What do a majority of Americans know about China’s “phenomenal military growth” after China’s Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989?
In the Pentagon’s “Annual Report to Congress on Military Power of the People’s Republic of China,” the Pentagon complains that some of the Chinese military data are not transparent; they lack transparency.
The Moscow Energy Institute, from which I graduated, demanded that each of us study what was necessary to be an officer (of the Reserve) and an examination was given for this purpose.
Let me acquaint the Pentagon with what I was taught.
A combatant prepares a battle plan, in which there should be as little information as possible transparent to strangers — and especially to a possible enemy.
Yet the Pentagon grumbles that not everything from the other side’s military data is transparent!
So, this is the war, according to the Pentagon. Its forthcoming opponent should make all military data transparent to the other side. No secret data — and no secret intelligence.
Well, the Pentagon should have signed an agreement with China about military transparency years ago and not grumble now that China’s military data are not transparent.
After the Pentagon’s annual complaints about the need of military data to be transparent, let us take a glimpse into the real war.
In 2003, President George W. Bush led his American troops into Iraq. Published in the same year was a book entitled, “Bush’s Brain” and subtitled, “How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential.” So a U.S. president, apart from having been elected by a majority, also had to be “made presidential” by a Karl Rove of Texas.
The photograph on the cover of the book shows a smiling Karl Rove, obviously pleased with everyone, including himself and George W. Bush. On the other hand, the expression on Bush’s face reminds of a caustic philosopher of genius, remembered by mankind for five centuries after his death.
With his right hand, Bush makes a truly presidential (Karl Rove!) gesture, begging the audience not to worry, for everything will be presidential about him, owing to Karl Rove.
It is no doubt the presidential gesture of George W. Bush that doomed the Iraqi people to seven years of needless invasion. .
Let us leave out the number of deaths in the invasion. It is less disturbing to recall its financial costs: $720 million a day.
Now let us recall what has come to be regarded as the primary geostrategic factor — the number of population, since all other factors are derived from this primary factor. The population of Iraq before Bush tried to conquer it was 26 million. If Bush’s invasion of Iraq ended in nothing, imagine the end of the U.S. war with China, whose population is 1.133 billion.
Not only is the population of a country the source of combatants, but it also is the source of its present and future scientists and engineers, developing and producing the latest weapons.
Since the population of China is more than four times larger than that of the United States, the number of China’s combatants as well as its developers and producers of latest weapons will exceed the corresponding U.S. number more than four times, to say nothing of the fact that China has more ruthless and hence effective means of mobilization.
This looming mortal danger is extremely unpleasant to many human beings, and, in freedom, some of them are trying to convince themselves and whomever they speak with that the ultimate disaster has been invented by those who panic far too easily.
Those who ridicule any catastrophe that can befall their country as an inane invention may do well to recall that France laughed at Hitler — but he occupied France, along with 10 British divisions in France, within six weeks.
In the second millennium A.D., the world’s geostrategic landscape changed. In the last millennium B.C., Athens and Rome were symbols of advance, while in the second millennium A.D., Britain, France, the United States, and Germany were such symbols.
Now, in the 21st century, China takes up its geostrategic role. But are the United States and its allies ready to defend themselves?
Let us trace George W. Bush’s war in Iraq beyond its stupendous costs of $720 million a day and its ridiculous length, since 2003 to . . . is the Iraq war over?
Before his and his allies’ invasion of Iraq, Bush had prepared a one-page explanation of how the oil industry of Iraq would be reconstructed. I received Bush’s explanation, but as far as I know not a single brick has been laid to realize Bush’s plan.
A young American lady tried to convince me that impeccable freedom had been achieved in Iraq. That reminded me of Stalin’s propaganda’s assertion that “in contrast to Western countries, freedom in our country also ensures what is necessary for freedom, such as paper.” Anyway, Obama promised that the American troops would leave Iraq by August of this year.
In general, let’s face it: the war in Iraq was Bush’s absurd and failed aggression. I do not mean that the United States cannot carry out a successful invasion of a country like Iraq. But what is necessary — not only on the battlefield but throughout the strategic cycle of war — is intelligence (has Karl Rove heard the word?), known at its highest level as genius.
To sum up, those who watched Bush’s war on Iraq, with its population of 26 million, cannot imagine that Bush could wage a victorious war with China, with its population of 1.331 billion people and its technology striving to match that of the United States, not that of Iraq.
You can reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.