Biden’s ‘Nighttime in America’ State of the Union
By Ron Paul | Institute for Peace and Prosperity | March 11, 2024
Last week President Biden delivered a dark and angry speech meant to convince the low percentage of Americans who still feel positive about his presidency that everything is fine and will only get better if he is re-elected for a second term.
Unfortunately we have come a long way from the optimism of a Ronald Reagan, who won a second term partially on the popularity of his “Morning in America” campaign commercials. Reagan was far from a perfect president, but it was that sense of optimism in otherwise difficult times that resulted in a record re-election victory. Biden’s speech, by contrast, was dark and angry, attacking not only his political opponents but even seeming to threaten the Supreme Court!
As constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley observed recently, “In some ways, the State of the Union speech may have died when former Speaker Nancy Pelosi ripped up the address of former President Donald Trump… While many in the media celebrated her lack of decorum and respect, she tore up something far more important than a speech. She shredded decades of tradition of civility and any remaining residue of restraint in our politics.”
We seem to be becoming a nation that would rather scream at each other than listen to each other.
The message of Biden’s speech was that if you do not support the re-election of Joe Biden, you are an insurrectionist and hate America and democracy. Seven years after the launch of the “Russiagate” hoax against then-candidate Donald Trump, it becomes clearer that the line “our democracy” means it’s only democratic when their side gets elected.
It is understandable that Biden is so angry. Despite all the lying with statistics about the economy, Americans can clearly see for themselves how inflation is undermining the standard of living. Of course this is not all Biden’s fault – Republicans in control of the House show little interest in cutting spending – but people generally blame the president for the state of the economy.
We are no better off on foreign policy either. President Biden started his speech by comparing Russian President Vladimir Putin with Hitler, claiming that Putin is “on the march” in Europe just as Hitler was in 1941, and that just as in those days, if he is not stopped in Ukraine he will continue to rampage through the continent. It was blatant fearmongering, based on no evidence. In fact, as Putin told Tucker Carlson just weeks ago, he has no interest in taking the war beyond Ukraine. But Biden is determined to spend another $61 billion on the failed proxy war in Ukraine and he is willing to say whatever he feels necessary to get that money.
Biden also introduced a bizarre plan to build a temporary pier on the shores of Gaza so that the US could deliver aid to starving Palestinians. Considering the billions of dollars and tens of thousands of missiles we have shipped to Israel, wouldn’t it just be easier to inform the Israeli prime minister that we would either be delivering aid to Palestinians over land, or else?
In all, Biden’s final State of the Union before the election reveals a president and administration that is out of gas and out of ideas. It also reveals a country deep in bankruptcy – both moral and economic. It is high time for a nationwide movement toward liberty.
Iranian firms turn the page with $20 billion gas deals
Press TV – March 11, 2024
Iranian companies have signed contracts worth $20 billion to boost gas pressure at the giant South Pars (SP) field in the Persian Gulf, in a plan which is expected to generate $900 billion in revenue.
This is the most strategic project in the history of Iran’s oil and gas industry and its long-sought empowerment of domestic entities, under which 90 trillion cubic feet of gas and two billion barrels of gas condensates will be available for use.
Top Iranian companies Petropars, Oil Industries Engineering and Construction (OIEC), Khatam al-Anbiya Construction Headquarters, MAPNA Group, and a consulting company are the contractors of the megaproject.
They inked the contracts in Tehran on Sunday in a ceremony attended by Minister of Petroleum Javad Owji and National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) Managing Director Mohsen Khojastehmehr.
The world’s biggest gas field is shared between Iran and Qatar which is also installing platforms to boost pressure in the field.
The massive project has created an opportunity to kickstart economic prosperity and employment in the face of sanctions. It has also allowed Iranian producers and companies to proactively engage in the economic growth and industrial development of the country and neutralize the sanctions.
Inattention to domestic companies in various sectors in the past and overreliance on foreign expertise and knowhow undermined their growth and expansion, but the accruing exponential costs on a macro level cascaded on the country which found itself in the lurch for the execution of major projects as foreign firms withdrew in the face of sanctions.
This is while the Iranian companies had always proven their mettle through shouldering grave responsibilities in the most difficult times from eight years of the war on Iran in the 1980s to unfair Western sanctions imposed intermittently since the Islamic Revolution in 1970.
If domestic companies are trusted and engaged in industrial projects, not only will it provide an opportunity to take advantage of their power, capacity and experience, but it will also protect and generate jobs and help achieve the high economic goals of the country.
Every project ceded to domestic companies means providing employment for a number of young people and professionals in the country. This is especially important in provinces such as Khuzestan, where employment does not match the capacities and facilities available in the region.
Therefore, supporting domestic companies – which, of course, does not mean financial support, but giving them a share in industrial projects – will have an irreplaceable effect in the country’s economic growth, job creation, national production jump, economic prosperity and neutralization of sanctions.
Domestic companies, if supported and trusted, can dispense us from the need to foreign firms and provide for their growth and expansion, enabling them to undertake projects overseas and win honor for the region.
While sanctions have forced the governing bodies to change their attitude towards domestic companies and entrust them with tasks which normally they would have not, it should be noted that Iranian producers are not perennial supporters of sanctions. Rather, they would like to interact and acquire world-class technologies from foreign companies to empower themselves.
In sum, many Iranian companies have the ability to produce the equipment needed for projects with the lowest cost and the highest quality and provide it to the applicants, provided that officials continue to put their trust in their capabilities both during the times of sanctions and in their absence.
Musk comments on US attempt to weaken Russia
RT | March 11, 2024
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has agreed with investor David Sacks’ view that Washington’s attempts to weaken Russia have “come true in reverse” and in reality only made it stronger.
Sharing his opinion on the Ukraine conflict in an interview posted on X on Sunday, Sacks called it “Biden’s big backfire.”
“We’ve made the Russian military stronger, it’s larger than it was before, it produces far more weapons, the industrial base is ramped up. Plus it’s now battle-tested and battle-hardened, especially against Western weapons,” he said.
Musk appeared to agree with Sacks, commenting on the post on X: “Unfortunately, this is true.”
Citing the size of Russia’s army compared to Ukraine’s, Sacks stated that Biden has “created” a much more “formidable” Russian military. Meanwhile, it’s the US that has seen its stockpiles “depleted and hollowed out,” he argued.
The economic sanctions on Russia have become another major miscalculation of Biden’s policies, according to Sacks. He believes that the idea to “crush” Russia with sanctions was delusional as the country’s economy stabilized and even outperformed G7 economies in 2023.
“The Russian economy is growing faster than any of the G7 economies. It’s really booming and it’s our European allies’ economies that have been crushed by the sanctions,” he noted.
But it is Ukraine that has been suffering the most from US involvement in the conflict, he argued. He attacked Biden who claimed that the US would “help ease the suffering of the Ukrainians” but in fact, Washington’s support “of this proxy war and our willingness to fight to the last Ukrainian” has led to a “humanitarian catastrophe.”
This is not the first time the two men have been in alignment on such issues. Earlier this month, Musk agreed with Sacks’ statement on X that NATO “faced an existential crisis” after the collapse of the Soviet Union and decided to embark on an expansion spree to fill the void.
The US has been Ukraine’s primary backer and has provided over $111 billion in military and financial assistance. However, in recent months, US aid has subsided drastically as the administration of President Joe Biden has struggled to overcome Republican resistance to its efforts to push through another $60 billion for Ukraine.
Meanwhile, Moscow has said that the US and its allies who continue to arm Ukraine cannot prevent Russia from achieving its goals and are only prolonging the suffering of Ukrainians.
Moldova about to escalate tensions with Russia
By Lucas Leiroz | March 11, 2024
Tensions in the post-Soviet space are escalating. Moldova recently signed an important military cooperation agreement with France, which tends to generate serious consequences for the stability of regional security, considering Paris’ interest in fomenting war against Moscow. In this context, many analysts fear that new violence could emerge in the pro-Russian separatist region of Transnistria, as Russia would be forced to intervene in such a conflict.
On March 7, Moldovan President Maia Sandu signed a military pact with France during a visit to Paris. On the occasion, French President Emmanuel Macron promised “unwavering support” on security and defense issues. Both sides agree that increased defense cooperation is a necessary step to confront what they call the “Russian advance.” According to them, if Moscow is not contained in Ukraine, the Russian government will launch new military actions in neighboring countries to gain more territories and zones of influence. In this sense, increasing French military cooperation would be a way of ensuring that the war “does not spread” towards Moldova.
The agreement establishes military cooperation in several sectors, mainly in arms supply contracts. Furthermore, French troops are expected to train the Moldovan armed forces. Moldovan officials have said recently that the country needs immediate help to reform its military structure to be ready for a possible conflict. Alone, Moldova is unable to overcome its current military weakness, which is why it is seeking Western help.
In parallel to this, Macron’s France has been marked by the constant attempt to further militarize the post-Soviet space and foment destabilization in the Russian strategic environment. Paris has been the main agent of disruption in Russian-Western relations recently, mobilizing “war preparation” efforts against Moscow in Europe. This is part of President Macron’s personal project to designate himself internationally as a “leader of all of Europe”, but it is also a reflection of the strategic irrationality that has today become a central aspect of Western foreign policy.
Previously, France had already started a similar project to fuel conflict in the post-Soviet space through Armenia. Paris has been endorsing the Pashinyan regime and stimulating anti-Russian sentiments in the Caucasus. The French government is playing a fundamental role in NATO’s plan to control both sides of the Armenia-Azerbaijan crisis, creating both an alliance between the US, EU and Yerevan and an alliance between Turkey and Baku. The aim of all this is simply to increase NATO’s presence in the Caucasus and generate military pressure on the Russian strategic environment.
Now, by encouraging Moldova to militarize, France is taking a step further in its anti-Russian destabilization project. Moldova has an extremely fragile domestic security architecture, as since 1992 the country has faced a separatist problem in the Transnistria region. Civil conflict has been frozen for decades – largely due to the presence of Russian peacekeepers in the region, dissuading the Moldovan government from launching a military offensive. However, like any other frozen conflict, hostilities could resume at any time if relations between the sides continue to deteriorate.
Moscow never recognized Transnistria as an independent country. For the Russians, it belongs to Moldovan territory, but both sides are required to reach a common agreement. As a region with a strong presence of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, where the Russian language is considered native by citizens, the region deserves a special status in Moldovan politics, as well as autonomy rights must be created for the local people. Moscow has already stated that if such peace conditions are established, Russian troops will leave the region. More than that, Russia has also made it clear that it is even willing to destroy the Soviet-era weapons depots that remain in Transnistria, advancing regional demilitarization.
However, instead of seeking demilitarization, pro-Western sectors in Moldova prefer to increase ties with NATO and create even more problems with Russia. For Moldovan elites, Russia is an enemy country that must be approached with hostility. For this reason, since 2022, the West has tacitly encouraged Moldova to seek a military solution in Transnistria. The calculation is simple: the hope is to force Moscow to send troops to protect the Transnistrian people, creating a new proxy conflict and opening yet another flank for Russia.
There has been an internal balance in Moldova. Some political sectors continue to object to considering Russia and Transnistria as “threats”, but the rapprochement with France indicates that pro-war groups are gaining momentum in national politics. It is important for Moldovans to remember that they are not part of NATO, and are therefore not protected by the American military umbrella – which means that, if there really is a conflict, they will be abandoned by the West and used as mere cannon fodder, precisely as happened with Ukraine.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
UK-made tank mired during Ukrainian demo for media

RT | March 11, 2024
A Ukrainian tank crew got their UK-donated Challenger 2 stuck in a bog during a special demonstration for a British tabloid, the newspaper has reported.
The incident happened during an exercise The Sun described as being “close to the front line” and within view of plumes of smoke emanating from Russian airstrikes. With its crew atop the turret, the British-made tank attempted to drive through a gully, only becoming stuck at its deepest point.
