Newsmax TV & Webwww.newsmax.comFREE - In Google Play
Newsmax TV & Webwww.newsmax.comFREE - On the App Store
Skip to main content
Tags: democrats | putin | nuclear

Democrats' Deterrence Minimalism a Win for Putin

Democrats' Deterrence Minimalism a Win for Putin
House Armed Services Committee ranking member Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) questions witnesses during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill April 12, 2018, in Washington, D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Peter Pry By Tuesday, 19 February 2019 02:42 PM Current | Bio | Archive

Senate Republicans and House Democrats will soon negotiate the next defense spending bill. Upon those negotiations may hinge the future existence of America and the Free World because of this momentous question:

Shall Democrats join Republicans in modernizing the aged U.S. nuclear deterrent, or abandon the long bipartisan strategy “Peace Through Strength” that won the Cold War?

Some Democrats. including Rep. Adam Smith, chairman of the powerful House Armed Services Committee, are for: replacing the U.S. Triad of bombers, ICBMs, and submarines with a Monad of missile submarines; reducing U.S. missile submarines from 14 to 6; and unilaterally reducing U.S. strategic nuclear warheads from 1,550 to 300.

It is deterrence minimalism — nuclear weakness en route to the fabled “world without nuclear weapons” recklessly pursued by President Obama.

Some Democrats want to impose upon the White House and the Defense Department a nuclear “No First Use” policy that would gravely weaken the credibility and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent.

These Democrat initiatives would be a dream come true for Moscow — even while Democrats falsely accuse President Trump of treason with Russia.

It may be constructive for all parties to remember we are nearing the anniversary when one year ago, on March 1, 2018, Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, in an official declaration broadcast worldwide, made against the United States unprecedented nuclear threats.

Dictator Putin correctly boasted Russia has already modernized its nuclear forces and described some recent additions:

“The strategic missile troops received 80 new intercontinental ballistic missiles, 102 submarine-launched ballistic missiles and three Borei-class nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines. Twelve missile regiments have received the new Yars intercontinental ballistic missile. The numbers of long-range high-precision weapons carriers has increased 12 times, while the number of guided cruise missiles increased by over 30 times….All of them are high-tech cutting edge weapons”

In contrast, the U.S. will not deploy its first new strategic bomber until 2025, first new ICBM until 2029, and first new ballistic missile submarine until after 2030.

Putin: “We have been working intensively on advanced equipment and arms, which allowed us to make a breakthrough in developing new models of strategic weapons.” He described a family of new nuclear super-weapons, including:

—Sarmat heavy-ICBM capable of hitting anywhere worldwide, delivering 15 hypersonic Avanguard warheads with pinpoint accuracy, a first-strike weapon;

—Poseidon intercontinental torpedo, nuclear-powered, 200 kph speed, artificially intelligent, 100-megaton warhead for raising radioactive tsunamis against coastal cities and blasting naval forces.

—Stealthy cruise missile of infinite range, nuclear-powered, probably artificially intelligent.

The U.S. has no counterparts to any of these weapons.

Putin announced Russia has developed “advanced weapons with new physical properties” which is technical military jargon for new generation nuclear warheads specialized for Super-EMP, neutrons, X-rays and other effects. “We have every reason to believe we are…ahead there as well,” Putin said.

He added ominously: “I do not want to reveal more details. It is not time yet.”

Putin is right. The U.S. has no counterparts to any of these high-tech nuclear warheads either.

His Strangelovian admiration for the USSR and its nuclear weapon wizards is evident:

“I want to specifically emphasize that the newly developed strategic arms — in fact, new types of strategic weapons — are not the result of something left over from the Soviet Union. Of course, we relied on some ideas from our ingenious predecessors.”

Putin blames his intended victim, the United States, for defending itself and NATO with missile defenses, for Russia deploying new doomsday devices:

“Why did we do all this? Why did we talk about it? As you can see, we made no secret of our plans and spoke openly about them…Russia has remained a major nuclear power. No, nobody really wanted to talk to us…and nobody wanted to listen to us. So listen to us now.”

Knowing U.S. politicians and press would be eager to dismiss his nuclear threats, Putin warned:

“We are not bluffing, please believe me — this is no bluff.”

Putin is not bluffing.

Stephen Blank, former U.S. Army War College professor, writes in “Russia’s Military Strategy and Doctrine” (Jamestown Foundation 2019): “If we calculate all the programs for both new and incoming weapons as well as life extension of existing platforms we could see, by 2022, a minimum of 2,976 warheads, and a maximum of 6,670 warheads, plus another 800+ bomber warheads ….Thus, Moscow appears to be reaching for a global strike capability comprising both nuclear and conventional weapons that could hold US, European and, if necessary, Chinese targets at risk. These developments portend serious threats….it clearly has a first-strike capability that can hit targets throughout Europe while supposedly holding the US at bay.”

Moreover: “Moscow has repeatedly displayed its commitment to force and subversion and behaves like an outlaw state, it should be clear that the general threats both to international order and to regional security in Europe and the former USSR are enormous.”

Democrats and Republicans must remember they are Americans first, and work together to modernize and strengthen the nuclear Triad, deploy space-based missile defenses, and harden critical infrastructures against EMP and cyber threats.

Or Putin wins.

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry is executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security. He served on the Congressional EMP Commission as chief of staff, the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA. He is author of "Blackout Wars." For more of his reports, Go Here Now.

© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Senate Republicans and House Democrats will soon negotiate the next defense spending bill.
democrats, putin, nuclear
Tuesday, 19 February 2019 02:42 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
Join the Newsmax Community
Read and Post Comments
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
Download the NewsmaxTV App
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved