Liberals’ lies about Team B, Soviet weapon systems and Paul Nitze

To this day, liberals STILL deny that Team B was right, that the CIA was wrong, and that the Soviet weapon systems of the 1970s’ were superior to contemporary American systems.

From Wikipedia, this quote sums up these liberal lies:
“Following his term as Secretary of the Navy, he served as Deputy Secretary of Defense (1967-1969), as a member of the U.S. delegation to the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) (1969-1973), and Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Affairs (1973-1976). Later, fearing Soviet rearmament, he opposed the ratification of SALT II (1979).

Paul Nitze was a co-founder of Team B, a 1970s intelligence think tank that challenged the National Intelligence Estimates provided by the CIA. The Team B reports became the intellectual foundation for the idea of “the window of vulnerability” and of the massive arms buildup that began toward the end of the Carter administration and accelerated under President Ronald Reagan. Team B came to the conclusion that the Soviets had developed new weapons of mass destruction and had aggressive strategies with regard to a potential nuclear war. Team B’s analysis of Soviet weapon systems was later proven to be largely exaggerated.

According to Dr. Anne Cahn (Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1977-1980) “if you go through most of Team B’s specific allegations about weapons systems, and you just examine them one by one, they were all wrong.” Nonetheless, some still claim that its conclusions about Soviet strategical aims were largely proven to be true,[3] although this hardly squares with the elevation of Gorbachev in 1985.”

The truth is that every single allegation of Team B about every single Soviet weapon system was TRUE.

Go on, pick any specific Soviet weapon type. Soviet submarines of the 1970s were much quieter than their American counterparts, because LA class susbs were only beginning to join the USN.

Soviet fighterplanes were superior to the small, unmaneuverable, gunless, expensive to buy, expensive to maintain F-4s of the USAF, USN and USMC.

Soviet T-72 tanks were superior to all Western tanks until Leopard-2 and M1 Abrams tanks were introduced.

Soviet BMP-1 APCs were superior to the roofless, weakly-armoured American APCs of the era, and allowed their crews to fight from the inside rather than leave the vehicle.

But the most worrisome Soviet weapons were carriers of nuclear weapons: Tu-95 and Tu-16 bombers, SS-9 and SS-18 ICBMs, other Soviet ICBMs, Soviet MRBMs, and Soviet SS-20 Saber (RSD-10 Pioneer) IRBMs pointed at Europe and able to eliminate all European NATO bases and troops within 5 minutes. Before Reagan installed American IRBMs and cruise missiles in Europe, NATO had no weapons to counter Soviet IRBMs.

As for the “massive weapons buildup that occurred towards the end of the Carter Administration” – don’t make me laugh. No such buildup occurred until Carter left office. During his entire term he continued to cut weapon programs and kept defense spending low. It was Reagan who started the military buildup that Wikipedia talks about.

Why do former ACDA officials lie? Because they’re liars, but also because they’re former ACDA officials, i.e. pacifists. They oppose all weapon programs and favor total disarmament. Disarmament is their agenda.


5 thoughts on “Liberals’ lies about Team B, Soviet weapon systems and Paul Nitze”

  1. The wiki entry claims they were wrong on every major point.

    And the examples you cite don’t sound like what I’ve heard from Team B. It’s not that Soviet subs were quieter than soon to be deployed US subs. It’s that Soviet subs were undetectable with the present US technology. And the proof was in the fact that we couldn’t detect their subs. The lack of evidence proved the claim, despite strong CIA objections.

    1. I know what the Wiki entry claims, on the basis of the lies propagated by ACDA employees. Refuting what the Wiki entry claims was exactly the purpose of this blogpost.

      The US Navy was unable to detect Soviet subs until it deployed a new generation of submarines. Each time the Soviet Navy (the VMF) deployed a new submarine class, the USN had to deploy a new submarine class of its own (e.g. the Los Angeles class as a “response” to Victor III class submarines).

  2. Very interesting. I’d like some sources for this though. I have no doubt due to Richard Nixon’s opening of trade with the communists and subsidization through numerous government institutions during the detente era, bought this unfortunate superiority to fruit if true. Communism by itself with it’s inferior economy couldn’t have built this military complex by itself, it most likely needed western aid and help to achieve it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s