Images shared by the newspaper showed the vehicle stuck in mud deep enough to fully cover its tracks. The incident confirmed that the British tank’s weight is an issue, The Sun said. An experienced squadron commander “blasted the rookie crew for going too slowly through the gully.”
The newspaper added that the tank team leader “turned the mishap into a training exercise” by calling in a second tank to haul the first one out of the mud.
The report noted Ukrainian praise for the tank’s main gun, but added that the conflict had not given the British military hardware a chance to demonstrate its ability in a classic tank-on-tank battle. Ukraine has been using the armor to target bunkers from a long distance and for charges on Russian trenches.
The maneuvers are a bluff, according to the tabloid, because the tanks “did not have the right type of ammunition for attacking infantry.”
While the British tank is superior to Soviet-made T-80s in many respects, Ukrainian crews told the outlet that they weigh some 20 tons more and have a 30% lower power-to-weight ratio, which limits their maneuverability.
German-made Leopard 2 tanks, which have a similar weight, have also reportedly become stuck in soft ground, according to images shared online.
The Challenger 2s are not only being bogged down, but are breaking down. Five of the 14 tanks donated by the UK are not operational because spare parts can take months to arrive, and Kiev lacks skilled mechanics to maintain them. With battle-damaged tanks accounted for, only half of the UK-donated squadron remain fit for battle.
The British tabloid also reported manpower shortages on the conflict frontline, meaning trained tank crews are forced to dig trenches. Nevertheless, the Ukrainians expressed gratitude to the British government for the tanks and, via the tabloid, asked London to “send more.”
German FM Open to UK’s Taurus Swap Proposal as ‘Option’
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 11.03.2024
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has repeatedly opposed the idea of supplying Ukraine with missiles capable of striking deep into Russian territory. However, recently UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron expressed London’s readiness to assist Berlin in overcoming any obstacles preventing the delivery of Taurus long-range missiles to the Kiev regime.
Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock is open to her British colleague David Cameron’s suggestion of a swap of long-range cruise missiles for their further transfer to Ukraine, Der Spiegel reported.
In particular, Germany could supply Taurus cruise missiles to the United Kingdom, and in return the British side would transfer Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. Thus, Berlin would formally be relieved of responsibility for providing cruise missiles to the Kiev regime, the outlet stated.
“That would be an option,” Baerbock was quoted as saying regarding the proposed exchange on ARD’s program Caren Miosga.
The German minister on Sunday pointed out that exchanges of a similar nature had already taken place with respect to other material. This, according to the outlet, was a nod at Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s previous use of indirect military aid to Ukraine, when he was reluctant to send Leopard 2 main battle tanks to the conflict zone. In January, 2023, Berlin announced it would send its Leopard 2A6 main battle tanks to Ukraine, also agreeing to provide re-export licenses for other countries wanting to supply these German-made armored vehicles. Within weeks of their arrival on the battlefield, Russian forces began hunting the tanks down with missiles and kamikaze drones.
UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron recently came up with a potential way to persuade Germany to supply Ukraine with Taurus missiles. During a recent interview with German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, he stated that London was ready to help Berlin solve problems preventing the delivery of the cruise missiles to Kiev, or consider the option of buying German missiles and then transferring British Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. Cameron did not discount the possibility of imposing certain restrictions before supplying the weaponry to Kiev.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has repeatedly dismissed the idea of providing Ukraine with missiles capable of striking deep into Russian territory, as such support would come dangerously close to direct German participation in the conflict.
If the swap scheme of Britain procuring Taurus missiles from Germany in exchange for supplying Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine comes to pass, Kiev would likely get the long-range missiles eventually, pundits told Sputnik.
The issue of Taurus transfers made the headlines in the wake of a leaked conversation between German military officials discussing a potential attack on the Crimea Bridge.
