Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Russia reacts to NATO state minister’s threat to ‘wipe Moscow off the map’

RT | October 29, 2025

Russia has accused Belgian Defense Minister Theo Francken of irresponsible rhetoric after he suggested that NATO could “wipe Moscow off the map.”

In an interview with De Morgen newspaper published on Monday, Francken brushed off concerns that the currently shelved delivery of US-made Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine could trigger an all-out war between Russia and NATO. He argued that Russian President Vladimir Putin would not use nuclear weapons because the US-led alliance “will wipe Moscow off the map.” Francken added that he did not fear a conventional attack on Brussels since it would result in Moscow getting “flattened.”

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko told the Russian daily RBC on Wednesday that Francken’s words were in line with “the atmosphere of military psychosis” prevalent in Western Europe.

The Russian Embassy in Belgium condemned Francken’s “provocative and irresponsible” statements as “sheer absurdity and total disconnect from reality.”

“Francken’s escapades are the most glaring manifestation of the militarist frenzy that is increasingly consuming the European war party,” the embassy said. It added that EU officials like Francken are “posing a threat to the continent’s future and [are] capable of plunging it into a new war.”

Moscow has repeatedly stated that the flooding of Ukraine with Western weapons would not stop its troops but only cause further escalation.

October 30, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Leaked: Britain’s Ukrainian sniper training plot

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | October 29, 2025

Since the Ukraine proxy war’s eruption, a shadowy cabal of British academics has secretly advised the US National Security Council on escalatory strategies. Many of their recommendations – some inspired by ISIS – have been adopted by Washington. It’s uncertain whether one of the boldest proposals – to train Ukrainian snipers on American soil – was one way or another greenlit. More gravely, this effort was intended to set a trap for the Biden administration, luring the US into deeper involvement in the conflict.

A leaked document, authored in April 2022 by St. Andrews University lecturer and the British cabal’s chief NSC contact Marc DeVore, sets out a bold vision for Washington’s “non-profit associations, civil society and private sector businesses” to tutor Ukrainian sharpshooters. US citizens were reputed to possess “the wherewithal and… motivation to provide such training,” while DeVore judged Donbass’ “slow-moving” battlefield – with its emphasis on “urban combat” – to be “an environment ideal for snipers.”

DeVore believed neither Ukraine nor Russia were “well-provided with snipers”, due to their common military “Soviet heritage”. By contrast, the US was “ideally placed to help Ukraine fill this ‘sniper gap’”, due to the country’s “surfeit of snipers, including US Army and Marine Corps veterans with experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the police snipers belonging to large numbers of SWAT teams.” Moreover, DeVore venerated “high standards of civilian marksmanship” in the US, due to “large” national networks of “rifle ranges and shooting clubs.”

The ability to purchase “the world’s most competitive sniper rifles” legally Stateside was an added bonus. Nonetheless, the true icing on the cake, per DeVore, was triangulating the Biden administration into formally endorsing Western arming and training of Ukrainian forces. The academic bemoaned how to date, Washington had been “timid” in offering direct assistance to Kiev, such as avoiding “overtly providing heavy weaponry”, due to “excessive fears of Russian retaliation/escalation,” and a “desire to maintain…deniability” in delivering such assistance.

As such, DeVore believed the sniper training program would offer war-ravenous Republicans the opportunity to “pressure and shame the [US] government into more overtly training Ukrainian forces,” and “openly [criticise] the President for not using the government’s resources to do so.” The academic predicted Biden would “respond to this criticism by publicly revealing more of the US government’s training activities.” That, combined with “Russia’s likely non-response”, would “open the door for the US to further increase the training and equipment it is providing,” DeVore fantasised.

“However, the Biden Administration [responds] to the private-sector training would hand hawkish Republicans a victory,” he forecast. A US-based Ukrainian sniper training program “would also give Republican politicians valuable talking points” for attacking the President. Were the White House to resultantly increase open support for Kiev, “then Republicans could claim credit for forcing him to do so.” If Biden alternatively “sought to circumscribe the training,” gun rights organisations and opposition governors could “wage a popular legal battle against the federal government” to force its reinstatement.

Both would “stand to benefit substantially from the positive public relations” generated both by overseeing the sniper training program, and the ensuing opportunity to “embarrass the Biden administration much more” over its supposedly lackluster backing for the proxy conflict. Still, the ultimate goal was to ensure “much more widespread training of Ukrainian military personnel in the West.” US acquiescence was “necessary for NATO to be able to enhance Ukrainian military capabilities to such a level that Ukraine can bring this war to an acceptable conclusion.”

DeVore drew inspiration for the project from the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, when US military magazine Soldier Of Fortune instigated sniper training for Bosniaks and Croats fighting Belgrade’s forces. The outlet, read by wannabe mercenaries and US army veterans, was founded by Robert K. Brown, a retired Lieutenant Colonel “who felt deeply sympathetic to the Croatians and Bosnians fighting for their independence.” Brown thus bankrolled and encouraged readers “with sniping experience” to travel to the region, “and organize a crash course” for sharpshooters.

Locals who were “pretty good shots” were identified, “and swiftly trained…to a standard where they contributed powerfully” to their wars against the Yugoslav army. Moreover, pupils “wrote articles on their activities for Soldier of Fortune, selling magazines and raising awareness” of their independence struggles. DeVore sought to repeat the success of this “non-governmental” training on a “larger scale”.  He envisaged enlisting “firearms related non-profits and businesses… to contribute to bringing this about.”

DeVore believed “ideally”, a “major national gun rights” organisation in the US, such as the National Rifle Association “or one of its rivals” would “play a coordinating role.” He foresaw “rifle ranges [being] asked to donate range time, ammunition makers to contribute bullets, and individuals with relevant marksmanship or sniper experience to volunteer their skills.” Pro-proxy war state governors “could also publicly embrace the movement by allowing state forests and National Guard facilities to be used for training”:

“Launching a civil society sniper training program in the [US] could therefore benefit from ideal circumstances, including; a networking of long range ranges where marksmen can be trained; highly skilled snipers and firearms instructors capable of teaching Ukrainians both the fieldcraft and weapons skills they need, and; a significant Ukrainian diaspora in the USA and Canada who could provide volunteers for training.”

DeVore went on to declare that “a large number” Ukrainians living abroad “who want to fight” in the proxy war were “being held back by their [lack] of experience,” suggesting “offering specialist training to… volunteers” among Kiev’s diaspora. Once taught, they would “return home with valuable skills, materially aiding Ukraine’s cause.” More generally, “if friendly governments and civilians help by training critical specialists, it will speed up the process of forming new units and make those that are formed significantly more effective.”

DeVore believed the training should “take place in a two stage process.” First, students would be taught “marksmanship”, during which they fired “thousands of rounds of ammunition to develop the necessary accuracy, rifle maintenance and range estimation skills” at rifle ranges across the US. “The infrastructure and teaching skills needed for this variety of training are fairly common,” he wrote, adding, “the dispersed nature of the training would simplify the accommodation of trainees,” with only a “small number” of pupils housed “near each individual range”.

Once trainees achieved “an adequate level of marksmanship,” they would be schooled by former snipers “in the more specialized skills of camouflage, concealment, infiltration, stalking and other forms of tradecraft.” DeVore proposed conducting this phase “in a combination of forested lands and simulated urban environments” – “large disused factories such as exist in the upper Midwest would be ideal for this purpose.” Upon completing this cycle, “snipers will be transported to Ukraine, where they can put their new-found skills to use.”

DeVore suggested “positive publicity” from being associated with the program “would be a major inducement for guns rights groups” due to “Financial corruption scandals and the need to defend permissive firearms laws in the wake of mass shootings,” which have “tarnished the image” of these organisations at home and abroad. “Training volunteer snipers for a popular war would provide a public relations bonanza for the organization that spearheads the effort,” the academic mused.

If training for Ukrainian snipers was provided on US soil, it wasn’t conducted in the highly public, politicised manner DeVore advocated. Nonetheless, the mainstream media has acknowledged Kiev’s sharpshooters are dependent on high-end American-made rifles and ammunition, and ongoing shipments of this equipment are no secret. Yet, the profusion of US sniper rifles on the battlefields of Donbass has failed to tilt the frontline in Ukraine’s favour one inch – in the precise manner of so many other British-influenced and concocted proxy war grand schemes.

