TeaPartyWire.com – Tea Party News by and for Tea Party Members

Russia still spends huge amount in defense issues. On February 5, 2010, the then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the new defense doctrine, which established brand new guidelines for defense and security matters. The new Military Doctrine vividly explains the threat environment that the Russian Federation (RF) is facing in the twenty-first century. Furthermore, it explains that Russia is not threatened by an imminent global war. The main concern is asymmetrical threats. It declares also that the Russian Federation has military, diplomatic, international-legal, information, economic and other means at its disposal to meet its strategic objectives. Moreover it states:

In the new Military Doctrine, world development today is characterized by the weakening of ideological confrontation; the reduction in the level of economic, political, and military influence of certain individual states and alliances; and the military influence of certain individual states and alliances; and the rising influence of other states that seek all-embracing domination; multipolarity; and globalization of various process.

Many regional conflicts remain unresolved. The tendencies toward violent solutions of these conflicts, including those bordering the Russian Federation, remains. The existing structure (system) of international security, including international legal mechanisms does not provide for the equal security of all states.

However, in spite of the lowering of the probability of the unleashing against the Russian Federation of large scale warfare with the employment of conventional means and nuclear weapons, in a number of directions military dangers to the Russian Federation have increased.

The new Military Doctrine lists both external and internal threats. In external issues Russia views with suspicion the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Nonetheless, allows some collaboration on asymmetrical threats. In May 2012, twenty-two Russian army paratroopers came to the State of Colorado for two weeks military training with the 10^th Special Forces Group at Fort Carson, a military base outside Colorado Springs. The training was very successful. Russian plays the good and bad cop regarding NATO and the United States. The Russian administration tries to balance a sensitive relation with both entities to benefit Russian national interest.

The new Military Doctrine does not introduce preemptive strikes but speaks utilizing nuclear weapons as deterrence. In addition, it introduces the improvement of collaboration among branches of Armed Forces, combat arms of troops (forces), and other troops. It ensures the integration and coordinated development of various systems of technical logistical and other forms of support for the Russian Armed Forces and new ways of military training and education.

Also, Russia wants to have a strong naval presence across the globe. This desire originates since the epoch that Romanovs ruled Russia. In the course of history Russia and the Soviet Union tried three times to create a powerful blue water naval force-before First World War, in the late 1930s before Second World War, and during the second half of the Cold War Period (from the 1960s until the late 1980s). In each and every case the plans were abandoned, because in the end were not crucial or viable for the existence of the Russian defense. Currently, Russia wants to have a naval presence in the Middle East and in the eastern Mediterranean Sea to monitor the evolution of the Arab Spring revolt and the maritime developments regarding natural gas exploration between Greece, Cyprus and Israel.

On internal security issues, the new Military Doctrine gives more power and new ways to the Russian government to use the military and fight asymmetrical threats inside Russia. Since 1991, Russia fights the Chechen separatists. President Vladimir Putin was successful to install a pro-Russian government in Chechnya. Moreover, Moscow has decisively disabled the Chechen rebel/separatist movement, although sporadic terrorist activity still appears in Northern Caucasus. Thus, the Russian civil and military leaders want to adopt new ways and techniques to fight terrorism. The ethnic threat from Chechnya is extremely serious and President Putin wants to deal in a decisively manner.

Russia under the new Military Doctrine wants to appear a major player in the global arena. As the historical evidences clearly indicate Russian military concerns are not new but originate since the era of the Romanov dynasty. Lately, President Putin uses the Orthodox religion as an instrument to unite under the Russian flag all the Orthodox Balkan populations. The future will show Russian military position in the globe.

24's Chloe O'Brian can tell you about the problems with drone technology.

Stephen Budiansky — author of Perilous Fight: America’s Intrepid War with Britain on the High Seas, 1812–1815 ­— has written an excellent book that inadvertently reveals Democrat politicians — in feverish pursuit of imaginary utopias — have been busy undermining our national defense for the past 200 years.

It began with Thomas Jefferson, whose fantasy was the noble agrarian. The rural, independent farmer who was vastly superior to the menial paid worker found in urban areas up North. Jefferson’s was a corrupt vision built on a foundation of parasitical slavery and human degradation that allowed the “massa” at the top to pursue his noble life of the mind, while the overseer drove the slaves.

The fact that Jefferson, and many of the planter aristocracy, was chronically in debt because he couldn’t even make a slave economy produce a profit does not in any way detract from his fantasy. And he wasn’t concerned that many of the devices that made large plantations feasible — notably the cotton gin, invented by a Yankee — and life in the manor house comfortable were manufactured by those same Northern wage slaves.

During his term Jefferson was faced by an arrogant Britain that seized US merchant ships, impressed US sailors into the Royal Navy and blockaded US ports. Ignoring reality, Jefferson believed a strong navy was somehow a threat to agrarianism and liberty.

The rational response would have been to start building frigates. Jefferson’s response was to cut $ 1.1 million from the Navy’s proposed $ 2.1 million budget. Budiansky writes Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, asserted that the cost of building a navy always exceeded the value of the commerce it saved. And Gallatin claimed US merchant ships had no right to government protection once they sailed outside the US territorial three–mile limit.

Jefferson’s solution was to build a fleet of 50 small gunboats. These would have done nothing to protect merchant shipping or break the blockade since the overgrown rowboats were so unseaworthy the slightest storm made using the guns impossible. Gunboats would have been ideal if the Royal Navy could have been persuaded to engage us in a swimming pool, but otherwise his gunboats were totally unsuited for naval warfare.

Replace gunboats with drones and you are close to current Democrat thinking on naval and defense policy. Jefferson starved the Navy in the belief he was protecting his fellow slaveholder’s liberty. Obama protects his fellow Democrat politicians by starving the military so he can use the money to keep voters on the government dependency plantation.

Obama has already signed off on defense cuts that total nearly $800 billion over the next ten years and this total does not include the $500 billion cut looming in January if sequestration takes effect.

These cuts mean that while Obama claims the military will be “pivoting” toward the Pacific in an effort to counter Chinese influence, they may as well be performing a “plie” for all the good it will do. Obama’s “pivoting” Navy will have fewer carrier groups than it does today. Which brings us to the drones. Leading Obama advisors advocate buying fewer carrier–based fighters and shifting the emphasis to unmanned combat drones.

Unfortunately, there is a significant difference between using a drone to incinerate a handful of jihadis careening about the countryside in a VW bus and using drones to establish air superiority. Anyone who has ever watched 24’s Chloe O’Brian lose a suspect after the car drives into a tunnel knows there are limits to drone technology today, just as there were limits to gunboats in Jefferson’s day.

Obama’s fantasy is even more dangerous than Jefferson’s. In a world where Iran wants nuclear weapons, North Korea is trying to build a way to deliver its atom bomb, and Pakistan is playing hide–the–nuke, Obama dreams of a nuclear–free world and believes the best way to achieve it is for the US to drastically reduce its nuclear deterrent and ignore missile defense.

This is the open–mic flexibility he was talking about during his second term in his meeting with Russian President Medevev.

You may be surprised to know that the mission of the Department of Defense under Obama does not include defending you from a missile attack. Obama big thinkers truly believe missile defense is “destabilizing” and actually serves to increase the danger of nuclear war. Of course in the event of a miscalculation on their part and resulting nuclear attack, elected officials, appointees and assorted hangers–on will be whisked away to protective bunkers while the rest of us watch the sky for really bright lights.

A reality–based defense policy would put a priority on protecting Americans from potential missile attacks and offering a credible deterrent to would–be attackers. Much like Israel does for its citizens today.

But that would mean Obama has to abandon a 200–year Democrat tradition: short–sighted defense cuts in pursuit of impossible goals.

Wired | Staff Sergeant Robert Bales will go before a military psych board.

Defense: Dealing from a position of increasing strength against increasing U.S. weakness, China has rebuffed an overture to hold strategic nuclear talks. Why should they? As we disarm unilaterally, time is on their side. America doesn’t have that big a stick anymore, and the Chinese know it. China and the United States are seemingly moving in different directions both economically and militarily. So when Defense Secretary Robert Gates went to

Read more from the original source: China Spurns Defense Secretary Gates

Individual Health Insurance

Ask me no questions …

The semifinal flights for the OOTY are beginning to take shape.  Yesterday, in your wisdom, readers chose Barack Obama’s first-he-did, then-he-didn’t defense of the Ground Zero mosque as a semifinalist.  Today, I hope you’re (shovel-) ready for today’s selections, because I’m not going to feel your pain if you leave out your vote and let [...]

Read this post

Wages of failure.

Looks like Congress got its bipartisan word on Gitmo after all.  Among the bills passed during Wednesday’s rush to close the 111th Session was the 2011 Defense Authorization Act, the precursor to fully budgeting the DoD for the year.  Buried in that bill was the codicil passed by the House earlier in the month forbidding [...]

Read this post

PLEASE! ! TAKE TIME TO SAY A PRAYER AND PASS THIS ON

DOD Identifies Army Casualty

The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Sgt. Steve M. Theobald, 53, of Goose Creek, S.C., died June 4 near Kuwait City, Kuwait, of injuries sustained in a military vehicle roll-over. He was assigned to the 287th Transportation Company, Livingston, Ala.

For more information, media may contact the 143rd Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) at 407-856-6100, ext. 1132.

DOD Identifies Marine Casualties

The Department of Defense announced today the deaths of two Marines who were supporting Operation Enduring Freedom.

The following Marines died June 8 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan:

Sgt. Derek L. Shanfield, 22, of Hastings, Pa.

Sgt. Zachary J. Walters, 24, of Palm Coast, Fla.

Shanfield and Walters were assigned to 2nd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Lejeune, N.C.

For additional background information on these Marines, news media representatives may contact the II Marine Division public affairs office at 910-450-6575.

Link: Army and Marine Casualties