On March 1, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT and Rossiya Segodnya, Sputnik’s parent media group, published the text of a conversation involving four Bundeswehr representatives discussing a potential attack on the Crimean Bridge with Taurus missiles. The talk, which took place on February 19, involved Inspector of the German Air Force Ingo Gerhartz, Brig. Gen. Frank Graefe, head of the Operations and Exercises Department at the Air Force Command in Berlin, and two employees of the air operations center of the Bundeswehr Space Command.
After the intercepted war talk, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz once again ruled out supplying the missiles to Ukraine since it could require the presence of German troops on the ground to help deploy them. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that long-range Taurus missiles would not be decisive for the conflict in Ukraine and would only help in certain areas, but that Germany does not intend to cross this line.
“We have always emphasized that such long-range missiles will not solve this [crisis],” Pistorius said at a joint press conference with Finnish Defense Minister Antti Hakkanen.
The Kremlin reiterated that the contents of leaked conversations between German officials proved “the direct involvement of the collective West in the conflict in Ukraine.”
In the wake of Ukraine’s bungled counteroffensive, the Zelensky regime has been pressing Germany for the delivery of the missiles, which have a range of 500 kilometers (311 miles) and could strike deep inside Russian territory.
Moscow has repeatedly underscored that Western arms shipments to Kiev and the training of Ukrainian servicemen only prolong the conflict and will be unable to alter the situation at the battlefield.
Polish embassy in US calls warning by Polish-US communities not to engage in ‘unwinnable’ Ukraine war the ‘Kremlin’s rhetoric’
POLSATNEWS | March 11, 2024
Representatives from several Polish-American communities in the United States have sent a letter to the president and prime minister of Poland ahead of their joint visit to the White House, in which they opposed the “deeper involvement of Poland in the war” in Ukraine.
The letter to Prime Minister Donald Tusk and President Andrzej Duda expressed communities’ “firm opposition” to Poland’s further involvement in the conflict and urged Warsaw not to engage in an unwinnable war.
The authors appealed for NATO to remain a defensive alliance, not a “tool for fulfilling the geopolitical ambitions of its dominant members.” They argued that “Poland should not be drawn into or forced into military engagement beyond its borders unless it is first attacked.”
The strong stance against Polish involvement in Ukraine prompted a significant response from the Polish embassy in Washington.
“We are concerned about the content and tone of statements reflecting the Kremlin’s rhetoric,” stated Poland’s Ambassador to the U.S. Marek Magierowski.
The embassy emphasized that “the only way to ensure a peaceful future for Europe and the transatlantic community is by ensuring Russia’s strategic defeat in its war.”
Furthermore, the Polish diaspora was urged to “advocate for our interests, which include further assistance for Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression.” The embassy also expressed gratitude for the contributions of millions of Poles towards Poland’s integration with NATO.
Andrzej Duda and Donald Tusk are due to visit Washington on March 12.
Trump has plan to end Ukraine conflict – Orban
RT | March 11, 2024
Donald Trump intends to end the Ukraine conflict, if reelected as US president, and has a “detailed plan” to do so, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban told local media, after meeting the presumed Republican nominee.
The former US leader repeatedly claimed on his campaign trail that, if he had remained in the White House for a second term, there would be no hostilities between Moscow and Kiev. If voted back in, he promises to end the conflict “in 24 hours” by applying pressure on stakeholders.
Orban, who spoke with Trump at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Friday, did not explain how exactly the American would do that, but said that cutting the flow of US aid was a crucial part of the plan.
”If the US will not provide the money, Europeans on their own will not be able to finance this war, and then the war will end,” Orban said in an interview with M1 broadcaster on Sunday.
During his presidency, Trump had shown himself to be “a man of peace,” the Hungarian leader claimed. That stance puts him in alignment with Hungary, unlike the administration of US President Joe Biden and many members of the EU, he added.
”The American Democratic government and the leadership of the EU, as well as the leadership of the largest EU member states are pro-war governments. Donald Trump is pro-peace, Hungary is pro-peace. At the bottom of everything lies this difference,” Orban declared.
The Kremlin declined to weigh in on the remarks, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying on Monday that Orban’s account of Trump’s intentions was too vague for any specific commentary.