As this journalist has extensively documented, all Kiev’s gravest military disasters, such as the October 2023 – June 2024 Krynky catastrophe, were planned in London. That effort saw wave after wave of British-trained Ukrainian marines attempt to secure a beachhead in Russian-occupied territory, before marching on Crimea and outright victory in the war. Planning was heavily-informed by a desire to recreate the Normandy landings – D-Day – based on fantastical, Hollywood conceptions of that operation. Coincidentally, so too was DeVore’s sniper training program.

In the leaked document, DeVore suggested his plan would have significant political and public appeal due to “the popularity of fictional resistance narratives, going back to Red Dawn.” In that movie, a gang of American teenage guerrillas successfully beat back an invasion of the US by Soviet forces – a compelling filmic narrative, but hardly a basis for actual war-fighting tactics, one might reasonably think. Such are the dangers of outsourcing battle strategy to academics thousands of miles removed from the frontline, with no military experience.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

New Encirclements Deal ‘Painful’ Blow to Zelensky – Ex-Ukrainian Opposition Leader

Sputnik – 29.10.2025

Zelensky can still spare the lives of his soldiers encircled in Pokrovsk and Kupyansk by issuing an order for them to lay down their arms, former Ukrainian opposition leader Viktor Medvedchuk said.

The ongoing encirclements [tightening around Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk) and Kupyansk] is especially painful for Zelensky, coming on the heels of his recent trip to Washington, during which he trotted out maps detailing a so-called forthcoming Ukrainian “counteroffensive”, said the former opposition leader.

This clearly demonstrates Zelensky’s glaring incompetence concerning military matters, rendering any discussion of strategy with him futile—a point underscored by President Trump’s own experience, Medvedchuk stressed.

Furthermore, he castigated Zelensky for publicly denying the encirclement even as Ukrainian propagandists peddle the narrative that such information is merely a “Russian ploy” to sway US opinion and create what the Kiev regime claims is the “impression” that Russia is winning.

According to the ex-politician, the nature of modern warfare, with its space-based surveillance and unmanned systems, makes it remarkably difficult for a force to get trapped in an encirclement.

According to Medvedchuk, Zelensky ignored Washington’s counsel by refusing to withdraw from Donbass and declining to begin negotiations. He is now, Medvedchuk added, surrendering the remainder of the region with disgrace and unnecessary casualties.

Zelensky can still save the encircled Ukrainian soldiers by ordering them to lay down their arms. This would give a huge boost to the negotiation process, and those who are captured would return home to their families and loved ones, he said.

However, Medvedchuk concluded, Zelensky’s personal ambition and lust for power outweigh the lives of his soldiers. His zealous belief in his own exceptionalism and invincibility makes him a danger to Ukraine, since these proclivities will only lead to further national suffering.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

The Russian Regret

By Israel Shamir • Unz Review • October 29, 2025

The Russians are disappointed with Trump’s policy towards Russia. They have long given up hoping to partner with the US in building a just world order, and they are now giving up the hope that they might be treated fairly. The last person in Russia (if not in the world) still hoping to get along with Mr Trump is President Putin.

One can understand him. There is a great need for geopolitical and geo-economic cooperation between the US and Russia, both in resolving the Ukrainian crisis (taking into account Russia’s interests) and in interacting throughout the Arctic, Caribbean, Africa and all the other global ‘hot spots’. That would be international cooperation, not American Hegemony, as many US politicians prefer. The US should step away from the abyss of nuclear war, while this is still possible. Last week, the Russians carried out nuclear exercises, of a magnitude never done previously. The exercises involved Russia’s full nuclear triad—land-based, sea-based, and airborne assets, according to the statement reported by Russia’s state RIA news agency on Telegram. During the exercise, a Yars intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was launched from the Plesetsk Cosmodrome and Tu-95MS strategic bombers conducted air-launched cruise missile strikes, the Kremlin said. A strategic submarine cruiser launched a ballistic missile from the Barents Sea. And then there was the launch of Burevestnik, a brand-new cruise missile with nuclear reactor onboard, that can fly anywhere for as long as it takes. The Pentagon has revealed that they are worried about these new developments, and have asked the Russians to show them how they make their new devices, the Burevestnik and Poseidon. It is good that President Putin prefers peace, not war.

However, President Putin is not a free agent. There is a strong demand in Russian politics for a nuclear response to Western provocations, not stopping at the Western border of the Ukraine, but going all the way west. For the present, Putin prevails, but it’s likely to change if the US continues its drift toward war and sanctions. And the US invasion of Venezuela is likely to be met with force. The Russian soldiers of Wagner PDC are supposedly already there.

Such sentiments were recently expressed by Sergey Karaganov (a prominent political scientist and honorary representative of The Council on Foreign and Defence Policy) on TVC television, quoted by a PolitNavigator correspondent:

“Europeans – we are dealing with insane morons, excuse me, these are unpleasant words. Well, brutalised morons. They really are morons – the current generation of degenerate European elites, who have also ceased to fear God… and have lost their fear of death.

This is an animal instinct that needs to be restored; they have nothing else left, because they have no intellectual function, no sense of homeland, no sense of gender or love. Of course, I am exaggerating; there are wonderful people there. But that’s how it is [those who are in the governing circle] — they are the scum of humanity.

There is no leader there yet, figuratively speaking, no ‘Hitler’. But, in principle, they are moving towards this. And they are driving their peoples to slaughter. We must stop this movement – in order to save ourselves and these peoples, by the way. Maybe something will come of them someday, although they are degrading very quickly.

They are now being targeted for a massive confrontation with Russia. By the way, we underestimate this, because total propaganda is turning masses of Europeans into potential cannon fodder.

So, we must save them, and at the same time save the world. This is our historical task, but we must realise this historical task. Moreover, we have no other option. Either we destroy ourselves, then destroy the world, or we win and save humanity.

The program’s host Dmitry Kulikov noted that historically, ‘we act best when we understand that we have no other option.’ This feeling permeates Russian political circles. They more and more often repeat Putin’s words from 2018: We shall go to heaven, and they will just croak.

This is indeed regretful, for Putin and Trump have in common real enemies, namely the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, the European Union and the ultra-liberal stateless intelligentsia. Can it be that a grown man, a US President, falls for flattery of the cheapest kind delivered by the likes of Keith Starmer, Macron, Friedrich Merz et al? Doesn’t he understand that they despise him? What do they want? Do Fritz (German Chancellor Friedrich Merz) and Ursula have good memories of the free Russian soup the Germans were fed by the Russian soldiers in 1945, and perhaps they dream of tasting it again? Does Starmer hope to distract his voters so that they might forget his support for Gaza Genocide and Israeli football hooligans? Does Macron think it better to send Frenchmen to die in the Ukraine so they won’t join the Yellow Vests? Does Swedish Ulf Kristersson think that it’s better to keep up the venerable tradition of hosting the Russian occupation force at least once in a century? Which of these plans fit into Trump’s vision?

We may ask – why would President Trump lift a finger to help Vladimir Zelensky, the man who supported the Democratic Party candidate during the US presidential election and played a role in launching the impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump?

In case Trump forgot, the Russian envoy Dmitriev reminded the American public (in his interview with journalist Lara Logan) that Zelensky campaigned in support of Kamala Harris, who represented the Democratic Party in the 2024 election and was Trump’s main rival. ‘Let’s not forget that,’ he added. Dmitriev then noted that Zelensky was one of the factors that influenced the initiation of the first impeachment process against the then US president.

The investigation that preceded the impeachment of US President Donald Trump began on 24 September 2019 at the initiative of US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The impeachment was sparked by a statement by an anonymous informant (probably Zelensky himself) who claimed that in July 2019, Trump pressured Vladimir Zelensky for personal political gain. According to the anonymous report, Trump demanded that Kiev investigate the activities of Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, in exchange for providing Ukraine with financial and military aid.

After these allegations surfaced, the White House was forced to publish a memorandum containing a transcript of the telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky. The document showed that Trump did indeed ask the Ukrainian president to ‘look into’ the matter concerning the Biden family. At the same time, a week before the aforementioned conversation, Trump had ordered the suspension of military aid to Ukraine. Representatives of the Democratic Party viewed this decision as a possible attempt to put pressure on Kiev in order to achieve an investigation that would be beneficial to Trump. The president himself was forced to publicly deny these allegations.

On 31 October 2019, the US House of Representatives approved a resolution to formally begin impeachment proceedings. On the 18th of December, the final debates took place, during which two articles of impeachment against Trump were put to a vote: abuse of power and obstruction of a congressional investigation. Both articles were approved, resulting in the president’s impeachment, making him the third head of state in US history to be subject to such a decision by the House of Representatives.

On 15 January 2020, a vote was held to send the indictment to the Senate, where the articles of impeachment were sent the following day. After reviewing the case, on 5 February 2020, the Senate acquitted Donald Trump on both counts. And now Trump wants to help the man who saddled him with that mess?

Not only that, but Trump’s policy of arming Europe and providing military aid to Ukraine is against US interests. Forcing Europe’s NATO members to increase defence spending to two per cent and then to five per cent will, in the near future, turn the EU into a military monster comparable to the Third Reich. A militarily strong EU would immediately break its economic dependence on the United States, both in terms of oil and gas and technology. And then it would begin to impose its own agenda on other countries, including America itself. Trump’s course towards the militarisation of Europe is suicidal for the future of the United States; it is feeding the crocodile that the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition seemed to have destroyed forever in 1945.

One might understand Trump’s decisions if building up a Ukrainian statelet were a winning move for the West. But it is not. It’s like feeding money to a slot machine in one of the casinos belonging to Trump’s benefactor, Sheldon Adelson. You give it money, and it gives you jolly music, noise, colourful figures move across the screen; then – nothing. Drop more money, you surely will win the next round, says the croupier. A wise man would not throw good money after bad, but a gambler would, down to his last penny. NATO’s Ukrainian morass is like a Kyiv Casino – they tell you that you are about to win big, you just have to invest another hundred billion! Billions have gone down this drain with nothing to show for it except more Miami palaces for Mr Zelensky and his friends.

The Trump’s renovation of the east wing of the White House is not just a random project – the so-called ‘Trump Ballroom’ is just a cover story for the construction of a secret bomb shelter and presidential bunker. But how long would he be able to sit there under a rain of Oreshnik and other fabulous Russian missiles? They will reach the deepest bunker and burn it out.

No, the only salvation for America is an honest alliance with Russia and the transformation of the Ukraine from Europe’s military springboard into a ‘bridge of cooperation’ between the West and the East. Thank God it is still possible.

NATO expansion has never benefited Europe. It was always a way to keep US troops on the job throughout the Cold War. NATO was deliberately expanded to keep up pressure on Russia. It always put Europe at risk, and there was never any corresponding benefit for the average European. Now, with the US about to drastically reduce its troops in Europe, the nations of Europe are on the brink of running NATO by themselves. Does Europe really want to recreate the Cold War and become a testing ground for Russia’s new cruise missiles? Are they really ready to face such an implacable enemy on their doorstep? Does Europe really want to make an enemy of a European country sitting on most of Europe’s natural resources, including its natural gas, oil, coal, palladium, aluminium and iron ore? How could this enmity benefit the average European family?

And President Trump will be remembered for Gaza Genocide that was not stopped by his 3000 years peace (lasted just two days!), for submission to the European clowns and to Bibi Netanyahu; now for leading the US into final Armageddon.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Damning Evidence Proves Keir Starmer Lied About UK Role in Israel’s Genocide in Gaza

21st Century News Wire | October 28, 2025

British journalist Matt Kennard reveals the criminal role of the British military as an accomplice to Israel’s brutal genocide of native Palestinian population in Gaza. Kennard reveals how the Royal Air Force (RAF) has flown hundreds, if not thousands, of surveillance flights over Gaza since October 7, 2023. It is believed that the British flights supplied the Israelis with targeting intelligence used to slaughter countless Palestinians—including thousands of unarmed men, women and children. Despite the exposure, the Starmer government refused to give any details about these flights which amount to war crimes.

Watch this incredibly damning video report from Double Down News:

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Video, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Building European Security Without Russia ‘Unrealistic’, Warns Hungary’s Top Diplomat

Sputnik – 28.10.2025

Building the architecture of European security without Russia is unrealistic, Foreign Minister of Hungary Peter Szijjarto said on the sidelines of the 3rd International Conference on Eurasian Security in Minsk.

Szijjarto also said he hopes for success of the talks between Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and US President Donald Trump and hopes Washington will understand the position of Budapest, whose energy security is impossible without Russia.

“Our energy security is based on our honest and reliable energy cooperation with Russia. Our historical experience shows that this cooperation has always been reliable and effective. Therefore, we hope that our energy security will not be violated. We hope that the conversation between our Prime Minister and the President of the United States in the second half of next week will also be successful from this point of view,” Szijjarto told reporters on the sidelines of the 3rd Minsk International Conference on Eurasian Security.

The Hungarian side “will talk in great detail about our energy supply situation and hopes that it will be treated with respect,” the minister said.

Hungary hopes that the Russian-US summit in Budapest will take place, the question is about timing of preparations, he added.

“We were looking forward to the phone call between [US] President [Donald] Trump and [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin announcing the possibility of a peace summit. We are happy to host it. We understand that neither side has abandoned this plan. The question is the timing and the content. Therefore, we hope that preparations will move forward and the summit will ultimately take place,” Szijjarto told reporters on the sidelines of the third Minsk International Conference on Eurasian Security.

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

The Rubio Doctrine: Neocons Are Back!

By Ron Paul | October 27, 2025

According to several recent news reports, the two major Trump foreign policy shifts last week are the handiwork of Marco Rubio, the President’s Secretary of State and (acting) National Security Advisor. As with all neocon plans, they will be big on promises and small on delivery.

First up, according to Bloomberg it was Rubio who finally convinced President Trump to take “ownership” of the US proxy war on Russia, and for the first time place sanctions on Russia. Up to this point President Trump chose to portray himself as a mediator between Ukraine and Russia. But with this move against Russia’s oil sector he can no longer credibly claim that this is “Joe Biden’s war.”

The Trump move followed a confusing few weeks since the Trump/Putin Alaska summit in August. After that meeting Trump dropped the neocon position that a ceasefire in the Russia/Ukraine war must occur before any peace negotiations. It was a sign that Trump was looking more realistically at the war. He also said he did not think Ukraine would win, which is pretty obvious.

A surprise call to Putin the day before Ukrainian president Zelensky was to arrive in town just over a week ago reinforced that position and Zelensky left Washington empty-handed. He was seeking Tomahawk missiles that could strike deep into Russian territory.

Then out of the blue President Trump last week announced through his Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that the US would be sanctioning Russia’s two largest oil companies until Russia declares a ceasefire in the war before negotiations. That won’t happen, but what it does mean is that Rubio and the neocons have successfully gotten Trump to step on the escalation escalator. That is what they always do. It will be much harder to back down now.

At the same time the US Administration was jumping deeper into the Russia/Ukraine war, a long-time neocon dream was suddenly back in play. Although in Trump’s first term a “regime change” operation was attempted against Venezuela, it failed spectacularly. But the neocons have long dreamed of overthrowing the Venezuelan government – they almost got their way back in 2002 – and suddenly after several weeks of extrajudicial murder on the high seas in the name of fighting the drug war, President Trump announced that land strikes on Venezuela would begin soon.

He did mention that he might brief Congress on his plans for war on Venezuela, not that Congress can be bothered to care much one way or the other.

The neocon old guard that still dominates Washington foreign policy is taking a victory lap. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham was on the Sunday shows beaming over the conversion of “no regime-change wars” President Trump to “regime change wars” President Trump.

The Saddam Hussein WMD factories of 2002 have become the Nicolas Maduro cocaine and fentanyl factories of 2025 and once again the neocon war lies are amplified by the US mainstream media and transmitted to the American people. A new disaster is in the making. The “global war on terror” has been rebranded the “hemispheric war on narco-terror” and the US military industrial complex is rubbing its hands in anticipation of a windfall.

After John Bolton’s disastrous stint in the first Trump Administration, promises were made that the second Trump Administration would be neocon-free. Instead, the neocons are back. Unless President Trump wakes up soon, the neocons will destroy his second term…and maybe the country.

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Senegal probes French colonial massacre with fresh excavations

Al Mayadeen | October 28, 2025

Archaeologists in Senegal have uncovered new evidence of a French colonial massacre dating back to 1944, as part of a government-led effort to uncover the truth behind the killings of West African soldiers by French forces following World War II.

The Thiaroye military cemetery, located near the capital Dakar, is currently the focus of an extensive archaeological excavation aimed at identifying the remains of soldiers allegedly executed by French colonial troops on December 1, 1944.

