General Billy Mitchell at his 1925 court-martial. He defied the Top Brass to prove that aircraft could sink battleships. USAF photo

Lyndon LaRouche would often retell a funny but insightful story told to him by his friend General Jean-Gabriel Revault d’Allonnes of France. At the time of the incident, d’Allonnes was a lone colonel in a room full of generals who were discussing the measures to be taken in case of war. Colonel d’Allonnes confidently asserted, “Well, the first thing you do is fire all the generals!”

Indeed! Today we could add, “and the President of the United States too!” However, that is the subject for other posts. Today we will discuss a few changes in military technology and practice which leave the American armed forces extremely vulnerable to foolish actions by leadership which relies on “proven experience,” the “school of hard knocks,” or bureaucratic autopilot. Sailors sometimes humorously refer to this bureaucratic problem as the “right way, the wrong way, and the Navy way.”

Of course, the best way to deal with the world is to work out international relations which ensure a better future for all. Indeed, in today’s world there is no need for any direct warfare among nations. This was key to Lyndon LaRouche’s approach, and President Trump’s approach—inclusive of Ukraine, the Middle East, and North Korea.

However, the warfare which was unleashed by the Biden collective’s idiotic pursuit of the British Empire’s plans in both Ukraine and Israel/Palestine makes clear that warfighting has changed drastically. In particular, in 1977 when LaRouche put forward his specifications for a strategic defense system based upon speed-of-light weapons (especially x-ray and gamma ray lasers that operate in the high frequency part of the electromagnetic spectrum), radio frequency systems, and near-speed-of-light particle beams to be used to give nations on the defensive the clear advantage over any attackers, LaRouche discussed the importance of preventing the saturation of defenses by swarms of cheap missiles.

For example, the recent rocket attack by Hamas which overwhelmed Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system demonstrated the problem of attempting to shoot down swarms of low-cost munitions with limited quantities of high-cost defensive missiles. The complexity of maneuvering to hit an incoming missile makes the defensive missile orders of magnitude more complex and therefore more costly than an offensive ballistic missile without maneuvering capability. It is therefore very easy for offensive systems to saturate or overwhelm missile defense capabilities that are based on anti-missile missiles.

That was one of the many reasons which caused LaRouche to specify a requirement for laser and relativistic beam weapons for defensive systems. Another reason was that the high-power consumption requirements of such systems would necessitate rapid advances in relatively compact fission and fusion energy sources to power such systems. And precisely the development of such compact power systems would make cheap abundant power available for the entire world and help to mitigate causes of international strife.

Of course, the British Empire and its swamp creatures in Washington sabotaged LaRouche’s plans and undermined President Reagan’s implementation of those plans via his Strategic Defense Initiative. The only defensive systems which could be tolerated by the Empire would be those composed of missiles themselves. New technologies and new physical principles threatened the Imperial economic ordering of the world. So LaRouche was targeted and imprisoned, LaRouche’s Fusion Energy Foundation was shut down, and Reagan was circumvented in typical Washington swamp fashion.

Besides saturation by quantity, there is the problem of hypersonic (and non-ballistic, relatively low altitude) offensive missiles. For example, President Putin this week announced the continuous patrolling of the Black Sea by MiG-31 jets carrying the hypersonic Kinzhal missile. These missiles place the two U.S. Navy carrier groups sent to the Eastern Mediterranean in jeopardy since the Navy has no way to defend against these low altitude Mach 9 missiles. Naturally, the British Ministry of Defense (representing the folks who brought you World Wars I and II) reported that there is nothing to worry about—just do as you’re told.

Then there is the situation in Ukraine. Does it look like World War I to you? In World War I the old tactics of massed infantry or cavalry charges to break through enemy lines were defeated by the introduction of large quantities of machine guns. The result was years of stalemate in trench warfare and millions of dead soldiers. Late in the war tanks were introduced as a means of overcoming machine guns.

Warfare in Ukraine now looks more and more like World War I trench warfare again because both sides have effectively developed methods to precisely target and destroy armored vehicles and tanks. Thousands of armored vehicles have been destroyed on both sides of the conflict. The only real defense is camouflage and going underground. If you can be seen, you will be destroyed. Not only expensive, large, and dedicated military drones are in use, but also tiny commercial and consumer drones have been turned into powerful, cheap weapons capable of destroying tanks and fortified positions. This is why the casualties in the war are astronomical—in the hundreds of thousands of dead and injured.

Admittedly there are small-scale Pentagon projects aimed at developing swarms of AI-controlled drones, cyber-warfare, AI warfare, and strategies which center on leveraging existing technologies with better control systems. Such efforts are not to be completely disparaged; however, the refocusing of major military research on the revolutionary physical principles outlined by LaRouche 40 years ago will be the key to a Defense Department actually able to defend the nation. And this approach still offers the power to lift our physical economy to a new level while also proliferating advanced, relatively cheap energy for electricity, water desalination, etc. across the globe. It is ironic that the best way to uplift our own defense and economy is so tied to the lifting of the world economy, but that is one of the many manifestations of LaRouche’s genius. A true genius can figure out how to turn opponents into friends. We used to have generals, such as MacArthur, Eisenhower, and Clay who had some good insight into this.

But you can’t assume that we can just send a couple of carrier groups somewhere to get the boys back in line. You are likely to get more that you bargained for.

As with the American economy in general, we have allowed the American military to be run according to Wall Street and City of London interests and guidelines for too long. It is time to realize that only visionary leadership (such as that once provided by Billy Mitchell, Lyndon LaRouche, and now President Trump and friends) can prevent war and ensure that our soldiers, sailors, and airmen are not left to be sitting ducks for whoever might wish to take pot shots at them. Both Billy Mitchell and LaRouche were dead right in their attempts to force Top Brass to see the need to lift American military practice to revolutionary levels of technology and prevent obvious potential disasters ahead.

Wars are prevented or won in the mind. Brutes, idiots, and lackeys always fail.

Recent responses