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky previously expressed skepticism about Trump’s ability to deliver on the promise. He said if the plan was feasible, the American politician should share it with the public, or at least with Kiev. The Ukrainian government claims that a “just peace” requires a military victory over Russia and that it would agree to nothing short of that.
Moscow has said that its strategic goals in the military operation against Kiev will be achieved one way or another. The US and its allies, who continue to arm Ukraine, cannot change that outcome and are only prolonging the suffering of the country’s people, Russian officials have stated.
Missiles near Russia, F-35s with thermonuclear bombs… Is NATO ready for war?
By Drago Bosnic | March 11, 2024
NATO’s never-ending encroachment on Russia’s borders is breaking world records in mere days. Just last week, a new major airbase was opened in Albania, despite the fact that Tirana effectively has no air force. NATO was also given full exterritoriality rights, meaning that Albania officially gave up on its already highly dubious “sovereignty”. Deployment of major ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) and strike platforms in the area can certainly bolster the belligerent alliance’s highly destabilizing presence in both Southeastern and Eastern Europe. And yet, this is not enough. Namely, on March 7, Lithuanian Defense Minister Arvydas Anusauskas confirmed that NATO would also station “Patriot” SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems in his country. While Lithuania doesn’t border mainland Russia, it has an extensive border with Belarus and Moscow’s Kaliningrad oblast (region).
“This year, the rotational air defense system will finally become operational, at least partially,” Anusauskas stated at a press conference in Vilnius, adding: “Our goal is to have a rotation similar to the air policing mission… This principle would not be a one-off thing for several months but would cover all of our calendar months and significantly increase our air defense capabilities.”
While the “Patriot” has been intentionally overhyped by the mainstream propaganda machine, particularly with laughable claims of shooting down “half of the Russian Aerospace Forces in a week”, the move can certainly be considered highly destabilizing. It’s not yet clear how many of these systems could be deployed, but given the much smaller distances that it needs to cover than in Ukraine, deploying the “Patriot” in any of the Baltic states can certainly be more consequential. Namely, the detection range of its AN/MPQ-65 radar (officially 150 km) could provide coverage into the airspace of both Belarus and the Kaliningrad oblast. In addition, Finland is acquiring similar, albeit more advanced air defense assets, including the Israeli “David’s Sling”, which has a significantly longer maximum engagement range. Amassing such SAM systems so close to Russia’s northwest is deeply destabilizing and antagonistic.
While other NATO member states in the relative vicinity of Russia’s borders also operate “Patriot” SAM systems, most notably Romania and (soon) Poland, both of these are far enough not to make the air defense system a strategic issue. On the other hand, other much longer-range weapons, such as the “Aegis Ashore” ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems, are set to become fully operational in Poland in 2024, while another is already active in Romania (since at least 2016). It’s part of the wider ship-borne “Aegis” system that provides a level of strategic depth that neither the “Patriot” nor “David’s Sling” could. And while the system’s capabilities and effectiveness are certainly up for debate (particularly against Russian hypersonic missiles), the massive increase in their presence is of quantitative importance, which could at least partially ameliorate their qualitative shortcomings and other deficiencies.
And yet, this certainly isn’t the end of NATO’s highly destabilizing activities in Europe. Namely, its vassals and satellite states such as Finland are acquiring the F-35s, while also making it possible to accommodate other jets of the same type from the United States and other NATO member states. The forward presence of USAF F-35s in Eastern and Central Europe keeps expanding and getting ever closer to Russia. Apart from Finland, it now includes Germany, Czechia and Poland, while the Dutch, Belgian and Italian F-35s will also be forward deployed to the area around the Baltic Sea. Worse yet, the jet has been certified to carry thermonuclear weapons, specifically the B61-12 bomb, with several NATO members having the ability to use them through nuclear sharing agreements with the US. This includes the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Italy, all of whom either operate F-35s or have them on order.
