Russia Has Weapons to Crush Europe
NATO IS A SHADOW OF WHAT IT WAS, SAYS SECURITY EXPERT PETER PRY.
R
ussia could win world War III in Europe with a single Super-EMP nuclear warhead.
Detonated nearly 44 miles high
over NATO headquarters in Brus- sels, Belgium, the EMP fi eld would black out electric grids and paralyze NATO military forces from Poland to Britain, providing a red carpet for a Russian invasion. U.S. troops and 30,000 civil-
ians fl eeing Ukraine would become POWs. Russian tanks could reach the English Channel in days. After an EMP attack, the U.S.
would discover it has no tactical nuclear weapons. Even if some delivery systems
survive the EMP, it is highly unlike- ly any host European government would allow a tactical nuclear strike against Russia from its territory, fearing nuclear retaliation. Russia also has vast advantages
over NATO in capabilities for bio- logical, chemical, and cyberwarfare. And Russia has the military
muscle to win a conventional war against European NATO without resorting to nuclear, biological, chemical, or cyberweapons. It has 20,000 main battle tanks,
1,900 jet fi ghters, and more than 1 million soldiers. NATO, meanwhile, is a shadow
of what it was during the Cold War and has become hollowed out mili- tarily. In 1989, the U.S. had 5,000 main
battle tanks in Germany. Former President Barack Obama withdrew all U.S. MBTs from Europe, how- ever, reducing the number to zero. Former President Donald
Trump started returning MBTs, but too little, too late, so today there are only about 100 U.S. main battle tanks in Europe to fi ght Russia’s 20,000 tanks. West European NATO has never
exercised, and does not have the capability, to rapidly project their collective land forces to defend Eastern Europe or Germany. They are essentially territorial armies
that a Russian invasion would encounter in “penny packets” and easily overwhelm. Russia has about 1,900 jet fi ght-
ers to attack the collective air forces of the above NATO Europe coun- tries that can muster altogether 463 fi ghters — assuming many or most of these are not destroyed by Rus- sian surprise missile and air attacks. But would Germany, Britain,
Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxem- bourg, and France send their air forces to the defense of Poland — or each other — and risk Russian retaliation? NATO’s theory of collective secu-
rity has never been tested in a major war.
Its weakness is a consequence of
European socialist-democratic gov- ernments building welfare states at the expense of military strength. NATO’s elites wrongly equate
nationalism with fascism; embrace globalism; and look to supranation- al institutions such as NATO, the United Nations, and “internation- al law,” backed by the U.S. “global policeman,” to keep them safe.
Peter Pry is executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security.
APRIL 2022 | NEWSMAX 59
SHUJAA_777/SHUTTERSTOCK
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100
