberos]

"One of the most improtant pieces written lately and not at all subject to smartass one line reply posts. "

Maybe because this one is dead on the money.

[all4one]

Required Reading...Bump

[Brad’s Gramma]

bumping for later

[GOP_1900AD]

Again, you take at face value that the explosions were caused by "Islamists." How do you know that they were not caused by the FSB?

[GOP_1900AD]

Do you dare trust the FSB?

"In its reports, Novaya Gazeta suggests the Ryazan bomb was real, and furthermore might indicate that Russian security services -- not Chechen terrorists -- were behind the apartment block blasts."

And this from the globalist, liberal FAS, hardly a den of tin foil conspiracy!..... BTW - this was simply the random first thing that popped up on my search of "fsb+moscow+apartment+blasts". There are scads of additional references, I am only scratching the surface here.

[dennisw]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The TRUTH!

[Countyline]

Article has clarity and insight. Wise to consider it.

[GOP_1900AD]

From your link:

"In September 1993 Moscow News reported that the Chechen republic had paraded SS-20 missiles at a military review in Grozny. The SS-20 is a solid fuel, mobile missile system with a range of 5 to 9,500 kilometers and capable of launching a powerful nuclear charged warhead. All were supposedly destoyed [sic] under the INF Treaty."

A very clever cover indeed! I had not realized that there was an INF "pie crust" angle (e.g. Russian saying - "treaties are like pie crusts, they were meant to be broken") to the "Chechnya Rebellion". There must be many things that this "rebellion" has been used for! And none of them are in the interest of the USA and the West in general.....