Russia, Putin noted, has responded to such a possible confrontation by developing a host of weapons systems that will successfully meet the threat posed by American plans to deploy the above-mentioned missiles. These weapon systems include hypersonic missiles that sail calmly through the air, rarified or un, at Mach 9, he claimed. Also ready for deployment or in the works are two novel creations. "The Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile of unlimited range," said Putin, "and the Poseidon nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle of unlimited range are successfully undergoing tests." When these weapons are perfected, one imagines that they can wander through the air or sea for long periods until it is deemed amenable to Russia's purpose to have them strike a particular target in the United States. Putin said the first submarine capable of launching such an unmanned vehicle would be ready in the Spring.
While peace was the preferred mode for his country's development, Putin said Russia was prepared to defend itself.
"Our efforts to enhance our defence capability are for only one purpose," Putin asserted: "to ensure the security of this country and our citizens so that nobody would even consider pressuring us, or launching an aggression against us."
The reader is referred to Putin's complete speech, translated into English and posted on the website of the Russian Embassy in Washington, D.C. It is highly recommended reading for all Americans.
Now what preparations are American officials undertaking in order to protect the American public from such a robust reaction by the defensive forces of the Russian Federation? It is safe to say that virtually no preparations are being made to protect the American public. My guess, uneducated as it may be, is that the American government, judging from its inaction or lack of interest in the matter, is ready to sustain casualties on the order of a hundred million people. Perhaps I have heard or read that number bandied about in broadcasts or writings on the subject. Does Russia have an interest in perpetrating such a calamity upon the United States? No, Putin says. The military preparations, he insists, are defensive measures.
"Russia is not threatening anyone," claims Putin, "and all we do in terms of security is simply a response, which means that our actions are defensive. We are not interested in confrontation and we do not want it, especially with a global power like the United States of America."
Can we say the same about the U.S. government? My own assessment of U.S actions and policies is that America is egging for a war, a military confrontation that can be won in spite of the millions of deaths on the North American continent that it would entail.
So, my dear friends, what is to be done? It is unlikely that the average citizen, who bears the most risk, will be able to influence the course of events regarding conflict with Russia. What Americans can do is move to rural areas distant from the installations Putin would of necessity target. The construction of bomb shelters would not be an untoward reaction to the threat of a nuclear attack. And, of course, a stock of edibles that could sustain human life for as long as a month or two could certainly come in handy if American provocations exceeded any "red line" that Russia has set in its own defense. These are preparations the average citizen may take without eliciting undue government interference.
If citizens have any influence over the policies of the state in which they reside, they might implore the state government to rid itself of any entity that might be a target of a Russian strike. It might become a priority for some far-seeing officials to position their states to become less vulnerable to the reckless and provocative actions and policies of the federal government.
Ultimately, if America receives a retaliatory bush-whacking from Russia, there are perhaps positive developments that may emerge. Certainly Russia would ultimately not allow any of the crafters of the malicious U.S. foreign policy that precipitated the attack to remain at large, and when they and their cohorts were located, the Russians would deal with them in a direct and effective manner.What would Benjamin Franklin, that great man of letters, say if he were to see how the experiment in democracy ended through a nuclear conflagration? I doubt he would be surprised in the slightest. After all, he was a scientist who delved into the causes and effects of lightning and electricity, and invented new designs for wood stoves that were decided improvements on earlier designs. Surely Franklin was a man, more than others around him, who knew the power of scientific innovation and how it could ultimately affect the destiny of human life on earth. He would have understood where science was taking the human race. And politically, he must have known deep in his gut that in the long run, he was backing a troubled proposition. When asked what the Constitutional Convention of the late 1780s had agreed upon, he is reported to have quipped, "a republic, if you can keep it."