Pravda's Headline: Russias Nuclear Attack On U.S. May Start With Major Banks

by Joel Hendon⁽¹⁷⁸⁾ Red Star

http://hebronics.org/index.html

In an article dated April 17, 2009, written by Sergei Malinin makes comparison of the United States plan for nuclear destruction of Russia as compared to their own for bringing us down. They profess that their idea is much more humane and would not destroy the world, whereas a total nuclear holocaust would.

It seems very foolhardy and immature for a state regulated paper to put forth such information regardless if it is fantasy or factual. Their idea, however, is one that would be devastating and would accomplish their goal. The English version of Pravda.ru makes a subtle attempt to put the article at the feet of another site, "Bigness.ru" which is written in Russian and beyond my comprehension.

Here is a paragraph detailing what they consider the U.S. plan for destroying Russia:

US scientists put forward an idea to focus targets on 12 key objects of the Russian economy: enterprises of Gazprom, Rosneft, Rusal, Nornikel, Surgutneftegaz, Evraz and Severstal. The suggestion became an absolutely new approach to the deterrence doctrine. The USA currently has the Mutual Assured Demolition Doctrine, which stipulates an attack of some 200 targets on Russia's territory.

This puts a slightly different light, according to them, as to the total infrastructural damage when you compare 12 targets to that of 200. Then they come with their own idea of reasoning that to destroy 5 U.S. financial centers would place us back into the stone age. This compares to what they say is their current plan of about 100 targets.

They went so far as to roughly name them. According to them, the first target would be three locations of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in Washington, Chicago and Dallas. This would eleminae all deposits guarantees and people would immediately withdraw all their monies.

Their next target would be, so they say, the General Electric Corporation, but they don't say what location. The theory is that General Electric would bring down "thousands" of "adjacent" companies and millions of people would lose their jobs.

They then say "Freddie Mac" and "Fannie Mae" would be also be targeted and suggest that the Federal Reserve System and U.S. Treasury Department would be a likely target also.

I do not know exactly how they arrive at about five targets. Their first one includes 3 locations, to take out G.E. would take several targets and the others would add up to several. They also made this statement, but don't ask me who they mean made it, there were no other references to one with this title: "This is the number one goal in case of war. We would need to destroy large banks in London as well," the Colonel-General said.

The article concludes with a refutation by one of their economists who said that, it did not matter what targets either side would choose, a nuclear attack would not go unnoticed. So perhaps there is enough intelligence on both sides to hang tight.

But, I still say it is an immature outlook to even want to publish such an item, unless it would be to cause fear. Regardless of their intent for the article, it gives appearance of being provocative.

Be A Writer For Webgazine

Webgazine Columnist.

Article submitted Monday, April 20, 2009 & read 31 times.

Please log in to leave your comments.
No comments yet.

7-1-2-1-3-ADWR

Most Recent

Sponsors: