IS GREEN ENERGY GOING ATOMIC?
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | December 12, 2024
As big tech goes all in on artificial intelligence, the monumental amount of energy expected to be needed in the coming years has the 4 of the biggest US tech companies turning to nuclear energy. With lofty net zero goals appearing to not be coming to fruition, will nuclear be the new green energy?
OCCUPIED: Former IDF Volunteer to Chair House Foreign Affairs Committee, Trump Approves
By Frankie Stockes | SPN | December 12, 2024
At the behest of President-elect Donald Trump, GOP House Leadership has named Israeli-funded-and-tied Congressman Brian Mast as the new House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, marking the first known time in American history that a veteran of a foreign military has led a congressional committee. Last year, Mast also became the first known member of Congress to wear the uniform of a foreign military to work at the U.S. Capitol, when he donned his IDF uniform in support of Israel’s campaign in Gaza, following the outbreak of war.
Assuming he’s confirmed by the GOP House Conference, Rep. Mast (R-FL) will succeed Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) as the Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, giving the staunchly pro-Israel Mast jurisdiction over ALL of America’s foreign relations that come through Congress, including war powers, treaties, and the deployment of American troops overseas.
These duties are especially relevant to Mast’s background and loyalties, as he is a staunch opponent of a two-state solution in the Middle East, supporting Israel’s continued seizure of Palestinian land and the expansion of Israel’s borders.
Mast has even cheerled the wholesale slaughter of Palestinian civilians, telling the media in 2023 that he “would encourage the other side to not so lightly throw around the idea of innocent Palestinian civilians… I don’t think we would so lightly throw around the term innocent Nazi civilians during World War II.”
The Israeli press has rejoiced in Mast’s installation as chairman, with The Times of Israel calling him a “pugnacious defender of Israel in [America’s] Congress” in an article published this week.
“The US House of Representatives elected Florida Representative Brian Mast, a zealous pro-Israel Republican who has volunteered with a group that assists the Israeli army, to chair the powerful House Foreign Affairs Committee,” The Times of Israel report went on, before revealing that President-elect Trump is behind the pending installation of Brian Mast.
“Insiders say that President-elect Donald Trump lobbied the Republican Steering Committee, which names committee chairs, to choose Mast.”
Mast, a self-proclaimed Christian and a U.S. Army veteran who lost both of his legs in the Middle East, later volunteered to serve the IDF and says on his campaign website that his worldview was shaped at Israeli “Shabbat tables.”
“I worked to strengthen the relationship between our two countries, as both a private citizen and as a soldier, because the national security of the United States is directly tied to the strength of Israel,” says Mast, who also says he will “advance policies” that are favorable to Israel and even use the force of the United States government to ensure that the American People are FORCED to support Israel.
“I will do all I can to put an end to the dangerous Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement,” he says.
Mast’s ties to Israel go well beyond serving the IDF and since his political career began, he’s received more than half a million dollars from the Israel lobby, with AIPAC holding the distinction of being his top donor.
UN Security Council ‘remains paralyzed’ by US – Russia
RT | December 14, 2024
By abusing its veto power, the US has made the UN Security Council incapable of enforcing peace in the Middle East, Russia has said.
The Russian Foreign Ministry released its statement after the UN General Assembly (UN GA) adopted two resolutions on the war in Gaza, including a resolution calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, which is similar to a document earlier blocked by the US at the Security Council. Unlike resolutions passed by the Security Council, the resolutions adopted by the General Assembly are legally non-binding.
A resolution passed on Wednesday called for “an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire,” as well for “or the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.” The second document confirmed “full support” for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), and “deplored” Israel’s legislation that banned the agency’s work in the West Bank and Gaza.
In a statement on Friday, the Russian Foreign Ministry noted that the ceasefire resolution “largely repeated the content” of a draft that was vetoed by the US at the Security Council last month.
“Once again, since the start of the unprecedented escalation of violence and bloodshed in the Arab-Israeli conflict, it is the UN General Assembly that is adopting the urgently needed resolutions,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Friday. The call for a truce and access to humanitarian aid are “moral imperatives in the current catastrophic circumstances,” it added.
