******
- Verified Buyer
The Best Enemy Money Can Buy:Interesting and stinging discussion of the extent to which Soviet industrialization, and especially Soviet military industry and technological development, was dependent upon foreign (especially US, British, and German) technology transfer. If that were all that the author (Anthony Sutton) did, this would be 4 – star book. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case. The approach in the book is very much a polemic against US government policy (both Republican and Democratic) and US corporations which sold equipment to the former USSR. There are numerous factual errors and distortions in this book. In addition, the author tries to set himself up as an expert on US and NATO trade and strategic technology transfer policy and legislation and also as an expert on US Constitutional law. He appoints himself as prosecutor, judge, and jury in determining that the US State Department and Commerce Department are run by traitors; in his concluding chapter, he flat out accuses State and Commerce Department personnel over the decades of being guilty of treason.To cite one subject: Chapter 8 discusses “The Soviets at Sea.” On page 121, he claims that the Soviet post WW II “W” (“Whiskey” in NATO) class submarine is a direct copy of the German WW II Type XXI submarine. A review of several references on the Soviet Navy shows that this is simply untrue: the “W” class is about 2/3 the displacement and has about half the engine horsepower of the Type XXI. He also spends several pages agonizing over the fact that ALL Soviet marine diesel technology is based on two or three major western manufacturers: Burmeister & Wain, Sulzer, and M.A.N. This should hardly be a surprise: the majority of marine diesel engines in the entire world are based on these three companies, either purchased directly from them or manufactured under license obtained from them. For example, marine diesel engine manufacturers in China, South Korea, Taiwan, and japan have licenses from those three companies. So the idea that the Soviet Union obtaining similar licenses somehow constitutes treason on the part of the company CEOs or US cabinet department secretaries is definitely off the wall.In Chapter VI the author carries on how the USSR developed its post WW II rocket, missile, and jet airplane technologies from captured German technologies and scientists. This is news? The US did the same thing in the 1940s and 1950s.In Chapter VII on Soviet missiles, he claims that the guidance systems for their ICBMs were manufactured using US supplied ball bearing equipment. In Appendix B, he makes several broad – brush statements such as “All Soviet automobile, truck, and engine technology comes from the West. All shipbuilding technology in the USSR comes directly or indirectly from the US or its NATO allies.” The problem I have with these statements (and many others in the book) is that Sutton offers no source citations or independent sources for these statements; he only cites as sources books that he has authored.In Chapter XII on tanks, the author makes several claims that are just plain wrong or are distortions. For example (page 165), he claims that the diesel engine used in the T – 34 tank was developed from a German Maybach diesel engine. Well, I suppose this may actually be somewhat true – after all, the diesel engine was invented in Germany by Rudolf Diesel in the first place. I have also read other claims that the T – 34 diesel engine was derived from a French engine design. I guess it all depends on how you interpret the word “derived.” The T – 34 engine is an aluminum diesel engine and was a military technological first at the time of its development and use. The German and French designs were cast iron. Aluminum diesel engine design is quite different from cast iron designs – the cooling systems are totally different.The author then makes further questionable statements when he discusses the “Christie – system torsion bar suspension” used on post WW II Soviet tanks. The Christie suspension system is NOT a torsion bar design; it uses a spring system. ALL tank and heavy military vehicle torsion bar suspension systems developed throughout the world are based on torsion bar systems originally designed in Czechoslovakia and Germany in the 1930s. The Soviets captured hundreds of damaged German Panzer II, Panther, and Tiger tanks during WW II, all of which used torsion bar suspensions; they would not have had to import torsion bar technology in order to use such suspension systems in their post – war tanks.Page 164: he claims that the engine for the T - 34 tank is the same gasoline engine as was used in the US M – 3 medium tank and was an aero V – 12 Liberty engine. As noted above, he then claims that the T - 34 engine was a diesel engine developed from the Germans. Both of these statements are wrong – see above discussion.Page 164 again: he claims that “Walter Christie … developed