Three to one Is invincible army of NATO?

U.S. and NATO is seen by many Western countries as an invincible military power, which you can rely on and which you can not resist.

The reason for such a successful simulation image of "Undefeated", according to the deputy director of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, Alexander Khramchikhin, in the conduct of U.S. massive propaganda campaigns.

Meanwhile, they have shown a reduction of military power and are designed to compensate for military weakness.


As Napoleon said, "War on the moral factor refers to the physical as 3:1 ". Recently, it began to appear more and more clearly. And sometimes appears paradoxical and contradictory ways.

Psychological scrapped Europe was the result of a catastrophic for all involved, it is absolutely senseless slaughter, known as the First World War.

France under German occupation

This demolition was evident during the Second World War, when much of Europe was not only conquered by Hitler, but it is blended in with the occupation regime. The most obvious examples — France and the Czech Republic. And this war is finally finished off the Europeans, knocking them out of any desire to fight.

Today this process in Europe closer to a logical end. Its very greatly increased extinction in the face of external threats to the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, a sharp rise in living standards, developing into hedonism of much of the population, falling birth rates (respectively, a sharp rise in the value of each life), post-modern pacifism and politics of political correctness. Until now, this process is little affected the United States, but in recent years, and they began to show a similar trend.

Meanwhile, the West in NATO proclaimed himself as the defender of freedom and democracy around the world, which causes it to become a party to various conflicts outside the Euro-Atlantic region. This occurs under the pressure of public opinion, which requires intervention in conflicts in order to protect freedom and democracy.

However, this same public opinion is not ready to ensure that their own army suffered in the conflicts any serious losses. This creates a deep internal conflict and enhances the double standards in the policies of Western countries, because the reduction of military capabilities increasingly limits the ability of the real intervention in the conflict.

In addition, often completely incomprehensible criteria by which the intervention takes place in a foreign conflict, because usually very difficult to determine who in this conflict is right and who is to blame and whether at least one of the parties to support freedom and democracy.

A massive propaganda campaign, which regularly deploys the West against regimes that currently he felt "wrong" to a large extent be explained as a time reduction of military power.

NATO is still seen as an invincible military power, which you can rely on and which you can not resist

The propaganda campaign designed to compensate for the weakness of the military's crushing the enemy's will to resist and convince their own people that maybe have to bear at least some losses.

If at least one of these goals is not achieved, the war will almost certainly not be started. Unfortunately, the world's lack of understanding of these trends in the development of the western sun often produces a "mesmerizing" psychological effect, NATO is still seen as an invincible military power, which you can rely on and which you can not resist.
For further strengthened these effects are rampant "professionalization" sun, ie transition of most armies of the world to wage principle of acquisition, dramatically lowered their psychological stability. The occupation of Kuwait August 2, 1990 has demonstrated the utter bankruptcy of "professional army" monarchies of the Persian Gulf.

More than twenty years ago the operation Desert Storm, "cleanse Kuwait from Iraqi occupation. The operation completed long ago, but the storm did not abate

Kuwait Armed Forces were not negligible quantity, but virtually no resistance Iraqi invasion. Not only all the equipment the Army, but half of the Air Force combat aircraft and 6 of 8 Kuwaiti Navy missile boats were captured by the Iraqis to fully combat-ready state.

Of the 16 thousand people., Made up the personnel of the armed forces from Kuwait, were killed and more than 200 to 600 were captured, the rest (95%) had fled. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which had a very strong sun, did not even try to assist Kuwait, but had to do it.

As shown by the defeat of Kuwait, and then only during "Operation Desert Storm" offensive by Iraqi forces on the Saudi city of Ras Khafji (24 January 1991), the Saudi armed forces would have decayed in the same way as Kuwait.

The fundamental error of Saddam Hussein was that he did not capture all the monarchies of the Persian Gulf

In this case, the United States and its allies would have no place to deploy a group, and conducting sea and air landing operation would be objective, at least an order of magnitude more complex and threatening very high losses. This error Hussein could still fix for about a month after the occupation of Kuwait, where the deployment of Western factions in Saudi Arabia has only just begun. It was already clear that the group is set not to frighten (if only because it's too expensive), but for war.

Massive attack Iraqi armed forces at the time that it may be extremely difficult to flip. However, it was manifested psychological factor revaluation military capabilities of the enemy, failure to understand that you can put the enemy to have to pay exorbitant price for it. No way prevented the full deployment of the U.S. military factions and their allies, Hussein naturally doomed to defeat.

In this case, it should be noted that at the beginning of the air campaign, the advantage of the U.S. Air Force and its allies over the Iraqi Air Force (both quantitative and qualitative) was much lower than during the Vietnam War, the superiority of the Air Force and U.S. Navy aircraft over the North Vietnamese Air Force. However, if over Iraq, the Americans managed to achieve complete control of the air on the first day of the war over North Vietnam did not work out for all four years (1965-68 and 1972). Air campaign.

This can not be explained only by the advantage of technique and tactics, and there is a fundamental psychological difference between soldiers of Iraq and Vietnam. The potential of Iraq's air defense was very high, even under conditions of complete chaos and disorganization they managed to shoot down at least 39 (possibly — 50) enemy airc
raft. However, the absolute passivity of command, refused to use the Army and Air Force, to nothing but defeat, cause I could not.

It is a psychological inadequacy of the military and political leadership of Iraq, the United States has provided an opportunity to practice the use of the new weapons in the conditions close to the polygon. Finally USA firstly, received valuable combat experience, secondly, created an image of the absolute invincibility.