Namely, on March 9, the F-35 was confirmed to be certified to carry B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs. Although this refers only to the conventional F-35A, with F-35B and F-35C variants still lacking such capabilities, the latter two are deployed in much smaller numbers. The conventional F-35A is the most common version used by the USAF and other NATO air forces. The possibility of their large-scale deployment in Finland and the Baltic states gives the US premier strike capabilities, far greater than Russia ever had in Cuba 60 years ago.
What’s more, both high-ranking officials in Moscow and independent experts regularly warn about the development of new thermonuclear weapons in America, including the so-called “nuclear super-fuse” technology that the US has been testing for decades, particularly under the Obama administration. Investigative historian Eric Zuesse wrote extensively on the topic.
He has repeatedly been warning that the sole purpose of this controversial technology is to exponentially amplify the effectiveness of America’s first-strike capabilities. And while some might discard Zuesse’s warnings and even decry them as “doom and gloom fantasy” or the mythical “Russian disinformation”, recent developments only reinforce his already sound hypothesis. What’s more, NATO is directly involved in these plans. Back in October last year, the belligerent alliance concluded the “Steadfast Noon” nuclear exercise involving approximately 60 aircraft, including nuclear-capable F-16s and B-52 strategic bombers simulating strikes with B61-12 bombs. It should be noted that these bombs will also be augmented by the upcoming B61-13 variant. And although the nature of this upgrade is classified, it’s safe to assume that they will also include the aforementioned “nuclear super-fuse” technology.
The Pentagon already announced that these new thermonuclear bombs will be comparable to the B61-7 version that can have a yield of up to 340 kt (roughly equivalent to 22-23 Hiroshima bombs). Faced with such escalation, Russia doesn’t exactly have a lot of choice but to be prepared. This is precisely why Russia has been conducting nationwide drills simulating an all-out nuclear attack, as well as its own retaliatory strikes on the aggressors. Earlier, the US FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) conducted similar warning exercises.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
New calls for inquiry into Climate Change Committee
Net Zero Watch | March 11, 2024
Campaign group Net Zero Watch is again calling for an inquiry into the Climate Change Committee (CCC), the Government’s official advisers on decarbonisation. The move follows revelations at the weekend that the organisation’s chief executive, Chris Stark, had tried to use obfuscation to “kill” questions over the adequacy of its energy system model, rather than addressing them directly. This behaviour put Stark in direct breach of the Nolan standards for public officeholders.
The scandal, published in the Sunday Telegraph, is just the latest of a series of controversies that have dogged the CCC since its inception.
-
In 2013, it was revealed that CCC chairman Lord Deben had a conflict of interest, retaining his position as chairman of a company involved in windfarm installations after his appointment. He had told the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee that he would divest himself of all such interests if appointed.
-
In 2019, it was revealed that Lord Deben’s family company was still taking large sums of money from businesses working in the environmental sphere.
-
In 2023, it was revealed that those payments to Lord Deben’s company were not properly disclosed in the Register of Interests.
-
In 2021, it was revealed that the CCC had used spurious weather data in their modelling, thus enabling them to reduce the capacity of electricity generation and storage equipment apparently required.
-
It was also revealed that the CCC used spurious figures for the cost of electric vehicles, thus reducing the apparent costs.
-
The CCC tried to hide its model from public scrutiny, spending tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayer’s money fighting a lawful Freedom of Information request.
-
More recently, the CCC admitted that its electricity system modelling is inadequate. The resulting understatement of costs is as much as tens of billions of pounds per year.
-
It has also been revealed that the CCC “waves away” most of the cost problem, simply by assuming extraordinary cost reductions in future. With current technology, the cost of Net Zero will be hundreds of billions of pounds higher.
Net Zero Watch director Andrew Montford said:
The list of scandals at the Climate Change Committee seems to be endless, but Parliamentarians seem to want to let them get away with it. If the House of Commons Energy Security and Net Zero Committee again fails to launch an inquiry into the governance of the CCC, and in particular Chris Stark’s management and the adequacy of the modelling that underpinned the 2019 Net Zero report, it will look very bad.