the Christie tank – the basis of World War II American tanks.” This is totally incorrect: the US Army rejected the Christie tank design.Page 165: he claims that the Soviet T – 28 and T – 35 tanks “resembled” British tank models. I suppose they could; after all, tanks all over the world tend to “resemble” each other – but the Soviet tanks mentioned were not based on any British tank designs.Page 166: he states “The latest T - 62s are manufactured in three gigantic plants at Nizhny Tagil, Omsk, and Kharkov.” This is wrong -- the T – 62 was manufactured only at Nizhny Tagil (although later it was manufactured in Poland and Czecheslovakia). The Kharkov plant built T – 54 and T - 64 tanks, which are completely different designs from the T -62. Omsk initially built heavy T - 10 tanks, although eventually production of heavy tanks ceased; in the 1980s, production at Omsk switched to the T – 80 tank (of which only a small number were made).It is interesting to read the extent of foreign influences on Soviet industrial and military development. But after a while, it just gets irritating to read the author’s histrionics and never ending references to traitors, treason, and “deaf – mute –blind men” (his words) who sold equipment to the Soviets. In addition, the author’s numerous distortions and outright false statements inevitably lead an intelligent and knowledgeable reader to wonder about other statements and conclusions in the book.For much more objective and balanced discussions of the former Soviet military industry and weapons manufacture and design, I suggest the following: “Soviet / Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices,” Institute for Defense Analysis (1995); “The Price of the Past” by Caddy (1996);”The Soviet Economy and the Red Army 1930 – 1945” by Dunn (1995); and “The Soviet Defense Industry” by Cooper (1991).This book is one of the most important about the subject of manipulation by a part of the ruling elite and its betrayal of the united state people and its constitution.Anthony Sutton is without doubt one of the best scholar on the subject as much as a courageous man.Nothing it says rings false and that s the terrible point that lead us to think that we truly live in a messed up world .,The crisis of cuba in 1968 would have never happened without these treator of the american ruling class.i didn t rate it five star for obvious reason as the cover of the book is different from the one i got even though the book is a must read. to understand what is going on i this worldThe corruption in DC and corporate America is beyond belief. Selling our technology to those who would use it against our own men in Vietnam is just the tip of the iceberg."The Best Enemy Money Can Buy", authored by Antony C. Sutton is afact-based work, published in 1986, but based on research undertakenby the same author in throughout his career, particularly in thelate 60's and early 1970's.Many an academic is pigeonholed in a specific area of expertise, inwhich they push the envelope further, in matters of investigation,research, theories, formulae, theses in a framework of universitylevel graduate work (Master's, PhD's, professorship, etc.)In the case of Sutton, the area was the Cold War between Russia andthe USA mainly, or the Western Countries with NATO generally. Also,this work and worth as an investigator was measuring the performanceof both world rival super-powers, in that Cold War competition, andanalysing how well Russia was doing, and by which methods, focusingon technology in particular.In this treatise, Sutton expounds over the above subject over morethan 210 pages, using his advance language skills in reading Germanand Russian publications, and retaining the relevant military andindustrial developments, achievements and facts contained therein,to explain them to readers, in a concise, legible, understandablemanner.Although at times over-simplified, Sutton exhaustively documents(going over every nook and cranny, at times) how the USA almostevery single time, was ready, willing and more than able to createthe best enemy that Russians could afford to become, monetarily. Andif they didn't have the cash to buy the technology and know-how, theUSA was more than happy to raise funds from taxpayers and theFederal Reserve to finance the production and export of machinery andfinished industrial parts to Russia, so the former Soviet Unioncould become a lethal, respectable, modern military competitor toitself.How this could happen, in a Cold War scenario, during which 20million perished in WW2, after which perhaps 142,000 US Militaryperished in the Korean War, and 58,000 US Military perished in theVietnamese War has many hypotheses.The first, that micromanaging the USA's industries, factories,scientists, exported goods, research labs is impossible from thegovernment level. Secondly, that army casualties are a minor aspector cost in the overall goal of increasing the USA's balance sheet,as measured