About me

My name is Zbigniew Mazurak. I’m a defense analyst with 8 years of experience in the field, specializing in defense budgets, nuclear weapons strategy, and missile defense. I also have B.A. and M.A. degrees in history with the highest honors. I’m now working on my PhD.

I’m the author of the In Defense of US Defense Spending, wherein I demonstrate how low American defense spending really is today(unlike the Cold War) and prove that the defense budget is not to blame for America’s budget deficits and public debt. I am currently working on my second book, La dissuasion dans le XXIème siècle.

I have also authored over 200 defense-issues-related articles in the American Thinker and many others in the Second Line of Defense, on the TheRealityCheck.org, ConservativesWithAttitude, Colony14, Conservatives4Palin, ConservativeDailyNews, and PeoplePoliticallyRight.com websites. I have also written a few articles that were published in the UK Column.

Since 2008, I have been maintaining this website to provide Readers with unbiased, impartial, quality information on defense issues, and to provide my own commentary on those issues. Since early 2012, by mutual agreement, some of my blogposts are cross-posted by conservative blogger Marjorie Haun on her reagangirl.com website.

 

33 thoughts on “About me”

  1. Zbigniew,
    Sarkozy Does seem to be an improvement over Chirac.
    You have a very thoughtful blog. I have linked to it on my blog here:
    http://conservativlib.wordpress.com/
    You might be interested in this book I reviewed here:
    http://conservativlib.wordpress.com/2007/10/07/two-flags-the-untold-story-of-the-warsaw-ghetto-uprising-and-its-relevance-today/
    Best of luck.
    Eric.
    P. S. I am originally from the former Soviet Union, so one of my favorite movies when I was a kid was “4 tankers and a dog” (“Czetyre pancerni i pes”). Have you seen it?

  2. I only want to say that I enjoy reading your comments on American Thinker. I respect your knowledge and like your reasoning. I would have thought that you are much older than a student!
    I read a lot of blogs as I have time and rarely find (in my opinion) reasoned and concise analysis. A couple of good articles/blogs you might find interesting: Lawrence Kudlow, June 12,2008,http//www,gopusa.com/commentary/kudlow:Carp Diem,mjperry.blogspot.com, Thursday, June 12, 2008.
    I am also a conservative. For a long time I was a Republican – – now I am just a conservative! I am have to admit that I have lost faith in the Democrats and the Republicans as most are primarily self serving and either will not take a stand for the good of the country or take a stand that is illogical – – such as “Cap and Trade”. It is very disheartening.
    Keep providing the good logical comments. It is refreshing after a lot of illogical and facile comments.

  3. Today at AT you commented that conservatives had a chance to nominate a real conservative in Hunter and Huckabee, but chose not to.

    You are right about Hunter, but dead wrong about Huckabee being a conservative. He is a populist, a pro-life liberal, and some say a socialist. After he won his last re-election as governor, he turned a sharp left and if you look at his actual record, not just his rhetoric as a candidate, you can learn what really happened in AK and what republican leaders there think of Huckabee. Not only his horrible record on taxes, but in pardons, amnesty, big government programs and more. He was the actual flipper in this race, not Romney. American Thinker published a few pertinent articles about why Huckabee is simply an unacceptable candidate. You might want to look them up.

    He also has too many ethical problems to be the standard bearer of conservative values. Not only that, Huckabee represents the bigot brigade in the GOP and those who vote on religion alone. These are the folks that need to be marginalized. Huckabee’s shameless identity political tactics against Romney for his faith were destructive and deceitful. Even after he dropped out, ever the self-promoter, he is still trying to divide rather than unite the GOP.

    You might want to do more homework on Huckabee before you promote him. He is completely unacceptable in too many ways to count.

  4. Hello Mr Mazurak
    I read your article some time ago in the Plymouth and Devonport column (now the uk column, http://www.ukcolumn.org)and was interested in finding you again.
    Do you have the latest information on the costs of our being part of the EU State ? This could be invaluable at the present time of monetary instability.

  5. No, I do not. I could try to calculate it (for 2007), though, if you request such a calculation.

  6. I think it would be good for everyone who has an interest to see those figures…..to know what the costs and benefits (if any) of the EU are.

    On another subject, can I ask what you think are the reasons for the state of the UK economy, are the richer economies being brought down to the level of poorer Member States in order to ‘equalise’ Europa?
    Is it possible that the UK will be forced into the Eurozone without the promised referendum on the ‘Euro’ monetary system, when the UK’s currency falls to the same figure as the Euro?
    I am open to theories, explanations and opinions.

  7. “On another subject, can I ask what you think are the reasons for the state of the UK economy”

    1) Usurious taxes (PIT, CIT, VAT, road tax, fuel tax, the tax for plane passengers, etc.) which should be replaced by the FairTax;
    2) A bad infrastructure (there are only 2 runways at the biggest British airport; British roads are overcongested);
    3) Oil prices;
    4) Profligate governmental spending;
    5) Too few FTAs; and
    6) Neglible military spending.

    “are the richer economies being brought down to the level of poorer Member States in order to ‘equalise’ Europa?”
    Yes.

    “Is it possible that the UK will be forced into the Eurozone without the promised referendum on the ‘Euro’”
    Yes. The Lisbon Treaty would require all EU member states to adopt the common European currency.

  8. Thank you,
    I was afraid that you might agree with the usual devious reasons employed to deny us our right to vote on our own futures.
    It will be interesting to see the methods used to apply pressure until Ireland votes ‘Yes’. I cannot see that happening in the near future.
    Other countries, too, are getting angry at being forced to accept ‘equality’ laws which go against their moral heritage.

  9. Just read your response on American Thinker concerning “I’m Thanking God for Obama”–you defended America against a piece of offal’s view that America had lost respect across the globe;– thank you for your defense of the country I love. I am disturbed by the creeping Socialism here and hope that all that love what America stands for will continue to watch and criticize –much love comes your way! Brilliance is always appreciated, wonderful to read, and instructive to those willing to learn.
    P.S. Sorry for what seems a sophomoric post, but I was anxious to thank you….

  10. Marcia:
    Thank you. And you don’t need to apologise, because feedback is welcome on this blog.

  11. Are you going to run for president when you grow up? A person like yourself should be in the news! I’m sure every American would like to learn more about you, or at least know where you are so they can keep their children away! Did you clean your guns today?

  12. I’ve read your articles, it seems most of time you have no idea what you’re writing about and/or very poorly informed. Unless, of course someone is just paying you to write propaganda, then yeah I’m sorry – everyone’s gotta make a living.

    In the other case – “Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt”.

    1. Insults are not a retort. They’re fun, Anton, but not a retort. One can reason with Z Big Man.

  13. Apply that advice to yourself, Anton. You’ve failed to refute any of my claims. You’ve failed to make any specific accusations.

  14. I’m very fascinated by your website. Definitely going to keep an eye out for what you are saying.

  15. Mr. Mazurak, just a quick note to let you know I enjoy your work on AT.com and now here at your own blog, which is nicely done. Your work is always thorough and well-argued; I often learn something new by reading you.
    Have you ever considered devoting a column to military reform concerning personnel issues, i.e. how the services recruit and train people? If not, please consider such a work…

    1. Thank you, GeorgiaBoy61, for that praise. It means a lot to me. I’m pleased to hear that you often learn something new from my articles and posts. Regarding the issue of how the Services recruit and train people, I’m embarrassed to admit that I have never considered writing a blogpost about it until I read your comment. I’ll research the issue and write something on it when time allows!

  16. Were it not for Nigel Farage and Daniel Hannan , You Btritish would belong to Germany now . You Guys have enough Homegrown Issues , without involving Yourselves in American Politics ! Or do You disagree ?

  17. Lap dog for more government spending. Full blown statist, hiding out in his little blog. All salute the bootlicking Zbig.

  18. Its like you read my mind! You seem to know a lot about this, like you
    wrrote the book in it or something. I think that you
    could do with a few pics to drive the message home a
    little bit, but instead of that, this is magnificent blog.
    A fantastic read. I will definitely be back.

  19. At age 81, as Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Turbo & Jet Engines, and 1967-1987 past inventor and owner of much patented 3D yaw-pitch-roll-Thrust-Vectoring [“TV”] & Stealth [“TVS”] technologies, and making the first-ever flight-tests of TVS vehicles [1990 Book, 27 publications in AIAA Journals, Aerospace America, Aviation Week and Five Editorials up to Volme 31, 2014 of said Journal], I found your publications interesting and thought provoking

    In particular I read with much attention your detailed comparisons of NON-TVS F-15, F-16, F-18 with TVS-F-22, TVS-F-35, TV-SU-30-MKI, F-15-ACTIVE, F-16-MATV/VISTA, F-18-HARV with no-canards, new, Russian and Chinese TVS-designs.

    HOWEVER, while you mention the TV and TVS revolutions in said publications, they lack knowledge and understanding of TV and TVS critical influence in current and future global defense strategies, 6-generation-tactics, WVR vs. BVR, Helmet-Aiming-Systems, supermaneuverability, Herbst, Helicopter and other new WVR-manuvers in new post-stall flight domains, in new TVS-R&D & TVS-related conceptual designs, flight testing, flight safety, Extra-Added-Kill-Ratio Advantages in A-A and A2G manned and unmanned operations, etc.

    Absent of any such information on TV and TVS-revolutions, puts your analysis back to past technologies while you talk on advanced Technologies.

    That absence taints professional impact of your otherwise global thinking and energetic writing.

    If you care to correct said mistakes you would certainly get your Doctor Degree and gain the full respect of many in these revolutionary TV-jet technologies, civil and military.

  20. I have noticed this:
    http://www.sldinfo.com/indias-choice-rafale-su-35-or-hal-tejas/
    “AGILITY AND MANEUVERABILITY: This is a completely different matter. On this score, the Rafale is unquestionably better. It has a wing loading ratio of only 328 kg/sq m (275 kg/sq m according to Picard) at 50% fuel – far, far lower than the Su-35′s 408 kg/sq m. In addition, at a full fuel and weapon load, the Rafale’s engines provide a 0.988:1 thrust/weight ratio – slightly better than the Su-35′s 0.92:1. Points go again to the Rafale.”

    Figures of 328 kg/m2 and 276 kg/m2 are both correct, but 328 kg/m2 is at 100% fuel and 276 kg/m2 is at 50% fuel. TWR is 1,007 at 100% fuel and 1,197 at 50% fuel. Your TWR figure for Rafale is also incorrect, as Rafale M has TWR of 0,97 at combat takeoff weight and 1,14 at combat weight, but Rafale C is one that should be compared to Su-35, not Rafale M. Su-35 has wing loading of 483 kg/m2 at 100% fuel and 390 kg/m2 at 50% fuel, while TWR is 0,968 at 100% fuel and 1,199 at 50% fuel. All figures assume standard load of 6 missiles and no external fuel tanks.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: