I listen to Michael Savage from time to time because on a whole he tends to have something intelligent to say. But then there are the days when he should stay off the air.
Yesterday was one such day as he turned his attention to the growing tension between the United States and Russia. This issue has been the subject of many media reports: mostly from other people who have little idea what they are talking about. I can say this because the real issue isn't what would happen if Russia and the United States started a hot war. The issue is what the war would be like if the United States found itself fighting against both Russia and China. For if we were to start lobbing shells at Russian units, why wouldn''t we expect China to more forcefully lay claim to the South China Sea.
People then talk of nuclear war. I have already voiced my concern over the condition of the United States nuclear arsenal. Only the Trident submarine force strikes me as viable as a nuclear deterrent force. The MInutemen ICBMS, which so many people now claim are 1970 vintage missiles are actually early 1960 engineering. Some have called them the Ferrari's of ICBMs: that only applies if your talking 1960 vintage cars. In short, I'll take the recent production "mobile" Russia missiles over these obsolete American ICBMS.
As for the bomber force, people made a big deal of the recent flights of B-1s to South Korea. What most don't know is these are not nuclear bombers, they are officially only for conventional bombing. Yes, they can be converted back to carry strategic nuclear bombs; but we actually can't function without these bombers being available for conventional bombing. And because we use the B-1s in conventional attack we are rapidly wearing the aircraft out. Some have made a big deal of the cost of making a new Flying wing bomber, but these people need to look at what its going to cost us over the next decade to just keep the B-1s flying.
No, I don't fear a sudden nuclear exchange at this time. Russia just has to wait until the B-1s are grounded for repairs, the Ohio's have to port because the subs are worn out, and the Minuteman force shuts down from lack of spare parts. They, the Russians can withdraw from any present agreement and the Democrats won't say a word. Look at all the things Obama did just to get the Iranians to sign a nuclear deal, and how many things they have since done to keep the Iranians in the deal. And if Hillary were to use an executive order to seize American guns, the Russians just need to wait until the majority of the arms have been crushed. Then they can pick and choose who they invade since we will not be in a position to raise additional troops or send arms to the attacked nation. And until the Russians actually threaten American territory the threat of the use of a strategic US ICBM is pretty slim.
Yesterday was one such day as he turned his attention to the growing tension between the United States and Russia. This issue has been the subject of many media reports: mostly from other people who have little idea what they are talking about. I can say this because the real issue isn't what would happen if Russia and the United States started a hot war. The issue is what the war would be like if the United States found itself fighting against both Russia and China. For if we were to start lobbing shells at Russian units, why wouldn''t we expect China to more forcefully lay claim to the South China Sea.
People then talk of nuclear war. I have already voiced my concern over the condition of the United States nuclear arsenal. Only the Trident submarine force strikes me as viable as a nuclear deterrent force. The MInutemen ICBMS, which so many people now claim are 1970 vintage missiles are actually early 1960 engineering. Some have called them the Ferrari's of ICBMs: that only applies if your talking 1960 vintage cars. In short, I'll take the recent production "mobile" Russia missiles over these obsolete American ICBMS.
As for the bomber force, people made a big deal of the recent flights of B-1s to South Korea. What most don't know is these are not nuclear bombers, they are officially only for conventional bombing. Yes, they can be converted back to carry strategic nuclear bombs; but we actually can't function without these bombers being available for conventional bombing. And because we use the B-1s in conventional attack we are rapidly wearing the aircraft out. Some have made a big deal of the cost of making a new Flying wing bomber, but these people need to look at what its going to cost us over the next decade to just keep the B-1s flying.
No, I don't fear a sudden nuclear exchange at this time. Russia just has to wait until the B-1s are grounded for repairs, the Ohio's have to port because the subs are worn out, and the Minuteman force shuts down from lack of spare parts. They, the Russians can withdraw from any present agreement and the Democrats won't say a word. Look at all the things Obama did just to get the Iranians to sign a nuclear deal, and how many things they have since done to keep the Iranians in the deal. And if Hillary were to use an executive order to seize American guns, the Russians just need to wait until the majority of the arms have been crushed. Then they can pick and choose who they invade since we will not be in a position to raise additional troops or send arms to the attacked nation. And until the Russians actually threaten American territory the threat of the use of a strategic US ICBM is pretty slim.