The Pentagon's "2015 Strategy" For Ruling the World

[unhappycamper]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Pentagon-s-2015-Strat-by-Mike-Whitney-Military_Pentagon-War-Strategy_World-Issues-150703-848.html



Martin Dempsey Releases 2015 National Military Strategy for the US

The Pentagon's "2015 Strategy" For Ruling the World
By Mike Whitney
OpEdNews Op Eds 7/3/2015 at 19:15:13

On Wednesday, the Pentagon released its 2015 National Military Strategy, a 24-page blueprint for ruling the world through military force. While the language in the report is subtler and less incendiary than similar documents in the past, the determination to unilaterally pursue US interests through extreme violence remains the cornerstone of the new strategy. Readers will not find even a hint of remorse in the NMS for the vast destruction and loss of life the US caused in countries that posed not the slightest threat to US national security. Instead, the report reflects the steely resolve of its authors and elite constituents to continue the carnage and bloodletting until all potential rivals have been killed or eliminated and until such time that Washington feels confident that its control over the levers of global power cannot be challenged.

As one would expect, the NMS conceals its hostile intentions behind the deceptive language of "national security." The US does not initiate wars of aggression against blameless states that possess large quantities of natural resources. No. The US merely addresses "security challenges" to "protect the homeland" and to "advance our national interests." How could anyone find fault with that, after all, wasn't the US just trying to bring peace and democracy to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria?

In the Chairman's Forward, Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey attempts to prepare the American people for a future of endless war:

"Future conflicts will come more rapidly, last longer, and take place on a much more technically challenging battlefield. ... We must be able to rapidly adapt to new threats while maintaining comparative advantage over traditional ones ... the application of the military instrument of power against state threats is very different than the application of military power against non state threats. We are more likely to face prolonged campaigns than conflicts that are resolved quickly ... that control of escalation is becoming more difficult and more important." (Document: 2015 U.S. National Military Strategy, USNI News)

War, war and more war. This is the Pentagon's vision of the future. Unlike Russia or China which have a plan for an integrated EU-Asia free trade zone (Silk Road) that will increase employment, improve vital infrastructure, and raise living standards, the US sees only death and destruction ahead. Washington has no strategy for the future, no vision of a better world. There is only war; asymmetrical war, technological war, preemptive war. The entire political class and their elite paymasters unanimously support global rule through force of arms. That is the unavoidable meaning of this document. The United States intends to maintain its tenuous grip on global power by maximizing the use of its greatest asset; its military.

[bemildred]

1. I don't know when I have read such an incoherent mess of whining in my life

as Dempsey's "strategy". It is like a laundry list of past failures gone over like they were promises of future success. All the things we have failed to do over and over again like get ready for the future, not the past, "we won't do them any more next time"

[on point]

2. For once I would like to what exactly are the 'national interests' defined

I suspect the country may not actually agree with if they are spelled out

[MisterP]

3. I don't know what's worse: that they're still trying to dominate Russia AND China at once,

that they're still plotting to "rule the world" like a Bond villain, or that this sort of nonsense has been producing instant blowback since the 70s

[bemildred]

4. Deciphering the Pentagon’s latest anger towards Russia

In successive weeks, the United States has ramped up tensions with Russia. Two highly provocative statements have emanated from the Pentagon. One was the Pentagon report titled 2015 National Military Strategy issued a fortnight ago, at the instance of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, naming Russia and China as two world powers with which the US may have to fight a war with “immense consequences.”

The second fusillade came during the testimony by the Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford at the US Senate Armed Services Committee last week where he nailed Russia as the greatest threat to the US national security. This is what Dunford said:

“My assessment today … is that Russia presents the greatest threat to our national security. If you want to talk about a nation that could pose an existential threat to the United States, I’d have to point to Russia. And if you look at their behavior, it’s nothing short of alarming.”

But for the fact that these words came from a general who has been designated by President Barack Obama as the next chairman of the joint chief of staff to succeed Gen. Martin Dempsey, one could have scoffed at it as sheer bluster.

http://atimes.com/2015/07/deciphering-the-pentagons-anger-towards-russia/

He ignores the fourth possibility: petulant time-servers angry about the failures of their policy and anxious to blame the guy that out-witted them.