Tags: Pentagon's | Annual | Report | China

Pentagon's Annual Report on China

Thursday, 04 August 2005 12:00 AM

In the conclusion of the Executive Summary we learn that

From my studies of Western intelligence/espionage, I remember that the Pentagon had its own Defense Intelligence Agency and, of course, the Pentagon can rely on the intelligence data of the CIA and other Western intelligence/espionage agencies. But their existence is not even sensed in the report.

Rightly so! As I discovered in 1978, and Ronald Reagan agreed with me, Western intelligence/espionage does not virtually exist except as a number of ladies and gentlemen receiving good salaries, good social benefits, and producing out of their imagination and the propaganda of a target dictatorship fantasies passed for espionage/intelligence data.

The only solution I can see is a letter from the Chinese dictators to the Pentagon informing it of what it does not know about China's military geostrategy, and the Pentagon does not know even what has been reported by the Western mainstream media.

Hence the imaginary Chinese dictators' letter to the Pentagon would run along these lines:

"Dear Pentagon,

"We have grown ashamed of our geostrategic secrecy and have decided to make a clean breast of it. True, we thereby cancel our geostrategy, but we do this for the sake of the dear Pentagon.

"You presently house about 23,000 military and civilian employees and about 3,000 non-defense support personnel. Does any one of them read the open Chinese press (the word "open" defining the press for everyone in contrast to information channels for us only). No one reads the open Chinese press? Of course not!

"We understand. The Chinese language is difficult, and, in contrast to French or English, few Westerners know it. But does any one of your 26,000 employees read that part of the U.S. press that is considered "serious," such as the New York Times? Both the Chinese open press (very elaborately) and the New York Times of Oct. 7, 2000 (only cursorily) have reported the founding in China (in 1986) of Project 863, developing post-nuclear superweapons in seven fields.

"Your annual reports do not even hint at the founding of this institution, and let us explain why this event of almost 20 years ago is a key event in our geostrategy.

"In 1969 President Nixon stopped the U.S. research in post-nuclear weapons as immoral and contradicting the forthcoming international conventions. Thus, you are still living in the nuclear weapons age, which began in 1939 with Einstein's letter to President Roosevelt. But if one of your 26,000 employees takes a look at the calendar, he or she is sure to notice that now it is August 2005, not April 1939, and science has been advancing at a quicker pace than it did then.

"As of August 2005 (not April 1939), nuclear weapons are as outdated as pre-nuclear bombs were in 1945. Such bombs in Japan's possession did not prevent her unconditional surrender after two nuclear bombs were dropped on her two cities.

"Today it would be useless for China to drop nuclear bombs (or missiles) on the United States or vice versa. Mutual Assured Destruction! Hidden means of retaliation, such as submarines deep underwater in the Pacific with nuclear missiles aboard, will destroy the attacking country in retaliation. Nuclear bombs cannot find a submarine deep underwater or a bomber on duty high in the sky.

"The post-nuclear superweapons, which we began developing in 1986 in seven fields, are expected to be able to destroy your means of nuclear retaliation, and then you will be at our mercy, as Japan was at your mercy in 1945.

"Japan had attacked the United States in 1941 and was defeated by nuclear weapons in 1945. Now, we had intended – before this letter of confession to you – to strike you as soon as we developed post-nuclear superweapons able to annihilate your means of retaliation and thus enforce your unconditional surrender. Immoral?

"In 1999, two of our ‘senior colonels' officially published a volume entitled ‘Unrestricted Warfare.' You see, the Western military thinking has been restricted by moral rules. Even Hitler, who gassed 12 million civilians, forbade the development of chemical and bacteriological weapons as beneath German military dignity. ‘Unrestricted Warfare' demonstrates that we do not and should not have any moral or other restrictions on warfare. Warfare must be totally unrestricted.

"In your report, you do not even as much as mention this official military study of ours. Have any of your 26,000 employees read it privately? Or do those who have read it privately keep mum about it, not to spoil your report with a description of our immorality and thus lose their jobs?