“The UN Security Council – the main body tasked with maintaining international peace and security – remains paralyzed as a result of the use of the veto power by Washington (six times since the beginning of the current crisis),” the ministry wrote on its website.
The US and Israel have argued that an immediate cessation of hostilities would only benefit Hamas and have accused the Palestinian armed group of sabotaging the negotiations. “It would be shameful and wrong if the General Assembly voted today to vindicate Hamas’ cynical strategy of stalling and obstruction,” US envoy to the UN, Robert Wood, said in a statement explaining Wednesday’s vote.
Israel has long accused UNRWA of covertly aiding Hamas and other militants. Despite the overwhelming evidence we submitted to the UN that substantiate Hamas’ infiltration of UNRWA, the UN did nothing to rectify the situation,” Israel’s envoy to the UN, Danny Danon, wrote on X last month.
UNRWA Philippe Lazzarini described Israel’s decision to block the operations of the agency as an “ongoing campaign to discredit UNRWA and delegitimize its role towards providing human-development assistance and services to Palestine refugees.”
Nearly 45,000 Palestinians have been killed during Israel’s operation in Gaza, according to local authorities. The war broke out on October 7, 2023, when Hamas and allied groups carried out a surprise attack on Israeli cities, killing some 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages, around 100 of whom are believed to be still held in Gaza.
Canadian mayor fined for LGBT thought crime of refusing to bend over
By Rachel Marsden | RT | December 13, 2024
The mayor of the Canadian township of Emo (pop: 1,204), which borders the US state of Minnesota, has to personally pay an LGBTQ group $5,000 for injury to their self-respect. And that’s on top of the $10,000 that the town has to fork over.
According to official documents, the drama started in 2020 when Borderland Pride, a Canadian non-profit group, requested that the town officials officially recognize Pride Month in June of that year. The town had done so in previous years, but reportedly decided to amend their proclamations policy – which had yet to be adopted when this latest request came through. So the group’s request was rejected in a 3-2 council vote that year.
It’s not like this particular policy amendment was high priority, particularly at the height of the Covid fiasco, since they barely had any requests anyway. This one group alone represented half of all of the town’s requests for declarations, proclamations, or flag displays from April 2019 to April 2020.
Their request for the town to fly the rainbow flag for a week, and to send the group photos of it with the town’s officials for use on social media, reportedly wasn’t considered since the town didn’t even have a flagpole.
So here comes a complaint by the group to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal – which was decided on November 20, 2024.
The role of such tribunals across Canada is to deal exclusively with complaints about discrimination on the basis of prohibited factors like race, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, and criminal convictions. Because if actual courts had to deal with things like this, they’d be clogged up like a frat house toilet after Frosh Week. If the complainant can prove that there was at least a 50 percent chance of discrimination on one of these bases, then it can order cash awards and other remedies. So step right up! Take a spin! Win cash and prizes!
In the case of Borderland Pride against the Township of Emo, the tribunal accepted at face value that the council didn’t consider hanging the flag because of its lack of a flagpole. It did however note that the flag could have been “displayed” somewhere else other than on a flagpole. But it stopped short of ordering the mayor to walk around with it like a Superman cape.
The tribunal also accepted that two of the three council votes against issuing the Pride Month proclamation occurred in good faith and were merely the result of not wanting to adopt any proclamations before the new policy governing them was put into place. It was only the mayor’s “no” vote that was problematic.
During the council meeting in question, after discussing what they should do with the Pride flag display request in the absence of a flagpole, but before the vote against the Pride Month proclamation, Mayor Harold McQuaker said, “There’s no flag being flown for the other side of the coin… there’s no flags being flown for the straight people.”
Uh oh, here’s comes the forbidden-thinking patrol!
The tribunal ruled that the mayor’s comment was “dismissive of Borderland Pride’s flag request and demonstrated a lack of understanding of the importance to Borderland Pride and other members of the LGBTQ2 community of the Pride flag” and constitutes discrimination.
Suddenly, because of the mayor’s pro-heterosexual comments, it must mean that he hates gays. So it’s decided that “on the preponderance of evidence,” the rejection of the Pride proclamation was, more likely than not, the end-result of the mayor’s homophobia, and couldn’t be because he aligned with the other two Council “no” votes on the need for the policy amendment to deal with it first.
“I don’t hate anybody,” he said. “We just don’t have a flagpole at our town hall,” McQuaker recently told the Toronto Sun. But cognitive deviance is cognitive deviance, and like a colon polyp, best to nip it in the bud so there’s zero risk of it ever potentially developing into systemic cancer.
So here come the experts to tell the tribunal about how malignant this mayor’s thinking already is.
According to Dr. Emily Saewyc, an LGBTQ specialist who testified at the hearing, research suggests that “anti-LGBTQ rhetoric by President Trump, Vice-President Pence, and members of Trump’s cabinet during his presidency visibly increased the amount of hate and violence” towards these minorities. Or, you know, maybe people are just fed up with having special interest agenda shoved down their throats in make-work projects for activists at a time when citizens of all stripes are facing common and federating hardships. She then attempted to draw a parallel with the “homophobic and hateful social media posts about Borderland Pride and the LGBTQ2 community” after the vote – as though people would have been cheering the LGBTQ cause had the mayor not been such a bigot and supported Pride Month.
Right, because the key to people embracing wokeism is just to firehose even more of it into the public domain. Guess she hasn’t heard about the impact on brands like Bud Light and Jaguar after going woke. Or the public outcry after the Paris Olympics opening ceremony featuring what many interpreted as being a tranny wreck version of the Last Supper.
Borderland Pride wanted the tribunal to allow it to choose a week for the Township to have 2020 Pride Month now, and to force it to hold Pride Month every June going forward. It refused. But it did order Mayor McQuaker to attend a sort of re-education camp. Within 30 days, he has to provide Borderland Pride with proof that he’s completed the province’s human rights training course.
McQuaker has basically told the tribunal to shove it, refusing to pay or take the course, calling it “extortion,” according to the Toronto Sun.
All of this is the sort of blueprint that demonstrates exactly how special interest agendas end up hijacking the most basic aspects of daily life, through relentless activist browbeating that has a chilling effect on anyone who fails to passionately cater to their sacred cows.
HTS officials order Palestinian resistance factions to disarm, close bases in Syria: Report
The Cradle | December 13, 2024
Representatives from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the new ruling extremist organization in Damascus, informed the representatives of the Palestinian factions in Syria they would no longer be allowed to possess any weapons, training camps, or military headquarters, Ibrahim Amin of Al-Akhbar reported on 13 December.
Amin further reports that the factions must dissolve their military formations as soon as possible in exchange for political and charitable work under the roof of the new Syrian state.
Palestinian factions, including Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), the Saiqa, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) Martyr Ali Aswad Brigad, have had a presence in Syria as guests of the government for decades.
A source in the PFLP-GC revealed to Erem News that the factions were informed of the decision in meeting headed by Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Muhammad al-Julani, in the Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp in the capital, Damascus.
Palestinians came to Syria as refugees during the 1948 Nakba. That year, pre-state Zionist militias ethnically cleansed some 750,000 Palestinians from the land that became the state of Israel, making them refugees in neighboring countries.
Many Palestinian refugees settled in Syria in the Yarmouk Camp on the southern outskirts of Damascus. The camp became the capital of the Palestinian diaspora.
The Palestinian factions formed armed resistance groups and provided manpower for the Palestinian Liberation Army (PLA), which served as an auxiliary to the Syrian Army.
Amin notes that the practical result of these steps taken by HTS, led by former Al-Qaeda leader Abu Mohammad al-Julani, who now goes by his real name Ahmad al-Sharaa, is that the Palestinians are prohibited from using Syria as a headquarters or passage for any activity against Israel.
In 2012, the predecessor to HTS, the Nusra Front, invaded and occupied Yarmouk, seeking to use it as the gateway to conquer Damascus. The camp was largely destroyed over the following years in the course of the fighting. ISIS also occupied the camp and fought against the Syrian army and Palestinian factions there.
Amin says that although the new Syrian government does not talk about establishing relations with Israel, its representatives talk about taking practical steps to prevent any existing or potential resistance against Israel from Syrian territory.
He writes that Israel may seek to force the Lebanese government to take similar actions against Palestinian factions in the refugee camps in Lebanon.
How the US and Israel Destroyed Syria and Called it Peace
By Jeffrey D. Sachs | Common Dreams | December 12, 2024
In the famous lines of Tacitus, Roman historian, “To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace.”
In our age, it is Israel and the U.S. that make a desert and call it peace.
The story is simple. In stark violation of international law, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers claim the right to rule over seven million Palestinian Arabs. When Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands leads to militant resistance, Israel labels the resistance “terrorism” and calls on the U.S. to overthrow the Middle East governments that back the “terrorists.” The U.S., under the sway of the Israel Lobby, goes to war on Israel’s behalf.
The fall of Syria this week is the culmination of the Israel-U.S. campaign against Syria that goes back to 1996 with Netanyahu’s arrival to office as Prime Minister. The Israel-U.S. war on Syria escalated in 2011 and 2012, when Barack Obama covertly tasked the CIA with the overthrow of the Syrian Government in Operation Timber Sycamore. That effort finally came to “fruition” this week, after more than 300,000 deaths in the Syrian war since 2011.
Syria’s fall came swiftly because of more than a decade of crushing economic sanctions, the burdens of war, the U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil, Russia’s priorities regarding the conflict in Ukraine, and most immediately, Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah, which was the key military backstop to the Syrian Government. No doubt Assad often misplayed his own hand and faced severe internal discontent, but his regime was targeted for collapse for decades by the U.S. and Israel.
Before the U.S.-Israel campaign to overthrow Assad began in earnest in 2011, Syria was a functioning, growing middle-income country. In January 2009, the IMF Executive Board had this to say:
Executive Directors welcomed Syria’s strong macroeconomic performance in recent years, as manifested in the rapid non-oil GDP growth, comfortable level of foreign reserves, and low and declining government debt. This performance reflected both robust regional demand and the authorities’ reform efforts to shift toward a more market- based economy.
Since 2011, the Israel-U.S. perpetual war on Syria, including bombing, jihadists, economic sanctions, U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil fields, and more, has sunk the Syrian people into misery.
In the immediate two days following the collapse of the government, Israel conducted about 480 strikes across Syria, and completely destroyed the Syrian fleet in Latakia. Pursuing his expansionist agenda, Prime Minister Netanyahu illegally claimed control over the demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights and declared that the Golan Heights will be a part of the State of Israel “for eternity.”
Netanyahu’s ambition to transform the region through war, which dates back almost three decades, is playing out in front of our eyes. In a press conference on December 9th, the Israeli prime minister boasted of an “absolute victory,” justifying the on-going genocide in Gaza and escalating violence throughout the region:
I ask you, just think, if we had acceded to those who told us time and again: “The war must be stopped”– we would not have entered Rafah, we would not have seized the Philadelphia Corridor, we would not have eliminated Sinwar, we would not have surprised our enemies in Lebanon and the entire world in a daring operation-stratagem, we would not have eliminated Nasrallah, we would not have destroyed Hezbollah’s underground network, and we would not have exposed Iran’s weakness. The operations that we have carried out since the beginning of the war are dismantling the axis brick by brick.
The long history of Israel’s campaign to overthrow the Syrian Government is not widely understood, yet the documentary record is clear. Israel’s war on Syria began with U.S. and Israeli neoconservatives in 1996, who fashioned a “Clean Break” strategy for the Middle East for Netanyahu as he came to office. The core of the “clean break” strategy called for Israel (and the US) to reject “land for peace,” the idea that Israel would withdraw from the occupied Palestinian lands in return for peace. Instead, Israel would retain the occupied Palestinian lands, rule over the Palestinian people in an Apartheid state, step-by-step ethnically cleanse the state, and enforce so-called “peace for peace” by overthrowing neighboring governments that resisted Israel’s land claims.