This greatly contributed to the fact that the American government has made adequate conclusions from its defeat in the information war with North Vietnam. In the case of Iraq, information support operations was at the highest level.

As a result, the Iraq war in a more grotesque form was repeated in Yugoslavia in 1999 is even more pronounced here than in Iraq in 1991 manifested psychological serbskogorukovodstva scrapped. Milosevic capitulated at precisely the moment when NATO operation, in fact, reached a dead end, because it does not reach the set goals.

The only way out was the beginning of the ground operation at a time when the Serbian army, as opposed to Iraq, almost suffered a loss and have not lost morale. Moreover, even during the NATO air campaign, Milosevic could begin active operations against the territory of Albania, and even try to air strikes by NATO CDH in Italy.

This would give an extremely significant military and, more importantly, the psychological effect, the enemy would face an unacceptable risk to obtain for themselves the damage. However, this opportunity was not used again. Milosevic was confident in the invincibility of the enemy, in this case very much like to retain power and life. Therefore, it is logical lost first one then the other.

An opposite example was the Russian army in the post-Soviet period. She has seen an exceptionally high viability, confirming its reputation as one of the best in the world (although this is almost no one understood).

Even during the first Chechen war, lost almost non-existent at the moment the Russian Armed Forces have very real chance to win the war in six months, prevented it only inadequate reaction of the political leadership of the country to capture militants hospital in Budennovsk, and Russian media information war against his own army.

The second Chechen war was quickly won, although logistically state aircraft between the wars only deteriorated further. Given the very high combat qualities of Chechen fighters and their excellent material equipment, it is very convenient for them to natural and climatic conditions and very unfavorable for the war morale of Russian society that victory can be considered an outstanding success of the Russian army.

Not at all less success became an instant rout of Georgia in the classic war in August 2008 Grouping Forces had no numerical superiority over the Georgian Armed Forces, and the technical equipment of the last part was even better than the Russian troops.

Of course, the Armed Forces as a whole could not lose the Georgian armed forces, but the war in August 2008 with the Russian side had shown no inhibition of slow weight loss with large proper, namely the immediate destruction of the enemy in the formal equality of forces. The main role in this victory played a psychological superiority of the Russian Armed Forces, which confirmed that the traditions are still alive.

In the same war once again demonstrated the failure of the idea of "professional army", which basically is not able to carry the heavy contact a defensive war. Until 2004, the Georgian armed forces were, in fact, the "legitimate armed gangs" for this reason, they are beginning the 90 lost the war much more cohesive and, moreover, who had the support of the Russian formations similar type of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

In 2004-2008. an attempt was made by a radical modernization of aircraft purchases in Ukraine and Eastern Europe, a significant number of Soviet technology, which is upgraded by the U.S. and Israel. The U.S. has also borrowed elements of network-centric warfare. In the formal preservation of military principle of manning all combat mechanized brigades were formed only on hiring.

The defeat of Georgia in the classic war of August 2008

However, the war with Russia in August 2008 ended in an instant and complete defeat of Georgia, and on the third day of the war, her sun, in fact, broken up, cease to have any sort was resisted. Thus, once again confirmed that the mercenary army can not protect their own country from external invasion.

The attempt to build a network-centric army based on Soviet technology and directly trained personnel was obviously untenable.

That Russia has demonstrated the fact that a country that is not afraid of NATO, he easily wins. And three times in less than 10 years. She albeit at the second attempt, despite the complete rejection of this campaign, the West has returned control of Chechnya. In June 1999 50000th grouping meekly gave NATO the opportunity to capture the main strategic facility Kosovo (Slatina airport), one battalion of Russian paratroopers (211 people), did not have any heavy weapons.

June 11, 1999 Russian paratroopers entered Kosovo and took control of the airport "Slatina"

In August 2008, NATO is not less than meekly gave Russia an opportunity to defeat his closest ally Georgia and deprive him 20% of the territory. NATO is not only Georgia did not have the slightest military and even political support during the war, but in fact imposed sanctions against it after the war — a tough embargo on all weapons (even defensive) and the exclusion of the possibility of admission to its membership, as Georgia has not been settled territorial issues (in this case, the rhetoric does not matter). Tragically, even in Russia all this was not realized.

Perhaps the first country where awareness happened, was Syria. Its leadership is behaving in the same way as the Russian in the Chechen wars (especially the second), it completely ignores the opinion of the West and is not afraid of its pressure. Moreover, the Syrians are openly demonstrated his power with impunity knocking in June 2012 Turkish RF-4E.

Perhaps, in Damascus there were adequate people who can look at NATO really is worthy of his misery evaluate the Libyan campaign, which "aggressive imperialist bloc" was almost lost, but the enemy did not resist at all. And as long as that account is completely correct. The only real reason for the Western "non-resistance to evil" — the power of the Syrian army to remain faithful to Assad.

Therefore, no one is going to fight against it. Real "godsend" for the West was "reinforced" the position of Russia in the UN Security Council. Both the West and Turkey, and the Arab monarchies violently pressed Russia to change this position. However, in the shower praying for it to Moscow and went on to be just as "concrete." Because it allows you to sling mud at her, continuing to do nothing, and to "legally".

The fact that in Yugoslavia in 1999 and Iraq in 2003, the position of the UN Security Council no one was interested, now in Washington, Ankara, Doha, Riyadh and Brussels prefer not to remember. If the Syrian regime can not stand, it will be a fundamental turning point of the whole geopolitical situation and would mean a
total loss of the real influence of the West. The paradox is that this can also be understood by no one.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: