Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 4:09 PM
Subject: RE: Star Bettis question to Tom Bearden re:
Sharon+Putin meeting
Dear Ms. B*******:
The old KGB (now the FSB) is
not a monolith.
It has two factions which
differ dramatically in their approach to the West.
The old diehard faction is
led by the old diehard communists who still intend to eventually destroy
the West, and particularly the United States.
The younger and more modern
faction, from which Putin comes, would like to reach an accommodation
with the West. Putin would dearly like to become our "trusted cheap oil
supplier", so that he could and would pump much needed oil funds into
the Russian economy. Accordingly, he has moved a long way down that
path, and hopes to continue. Our gas at the gas pump would already be
out of sight were it not for Putin opening all the oil spigots he could.
The old faction of the KGB,
however, is the faction that still controls all the superweapons (called
by the Russians "energetics weapons"). At the same time that Putin seeks
accommodation, the old faction with its energetics weapons still
maneuvers toward our destruction. It is ideological, so it is ceaseless.
It will never stop.
For many years, since early
on during the so-called "cold war", the kind of warfare we have been in
-- whether we knew it or not, or whether we acknowledged it or not --
is loosely called "asymmetrical warfare". In it, war is continuous and
there is no such thing as "peace". Instead, there are only two phases of
warfare: (1) the insertion phase, during which weapons of mass
destruction are inserted into the cities and population centers and main
target areas of one's foe, and (2) the operations phase, when the WMD
are unleashed, destroying the foe. Note that the insertion phase
replaces what used to be called "peace", in that full bore warfare and
shooting are not going on. Note also that it substitutes for the old
"massive ICBM attack etc.". It is just as massive when it comes, but the
business of getting the warheads to their target areas has dramatically
changed, and is now accomplished in "peacetime" itself. Ergo, there is
no peace now, and there never will be again, until this thing is won or
lost utterly.
Here's something you may not
have realized. We did not "win the cold war" by the strength of our own
forces and our ICBMs, submarines, and nuclear bombers as most Americans
think. Instead, way back there in the cold war, the Soviets inserted
nuclear weapons in all our major cities and population centers, over a
period of some years, along with the Spetznaz teams to detonate them on
command. As they achieved sufficient inserted nukes (some 50 cities and
targets), their intention was to just go ahead and detonate them all at
once or rapidly, in the dirt and dirty, thereby destroying the United
States (150 million casualties, unrecoverable physical and economical
damage). They would have accepted the retaliation strike of whatever we
may have had left to throw at them, and accepted the damage as the
necessary cost of winning the war.
That plan was countered by
Israel when it acquired nuclear weapons, including hydrogen bombs. We
ourselves were not in position to insert sufficient weapons into Russian
cities to produce a credible deterrent (which, if produced, was known as
"dead man fuzing"). Against a rational foe, dead man fuzing works. He
could destroy you at will, but then he would also be destroyed himself,
inevitably. But it wasn't our nuclear bombers and ICBMs that made up
the deciding deterrent and "dead man fuzing" that insured the
effectiveness of the "Mutual Assured Destruction" concept and
capability.
Instead, the State of Israel
-- with a very large Jewish contingent in Russia -- simply inserted
nukes (including hydrogen bombs) into most all the important Russian
cities and strategic target areas, with teams to set them off on order.
They thereby achieved -- actually for the entire West --- "dead man
fuzing" against a chess playing rational Russian foe. That put the
"assured" in the phrase of "Mutual Assured Destruction".
The nukes are still there,
in the cities of both the U.S. and Russia, just waiting. That has been
what really nailed down the "mutual assured destruction" capability each
country saw against it, in the hands of the opposing nation or nations
friendly to the opposing nation.
So since early on in the
cold war, Israel has saved all our collective bacon. Quietly and
without a lot of fanfare.
The irrational opponents --
such as the fanatical wings of the terrorists -- saw the success of the
dead man fuzing. Since they are irrational (any nation or group sending
children in with bombs tied to their bodies to blow themselves up etc.
is obviously irrational), then they cannot be dead-man fuzed. Instead,
once they get sufficient insertion accomplished, they will unleash the
WMD, thereby destroying the U.S.
Al Qaeda has announced to
the Arab world that it already has seven nuclear weapons hidden in seven
U.S. cities, and that insertion effort continues. That is the strategic
plan of the terrorists (such as Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, etc.), not
their tactical plan. All the news media covers with its "talking heads"
approach is to cover all the tactical incidents. Those are distressing
and do cause casualties and loss of life, but they do not win the
strategic war. It is the strategic insertion which is the real and most
deadly enemy action.
In the face of an irrational
foe using asymmetrical warfare and strategic WMD insertion, one has a
quandary. There is no choice but to win the insertion phase. If one
loses the insertion phase (i.e., if it is completed), then one has just
lost one's nation and the war, because very shortly the foe will unleash
the WMD and thereby destroy the United States.
That is the kind of warfare
and the stage we are now in. Sweet negotiations in the UN are
necessary, but they are not primary. To the terrorists, such as
mere delaying tactics to enable them to continue to pursue the strategic
insertion phase.
To the nuclear insertion,
one today must also include such things as biological weapons,
particularly anthrax, smallpox, etc. If (and when) smallpox is
unleashed in a single major city on this planet, it will eventually kill
some 2 billion persons -- nearly one third of the human population. And
when the economy of the old Soviet Union collapsed, anyone who wanted
smallpox and smallpox biological warfare specialists, could easily buy
them. The terrorist backing nations did want them, and they did buy. You
could also buy nuclear weapons etc. More than a hundred warheads came up
"missing" in one part of the Soviet empire alone. Nuclear weapons do not
"go missing". They get stolen and sold on the black market for
incredible prices.
Asymmetrical warfare is
favored by all our foes these days because of one of our great
vulnerabilities of the American society. When one does a Strategic
Estimate (a standard military analysis of great importance), one area is
called "National Style". That area captures the schisms and knee jerk
reactions that a society has. One of our national style characteristics
is a deadly vulnerability: We almost never react to a slowly increasing
threat. We react to the rattler who bites us, but not to the boa
constrictor slowly strangling us. To wit, the threat did not change one
whit with the advent of 9/11 and the strike on the Twin Towers (and the
deaths of some 3,000 Americans). What did change was that the snake had
now bitten us sufficiently hard to get our attention. The boa
constrictor had revealed himself to have fangs after all.
The other part of our
national style that is a disadvantage is that, because we abhor war, we
tend only to fight a short war. We go to war, take the battlefield and
defeat the main forces, then tend to dust our hands off and go home,
particularly if patches of guerrilla warfare and resistance continue.
Anything resembling a "Vietnam" where the dragon continues to bleed,
will result in a rising clamor to bring the troops home and be done with
it. That reaction vis a vis Iraq is already started, and it will grow.
So the terrorists, knowing
such things, are exhorting the faithful to flock in from other
surrounding nations, and continue attacking Americans in Iraq and
Afghanistan. That is happening, and the dragon will continue to bleed.
In turn, with an election campaign in full hue and cry, that is being
made perhaps the major issue. Our folks had better train more Iraqis to
take over the military defense actions against harassment attacks,
because our own activists will do precisely what the activists did in
Vietnam -- force the withdrawal of U.S. forces.
The terrible problem we have
is this: Asymmetrical war is continuous, unrelenting war. It never ends,
until either one side or the other is destroyed. Not defeated on the
battlefield, but destroyed. If an idiot keeps shooting at you wherever
you go, laying ambush after ambush, etc., the only way that ultimately
you can stop him is to kill him. Or perhaps in a few cases capture and
imprison him for the rest of his life.
The briefings that Bush and
Cheney received after 9/11 must have been very sobering, as the full
realization of what kind of action we are in sank home. About a month or
so after 9/11, Cheney came out of one series of meetings in a very
solemn and wry mood, and made this sobering statement:
So that is our problem. We are in a very long struggle against a very
determined, highly indoctrinated foe, who is in it for the long run.
This year, next year, the year after, and the three decades after that.
We have not had any experience in our Republic with the kind of warfare
the British and French once fought for 100 years.
Now we may well be going to find out.
The problem is that now, with weapons of mass destruction, the foe
doesn't just strive to hit a ship or an apartment building. He does
that, of course, but that is the tactical action which "bleeds the
dragon".
The real war will be decided -- and won or lost -- on the success or
failure of the strategic plan of the terrorists: to insert sufficient
WMD (preferably nukes) in U.S. cities so that a real knock-out punch can
be initiated.
There are other forces maneuvering against us simultaneously, and these
other forces are also very powerful. They are also very patient -- and
patience is not an American virtue.
So time and our own cultural biases will eventually tell the tale.
Till then, we can only hope that our beloved nation survives, and that
we "hold the fort" somehow.
And we fervently hope that we will win the insertion phase. Otherwise,
we will surely lose and just as surely be utterly destroyed.
Best wishes and a little prayer for all of us,
Tom Bearden
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 11:31 AM
Subject: Correspondence
Dear Sir:
I have checked and rechecked Colonel Bearden's website and not been
able to find an email address to which I can send the following
question. Perhaps you can help me?
My Question:
After reading the Excalibur Briefing book, I am wondering
WHY Prime Minister Sharon of Israel visited Putin in Russia last
month?
Sincerely,
Star
|