The Clean Break strategy asserts, “Our claim to the land—to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years—is legitimate and noble,” and goes on to state, “Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon…”
In his 1996 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu set out the new strategy. Israel would not fight the terrorists; it would fight the states that support the terrorists. More accurately, it would get the US to do Israel’s fighting for it. As he elaborated in 2001:
The first and most crucial thing to understand is this: There is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states… Take away all this state support, and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into dust.
Netanyahu’s strategy was integrated into U.S. foreign policy. Taking out Syria was always a key part of the plan. This was confirmed to General Wesley Clark after 9/11. He was told, during a visit at the Pentagon, that “we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Iraq would be first, then Syria, and the rest. (Netanyahu’s campaign for the Iraq War is spelled out in detail in Dennis Fritz’s new book, Deadly Betrayal. The role of the Israel Lobby is spelled out in Ilan Pappé’s new book, Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic). The insurgency that hit U.S. troops in Iraq set back the five-year timeline, but did not change the basic strategy.
The U.S. has by now led or sponsored wars against Iraq (invasion in 2003), Lebanon (U.S. funding and arming Israel), Libya (NATO bombing in 2011), Syria (CIA operation during 2010’s), Sudan (supporting rebels to break Sudan apart in 2011), and Somalia (backing Ethiopia’s invasion in 2006). A prospective U.S. war with Iran, ardently sought by Israel, is still pending.
Strange as it might seem, the CIA has repeatedly backed Islamist Jihadists to fight these wars, and jihadists have just toppled the Syrian regime. The CIA, after all, helped to create al-Qaeda in the first place by training, arming, and financing the Mujahideen in Afghanistan from the late 1970s onward. Yes, Osama bin Laden later turned on the U.S., but his movement was a U.S. creation all the same. Ironically, as Seymour Hersh confirms, it was Assad’s intelligence that “tipped off the U.S. to an impending Al Qaeda bombing attack on the headquarters of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet.”
Operation Timber Sycamore was a billion-dollar CIA covert program launched by Obama to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. The CIA funded, trained, and provided intelligence to radical and extreme Islamist groups. The CIA effort also involved a “rat line” to run weapons from Libya (attacked by NATO in 2011) to the jihadists in Syria. In 2014, Seymour Hersh described the operation in his piece “The Red Line and the Rat Line”:
“A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria.”
Soon after the launch of Timber Sycamore, in March 2013, at a joint conference by President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House, Obama said: “With respect to Syria, the United States continues to work with allies and friends and the Syrian opposition to hasten the end of Assad’s rule.”
To the U.S.-Israeli Zionist mentality, a call for negotiation by an adversary is taken as a sign of weakness of the adversary. Those who call for negotiations on the other side typically end up dead—murdered by Israel or U.S. assets. We’ve seen this play out recently in Lebanon. The Lebanese Foreign Minister confirmed that Hassan Nasrallah, Former Secretary-General of Hezbollah had agreed to a ceasefire with Israel days before his assassination. Hezbollah’s willingness to accept a peace agreement according to the Arab-Islamic world’s wishes of a two-state solution is long-standing. Similarly, instead of negotiating to end the war in Gaza, Israel assassinated Hamas’ political chief, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.
Similarly in Syria, instead of allowing for a political solution to emerge, the U.S. opposed the peace process multiple times. In 2012, the UN had negotiated a peace agreement in Syria that was blocked by the Americans, who demanded that Assad must go on the first day of the peace agreement. The U.S. wanted regime change, not peace. In September 2024, Netanyahu addressed the General Assembly with a map of the Middle East divided between “Blessing” and “Curse,” with Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran as part of Netanyahu’s curse. The real curse is Israel’s path of mayhem and war, which has now engulfed Lebanon and Syria, with Netayahu’s fervent hope to draw the U.S. into war with Iran as well.
The U.S. and Israel are high-fiving that they have successfully wrecked yet another adversary of Israel and defender of the Palestinian cause, with Netanyahu claiming “credit for starting the historic process.” Most likely Syria will now succumb to continued war among the many armed protagonists, as has happened in the previous U.S.-Israeli regime-change operations.
In short, American interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal, being pushed against its own inclinations to this eventuality.
All this is in the service of a profoundly unjust cause: to deny Palestinians their political rights in the service of Zionist extremism based on the 7th century BCE Book of Joshua. Remarkably, according to that text—one relied on by Israel’s own religious zealots—the Israelites were not even the original inhabitants of the land. Rather, according the text, God instructs Joshua and his warriors to commit multiple genocides to conquer the land.
Against this backdrop, the Arab-Islamic nations and indeed almost all of the world have repeatedly united in the call for a two-state solution and peace between Israel and Palestine.
Instead of the two-state solution, Israel and the U.S. have made a desert and called it peace.
How Does Western Media Try to Defame Calin Georgescu?

Calin Georgescu, running as an independent candidate for president, speaks to media in Bucharest, Romania, Oct. 1, 2024.
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 13.12.2024
Amid uncertainty surrounding Romania’s botched presidential elections, Western media has launched an information campaign against independent candidate Calin Georgescu, who earlier made it to the country’s presidential runoff.
His progress, however, was annulled by the country’s constitutional court, which accused Georgescu of money laundering and being “Moscow’s man” – allegations he denies.
How does Western media paint the 62-year-old politician?
- The Financial Times : Romania shocked the world by voting for “a pro-Putin TikTok star” and “an outsider with ultranationalist views who was polling poorly just weeks before the election.”
- The BBC: Georgescu is “a figure from the extreme fringe of Romanian politics.”
- Sky News: He “has emerged from obscurity to top the polls in Romania’s presidential election. But the Anglophile and Trump supporter is also his country’s most divisive figure for decades.”
- AP : “A self-professed Donald Trump supporter”, Georgescu remained “a little-known entity until just weeks ago.”
- France 24: “The pro-Russian outsider candidate”.
- The Week : The “Putin of Romania” and “the EU and NATO’s worst nightmare.”
Romania held its presidential election on November 24, with Georgescu winning the first round with 22.94% of the votes. The leader of the liberal Save Romania Union, Elena Lasconi, who favors the partnership with NATO and the US, came second with 19.18%.
The second round of elections was scheduled for December 8. However, on December 6, the Constitutional Court ruled to cancel the results of the first round, paving the way for a rerun. The Romanian government must now set the date of a new presidential vote. Both Georgescu and Lasconi criticized the ruling.
Georgescu earlier told Western media that he had spent “zero” on his TikTok campaign and had “zero” ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom he praised as “a patriot and a leader”.
The country’s opposition parties and politicians slammed the court’s decision as anti-democratic. Georgescu, for his part, insisted that the ruling “is more than a legal controversy” and that “it is basically a formalized coup d’état.”
US claims success in hypersonic weapon test
RT | December 13, 2024
The US Department of Defense (DoD) has reported a successful test of the hypersonic weapon system dubbed the Dark Eagle, which is being developed jointly by the Army and the Navy.
The two military services intend to use the same hypersonic glider warhead, the C-HGB, whose booster rocket could be launched from either land or a vessel, including a Zumwalt-class destroyer and a Virginia-class submarine.
The recent test launch from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida and which the Pentagon announced on Thursday, involved the Army’s version, officially named the Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW).
The previous test launch was conducted in June from the Hawaiian island of Kauai, according to the DoD. The new trial differed in using for the first time a Battery Operations Center and a Transporter Erector Launcher, the elements of the ground-mobile platform for the Army’s booster missile.
The weapon has a reported range of 1,725 miles (2,775km), with the warhead travelling at speeds of over 3,800 miles per hour (6,115km/h), which corresponds to Mach 5 and defines the weapon as a hypersonic projectile.
The US used to have a commitment not to develop the LRHW with that range under the now-defunct Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which banned both conventional and nuclear-capable surface-to-surface delivery systems in a certain range bracket. Washington withdrew from the treaty in 2018.
The joint program faced delays, with the Army telling Bloomberg in September 2023 that it was missing its goal to field the system by the end of FY2023.