by the GDP, scientific and economic progress,manufacturing and exporting increasingly, no matter which is theother country doing the importing. Thirdly, that politicans to getelected make backroom deals to break export controls to powerfulindustrialists, in exchange for political party contributions. Inturn, the elected officials maneuver their hand-chosen candidatesinto the board of directors of major multinational corporations toget the deals done internationally, and name them to the properexecutive branch positions. This way, they eliminate those publicservants and board directors that had been opposing the exports ofsensitive machinery and machinery, under the notion of a NationalInterests, in avoiding lethal technologies from falling into thehands of Cold War enemies that down the line, could be used againthe USA and Free World.As stated, the author is exhaustive in his research. For example,the ships delivering supplies to Korea and to the Vietnamese fromRussia, were powered by diesel engines designed, built and exportedto the USSR. The trucks moving ammunition, supplies and enemycombatants were built by Ford Motor in Moscow. The assembly lines,metalurgical processes and machines all American made, and exported.The Russian bomber aircraft from the 1930's powered by clone enginesof American planes, whose designed were sold and exported to theUSSR. Entire watch factories, steel foundries, automobile assemblylines (such as Ford, Fiat, 20 ton trucks) were disassembled,exported, and reassembled back in the USSR. The Soviet munitions formachine guns, rifles, artillery, all powered by sulfuric acid andother substances built in giant American designed, engineered, and builtplants in Moscow and surroundings, exported by Du Pont and similarcorporations maximizing shareholder profits, as had done earlierUS corporations, albeit at strengthening a military rival to theUSA.Interesting historical facts are narrated, such as the slave laborof some 15,000 captured German rocket scientists, aircraft andengine engineer specialists, POW's, that were forced to disassemble,export and reassemble back in the USSR, WW2 era rocket assemblylines, factories of aircraft, ship and submarine engines, over aperiod of 10 years or longer, for bringing their military -gradeperformance upto par with NATO countries, and with the US.The revelations are stunning in their breadth, and significance, tothe point that ICBM's would not have been possible without theagreement of the State Department of the USA in the export ofworld-class, unique, military-grade ball-bearing precision machiningequipment to RUSSIA, for example.In sum, while the young men and women in uniform were put in harm's way,at the highest levels, even before WW2, powerful political,industrial and scientific interests were joining together, to turninto reality, enormous industrial projects all inspired, designed,built and overseen ( and often, financed ) by Americans for useoutside America, and in the final analysis, potentially against America.Der Historiker Anthony Cyril Sutton liefert in diesem Werk hieb- und stichfestes dokumentarisches Beweismaterial für die - ausSicht der Mainstream-Geschichtsschreibung - "merkwürdige" Unterstützung der UdSSR durch "westliche" Machteliten. Warum, fragen sich heute noch viele Menschen, wurde die Sowjetunion über die Jahre ihres Bestehens mit insgesamt mehreren Billionen (!) Dollar "Hilfs-" bzw. "Entwicklungsgeldern" künstlich unnötig lange am Leben erhalten? Warum die Transfers von Hochtechnologie aus der Waffen- und Raumfahrtforschung u.v.m? Leser, deren Horizont nicht bei den putzigen Malen nach Zahlen-Geschichtsbüchern aufhört, mit denen man in der Schule eingenebelt wird, wissen es natürlich: weil die UdSSR als Feindbild benötigt wurde - nämlich zur geopolitischen Transformation der Welt in Richtung der sogenannten "Neuen Weltordnung". Sie war, wenn man so will, jahrzehntelang die "geostrategische Brechstange", um den Planeten auf die seit Jahrhunderten geplante "Weltregierung" vorzubereiten. Der Bolschewismus bzw. spätere Kommunismus, finanziert und befördert von denselben internationalen NWO-Bankiers, die heute über das (ebenfalls von ihnen aufgebaute, bewaffnete und finanzierte) Nachfolger-Schreckgespenst des "Internationalen Terrorismus" ihre Agenda zu vollenden trachten, war ein "Schmiermittel", ein nutzdialektisches Feindbild (Problem-Reaktion-Lösung bzw. These - Antithese - Synthese). Bücher wie dieses sind es - zusammen mit anderen unverzichtbaren Werken Suttons wie "Wall Street und die Bolschewistische Revolution", "Wall Street und der Aufstieg Hitlers" oder der Schrift über den "Skull & Bones"-Club - dank derer alle, die sich für echte historische Zusammenhänge und Tiefenanalysen interessieren, sich nicht mehr mit dem unbefriedigend oberflächlichen Plumpaquatsch zufrieden geben müssen, der heute leider immer noch im Geschichtsunterricht oder in der Trivialpresse gelehrt, oder besser: ausgeleert wird.
