by Oui
Sun Feb 16th, 2025 at 07:57:52 AM EST
[Update -1 Propaganda to be revamped ...
a message from the militarization disinfo Operation Mockingbird 2.0]
USAID website temporarily unavailable
More below the fold ...
ADDENDUM
CIA always finds inflating the power of Russia more attractive than underestimating the enemy … see Cold War era.
Russia's Ground Combat Capabilities and Implications for U.S.-Russia Competition | RAND Corp - June 2019 |
Russia and the United States have countervailing interests in multiple areas. Since 2008 Russia's military forces have improved substantially, enabling Russia to pursue its interests much more aggressively, including intervening in Crimea, eastern Ukraine, and Syria.
Researchers analyze the factors that undergird Russian military power: societal, political, economic, and demographic. They then turn to specific ground combat capability areas, such as the maneuver ground forces, indirect fires, long-range strike, and C4ISR.
The researchers expect relative continuity in the development of Russia's military capabilities but recognize that change is possible were energy prices to increase or decrease or Russia's relations with the West or China shift. The key challenge for the U.S. military will be to develop capabilities that can enable the United States to compete with Russia and achieve U.S. interests across different regions and intensities of conflict without provoking escalation.
The report presents several recommendations to the U.S. Army, including considering how best to respond to Russia's military dominance in the near abroad and how to prepare for potential conflict with Russian forces and their proxies in the Middle East.
Given Russia's security policy and economic and demographic constraints, the researchers do not foresee Russia initiating a conflict with the West. Nevertheless, the U.S. Army should prepare to counter Russian capabilities that challenge current U.S. forces, including long-range strike, C4ISR, and rapidly deployable forces.
Perhaps the most dangerous possibility is a large-scale ground war with Russia; however, it is highly unlikely that Russia is preparing to initiate such a war given its security strategy, past decisions of which capabilities to prioritize, and economic constraints?
Recommendations
- To achieve U.S. interests, the U.S. military will need to compete with Russia across a range of different regions and situations, while limiting costs and the potential for escalation.
- Russia's pursuit of strategic deterrence and internal security are defensive but still pose a threat. To minimize the risk of unintended escalation, U.S. policymakers need to be attuned to Russian perceptions.
- Russia's pursuit of regional dominance poses a threat to U.S. partners, such as Georgia and Ukraine. Russia's ongoing expeditionary operations also could lead to a direct or indirect confrontation with Russia and its partners outside of Europe.
Statement Barack Obama: “Russia Is ’A Regional Power,' Not Top Geopolitical Foe”. | 25 March 2014 |
President Barack Obama says that he still does not consider Russia to be the top geopolitical enemy of the United States.”
You read it correctly … “geopolitical foe” … wording as is, not on any level of a military equivalent power.
U.S. vs. Russia: What a war would look like between the world's most fearsome militaries | Military Times - Oct 2015 |
Russia remains weak, according to many traditional criteria. But it is now developing some key technologies, new fighting tactics and a brazen geopolitical strategy that is aggressively undermining America's 25-year claim to being the only truly global superpower. The result: Russia is unexpectedly re-emerging as America's chief military rival.
Russia has preserved, even modernized, its own "triad" with nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles, a large fleet of long-range strike aircraft and increasingly sophisticated nuclear-armed submarines.
Reagan, Obama Key in Op Mockingbird 2.0
USAID — Internews — Prisma
USAID-Internews | 2021 Media Consumption Survey |
Journalism on sale: How USAID doled out millions to buy journalists, media groups | PressTV |
Internews was founded during the Cold War with the stated goal of fostering open dialogue between the US and the Soviet Union, aiming to reduce tensions between East and West.
However, critics argue that under the influence of USAID and Western elites, the organization turned into a tool for promoting NATO expansion, contributing to the resurgence of Cold War-era rivalries.
In an interview, American politician Robert F. Kennedy Jr. criticized USAID for its long-standing influence on global media narratives. The interview went viral on social media following the WikiLeak's expose of USAID funding media operations.
“Journalists have become propagandists for the government...A significant part of this dynamic is the influence of intelligence agencies on the press. Today, they are the largest funder of journalism worldwide, primarily through USAID.”
Kennedy pointed to the scale of this funding, noting, “They spend about $10 billion a year funding journalism around the world.”
He also referenced a 2012 executive order by the then US President Barak Obama.
"President Obama issued an executive order that allowed the CIA to begin, propagandizing Americans again...We started seeing then the press becomes an overt kind of propaganda vessel for the CIA.”
Prior to Kennedy, CIA whistleblower John Stockwell highlighted the CIA’s use of media as a tool. In his accounts, Stockwell detailed how the agency leverages “collected intelligence” for various purposes, some more controversial than others.
“There are other functions... One is to run secret wars… Another thing is to disseminate propaganda to influence people's minds, and this is a major function of the CIA. And, unfortunately, of course, it overlaps into the gathering of information,” Stockwell said.
He further exposed the agency’s tactics for manipulating journalists, describing a calculated process where reporters are initially fed stories to gain their trust, and later supplied with false information.
He also offered a specific example of how the CIA leverages the press, drawing from his experience managing the Angola conflict.
“Well, for example, in my war, the Angola war that I helped to manage, one third of my staff was propaganda. Ironically, it's called covert action inside the CIA… that means the violent part. I had propagandists all over the world, principally in London, Kinshasa, and Zambia," he explained.
These revelations, combined with evidence of the US government’s extensive funding of media outlets worldwide to promote "politically motivated stories," have fueled widespread debate among analysts.
They argue that media organizations receiving such funds are advancing narratives favorable to US.
United Kingdom masters in weaponization of information for propaganda and narrative in time of war.
Weaponizing information systems for political disruption: The Actor, Lever, Effects, and Response Taxonomy (ALERT)