On Wednesday, the Pentagon heralded a major defense achievement, reporting that the US Missile Defense Agency has for the first time conducted a successful interception of an air-launched medium-range ballistic missile in Guam.
Blinken Announces New $500Mln Military Aid Package for Ukraine
Sputnik – 13.12.2024
The US will provide Ukraine with an additional military aid package worth $500 million, State Secretary Antony Blinken said on Friday.
“As part of the surge in security assistance that President Biden announced on September 26, the United States is providing another significant package of urgently needed weapons and equipment to our Ukrainian partners… This additional assistance, provided under previous drawdowns from Department of Defense stocks, is valued at $500 million,” Blinken said in a statement.
The package will include artillery munition, Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (c-UAS) munitions, ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), as well as protection equipment for chemical, biological, and nuclear threats, he added.
Russia believes that arms supplies to Ukraine hinder the settlement, directly involving NATO countries in the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov noted that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine would be a legitimate target for Russia. According to lavrov, the US and NATO are directly involved in the conflict, including not only by supplying weapons, but also by training personnel in the UK, Germany, Italy, and other countries.
Kremlin reacts to Trump’s stance on long-range strikes into Russia
RT | December 13, 2024
US President-elect Donald Trump’s statement regarding Ukraine’s use of Western long-range missiles to strike deep into Russia is completely in line with Moscow’s stance on the matter, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.
Peskov was commenting on Trump’s sharp criticism this week of President Joe Biden’s decision to allow Kiev to conduct long-range strikes on Russian territory with US-supplied missiles.
“The statement itself completely coincides with our position,” Peskov told reporters. “In this case we have the same vision of the reasons for the escalation.” He added that Trump’s thinking on the matter “appeals” to Russia.
“It is obvious that Trump understands what exactly is escalating the situation around the conflict,” he said.
At the same time, the Russian presidential spokesman warned against “jumping ahead of ourselves” and predicting the actions of the incoming US administration.
“Let’s wait until the moment when the president-elect takes his post in the Oval Office,” he advised.
In an interview with Time magazine, which named him the 2024 Person of the Year, Trump stated that he disagrees “very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia,” asking rhetorically: “Why are we doing that?”
Trump said that missile strikes deep into Russia’s internationally recognized territory are “just escalating this war and making it worse,” and described such attacks as a “very big mistake.”
The US president-elect’s comments came a day after the Russian Defense Ministry reported that Ukrainian forces had launched six US-supplied long-range ATACMS missiles towards an airfield in Rostov Region.
In response to Kiev’s attacks, Moscow hit a number of Ukraine’s key energy facilities overnight into Friday.
Russia has repeatedly warned that long-range strikes using foreign-made weapons would escalate the conflict and be seen as NATO’s direct participation in the hostilities.
In late November, Moscow used its new Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile system for the first time, striking the Yuzhmash military plant in the Ukrainian city of Dnepr.
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned at the time that if Ukraine’s attacks deep inside Russia continue, Moscow reserves the right “to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow the use of their weapons against our facilities.
How disgraced South Korean defense minister just nearly caused nuclear war
By Drago Bosnic – December 13, 2024
To say that we live in dangerous times would be a gross understatement. The political West’s quest for global destabilization dominates its decision-making to the point of absurdity. However, the consequences of such actions are as serious as they could possibly be. The fate of the world hangs in the balance and even the most trivial event could plunge us all into the abyss. One would expect global leaders to be extra careful during such times, but it seems many of them are more careless than ever before. The recent political crisis and unrest in South Korea were largely sidelined by the ongoing events in Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere, but it seems they could’ve been just as consequential (if not more).
The martial law President Yoon Suk Yeol declared on December 3 was just as mysterious and unexpected as the virtually concurrent and shockingly swift fall of the Syrian government. What was even stranger was the accusation that his political opponents from the Democratic Party are supposedly “sympathizing with North Korea” and “supporting anti-state activities aimed at inciting rebellion”. Yoon insisted that martial law was a “necessary measure to eradicate these shameless pro-North anti-state forces”. The opposition’s control of the parliament is a major issue for the incumbent, so he tried to block their access to it. The martial law declared by Yoon was just an attempt to have a legal basis for such actions.
The National Assembly fought back, with the 190 MPs who managed to get into the building unanimously voting to lift the president’s martial law. The resulting political standoff resulted in one of South Korea’s worst crises in recent decades. The US insists it wasn’t informed in advance about the martial law, but this is extremely difficult to believe, as Seoul cannot make such decisions without explicit approval from Washington DC. Perhaps the most compelling evidence of US involvement in the crisis is the fact that the opposition wants normal relations with China and detente with North Korea. Obviously, this is a “very dangerous prospect” for the warmongering oligarchy in America.
The current government has been escalating tensions not only with both of its neighbors, but also Russia. This is 100% in line with Washington DC’s policies, which explains its support for Yoon. Expectedly, South Koreans weren’t exactly thrilled with this turn of events, resulting in massive protests. Yoon narrowly dodged an impeachment after MPs from his People Power Party boycotted the vote in the National Assembly, but still got a travel ban from the Ministry of Justice. In the following days, there was a string of arrests, including of now former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, who even tried to commit suicide while in custody, which is hardly surprising, considering what he tried to do.
Namely, Kim Yong-hyun ordered a swarm of drones to be launched at Pyongyang in order to provoke an attack from North Korea. President Yoon was to use this as a pretext to declare martial law. It’s perfectly clear that the disgraced defense minister didn’t do this on his own volition. Worse yet, it’s extremely likely that the US ordered Yoon to launch the operation to ensure escalation with North Korea and possibly even China. The incumbent is now faced with another impeachment vote (scheduled for tomorrow). He promised to fight tooth and nail to stay in power, which is another indicator of American backing, while the former defense minister’s role is also one of the most compelling arguments for US complicity.
Namely, the South Korean military is effectively controlled by the Pentagon, meaning that the latest events are effectively a US-backed military coup. Kim Yong-hyun was the one who ordered the troops to prevent MPs from entering the National Assembly on December 3. Park Beom-kye, an MP from the Democratic Party, claims that the Defense Counterintelligence Command (DCC), led by former commander Yeo In-hyung – the disgraced defense minister’s close associate – planned the drone incursion into North Korea. Worse yet, it seems this wasn’t a one-time thing, as Pyongyang reported that it detected swarms of drones back in October. Seoul refused to confirm or deny involvement in the incident.
Needless to say, risking possible war with a nuclear-armed North Korea in order to stay in power is beyond idiotic. However, that’s precisely what Yoon and his associates did, while the US saw it as an opportunity to ensure South Korea stays firmly in its orbit. Not to mention the added “benefit” of a possible war with Pyongyang, which is the wet dream of every warmonger, war criminal, kleptocrat and plutocrat in Washington DC. The plan to escalate tensions in East Asia might’ve been uncovered, but the situation remains volatile. The opposition announced it will go ahead with the second impeachment vote, but it needs a two-thirds majority to pass it. At the moment, they control 192 of the National Assembly’s 300 seats.
Technically speaking, Yoon is safe, as the opposition would need another eight votes held by MPs from the president’s People Power Party. However, it seems the party itself sees Yoon as a political liability, as its chairman Han Dong-hun said he’d support the vote. Although Yoon’s supporters within the party didn’t take this too kindly, especially after Han told them that the president’s remarks were “a confession of rebellion” (for which he was insulted and told to “shut up”), he might convince eight MPs to vote for the impeachment. Perhaps Han himself has certain political ambitions and Yoon is simply in the way. Still, the biggest issue is how constant instability in the political West is now becoming a security hazard.
Namely, the world’s most aggressive power pole is faced with neverending crises, as various Western governments keep collapsing every few months. Not to mention their sheer unpopularity, which is effectively paralyzing the decision-making process, particularly in the troubled European Union. The new American National Security Strategy envisages a greater role for its numerous vassals and satellite states, meaning that such countries would need to sacrifice their own economic and financial interests for the sake of the warmongering oligarchy in the US. There’s zero tolerance for any sort of non-compliance, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, where aggressive US foreign policy is the main destabilizing force.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