"While it is perfectly all right to annihilate you, according to ‘Unrestricted Warfare,' without any secret or open hostility on your part, what is our motivation to do so?

"Violent protests in China reached in the past year, 2004, an all-time high of no fewer than 58,000, which you know because we have officially announced this. Why these upheavals, endangering our power?

"Man wants it to be hot when it is cold, and he wants it to be cold when it is hot – man always wants what it is not. Remember one quarter of French voters voting Communist? They wanted Communism, and it was not in France, but it was in Communist Russia. Can you imagine any Westerner today who would want it as it is in Communist China?

"On the other hand, those who participated in the past year in 58,000 violent protests wanted secretly or even subconsciously as it is in Taiwan, or in the United States, or in the West in general, but is not in China.

"There is only one way to stop this involuntary subversion on the part of Taiwan, the United States and the West in general: to annihilate them or convert them, after their unconditional surrender, into our docile colonies.

"Why was our geostrategy secret before this letter of confession to you? Because if it were not secret, you would have begun the development of post-nuclear superweapons to destroy our means of nuclear retaliation the moment we destroyed yours. Without this letter of confession to you, one fine day we would have presented to you our ultimatum and proof that we can destroy your means of (nuclear) retaliation, or would, without any ultimatum, have struck you with our post-nuclear superweapons to annihilate you, including (tears are running down our faces) your Pentagon, with its 26,000 employees. What a pity that molecular nanoweapons would have reduced you to atoms."

Alas, the Pentagon has not received any such letter from the dictators of China. Incidentally, the Pentagon never uses the word "dictators" or "dictatorship." So, what is the Pentagon's report all about?

The word used most frequently in the report is "modernization." You see, China is one of those countries that has been called "underdeveloped," as the politest version of the word "backward." China has been developing, advancing, modernizing to become as developed, advanced and modern as the United States and hence as militarily powerful in all the fields the Pentagon finds worth noticing. Says the Executive Summary: "We assess that China's ability to project conventional [!] military power beyond its periphery remains limited."

Why "conventional"? What about unconventional, post-nuclear (such as molecular nano) power?

Are you crazy?! China is a developing, modernizing, advancing underdeveloped country, while the United States, the world's most advanced supermodern and superdeveloped country, abandoned the development of post-nuclear superweapons in 1969, and here you are suggesting that the underdeveloped China has been developing such unconventional military power since 1986, and China's limited ability to project UNCONVENTIONAL military power may be sufficient to annihilate the United States or the West as a whole.

Since the Pentagon regards the United States as militarily the world's most advanced, modern and developed country, the Pentagon launched the war in Iraq without having read what a "world almanac," available at every American bookstore, says about Iraq.

The beginning of the war was magnificent: The world's most advanced, modern and developed country (population about 300 million) in coalition with no less splendid giants pounced on a backward midget (population about 25 million). But the Sunni started a guerrilla war (which was used centuries ago).

Let us suppose that the Sunni will finally be exterminated by the Islamic-fundamentalist Shia, and the U.S.-led troops will leave Iraq. The Shia of Iraq will ally with those of Iran to form a new Islamic-fundamentalist, anti-Western and anti-American alliance. So, what was the goal of the war? To enrich shareholders of the American oil companies in Iraq?

The Pentagon's war in Iraq is a political-military illiteracy. The Pentagon's report on China of 2005 is likewise illiterate politically and militarily. The Pentagon does not explain the geostrategic consequences following from the crucial political fact that China is dictatorship. The report is not just worthless, it is harmful. But the United States cannot leave our world, in which it coexists with China and its post-nuclear geostrategy, as it can leave Iraq, no matter what will happen to it.

The link to my book Online is www.levnavrozov.com


© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
In the conclusion of the Executive Summary we learn that From my studies of Western intelligence/espionage, I remember that the Pentagon had its own Defense Intelligence Agency and, of course, the Pentagon can rely on the intelligence data of the CIA and other Western...
Thursday, 04 August 2005 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

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