The incident occurred after nearly 1,600 soldiers, many of them recently freed from German captivity, were brought to a holding camp in Thiaroye and began protesting unpaid wages and unequal treatment.

French troops opened fire on the men, but the number of casualties and the precise circumstances have long been disputed. Official colonial-era accounts claimed 70 deaths, but Senegalese researchers say the number could be between 300 and 400.

Mass grave evidence emerges

During a recent visit to the cemetery, an AFP team observed disrupted earth, exposed burial containers, and ongoing digs around headstones. The cemetery, created in 1926 by colonial France, holds 202 marked graves, although it remains unclear who is buried in each plot, or whether some markers contain any remains at all.

Archaeologists have excavated seven graves from an initial group of 34, recovering full and partial skeletons. According to archaeologist Moustapha Sall, one of the skeletons was found with a bullet lodged near the heart. Others showed signs of trauma, including missing spines, ribs, and skulls. Some remains were discovered with iron chains around their legs.

“This means they suffered violence,” Sall said. “One hypothesis is that the graves were made after the initial burials, or that it was staged to make it appear they had been properly buried.”

Historical record challenged

Colonel Saliou Ngom, director of Senegal’s army archives and historical heritage, said the work aims to compensate for the historical gaps left by limited access to French colonial archives.

“Making the underground speak is our way of accessing truth,” Ngom said. He added that the October 16 report submitted to President Bassirou Diomaye Faye described the massacre as “premeditated” and “covered up.”

President Faye has since authorized the continuation of excavations at all sites suspected to contain mass graves. He has also reaffirmed Senegal’s commitment to preserving the memory of those killed.

Researchers plan to carry out DNA analysis to identify the origins of the remains, and ballistics experts will examine the materials recovered to establish the type of weapons used. Ground-penetrating radar is also being employed to explore deeper layers of the cemetery’s subsoil.

“The preliminary results do not answer all the questions,” Sall noted. “But they are a very important step in the search for historical truth.”

France acknowledges massacre

In November 2024, as the 80th anniversary of the massacre approached, French President Emmanuel Macron publicly acknowledged for the first time that French colonial troops had carried out a “massacre” in Thiaroye.

While the statement marked a significant shift in France’s official stance, Senegalese officials and historians say much more work remains to be done to fully document the scale of the atrocity and ensure proper recognition for those killed.

“We have been searching for the historical truth for 81 years,” Colonel Ngom said. “If the subsoil provides it, there is nothing more significant.”

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

French General Staff Gearing Up To Send 2,000 Troops To Ukraine – Russian Foreign Intel

Sputnik – 28.10.2025

French Foreign Legion assault troops, currently stationed in Poland, are preparing for redeployment to central Ukraine, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has revealed.

French Foreign Legion assault troops, stationed in Poland’s border regions, are gearing up to be redeployed to central Ukraine, the Russian Foreign Intelligence service (SVR) stated.

President Emmanuel Macron of France has been itching for military intervention in Ukraine, craving to be remembered as a military leader, the agency said.

“According to information received by the SVR, French President E. Macron is dreaming of a military intervention in Ukraine. Having failed as a politician and despairing of leading the country out of its protracted socio-economic crisis, he has not given up hope of going down in history as a military leader,” the SVR said in a statement.

The General Staff of the French armed forces, on the orders of Macron, is preparing to deploy a military contingent of up to 2,000 soldiers and officers to Ukraine to assist Kiev, the SVR added.

“The backbone of the formation will be French Foreign Legion assault troops, primarily from Latin American countries. The legionnaires are currently deployed in areas of Poland bordering Ukraine, undergoing intensive combat training and receiving weapons and military equipment. Their deployment to central Ukraine is planned for the near future,” the statement read.

France is rapidly creating hundreds of additional hospital beds to accommodate the wounded, the statement added.

“In the event of a leak of information about the planned intervention, Paris intends to state that it is merely a small group of instructors arriving in Ukraine to train mobilized soldiers of Ukrainian armed forces,” the SVR also said.

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Inside the Trump Administration’s Venezeula Disagreements

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | October 28, 2025

In the waters of the Caribbean, a surprisingly large U.S. fleet sits with Venezuela in its sights. It includes over 10,000 troops, Aegis guided-missile destroyers, a nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, F-35B jet fighters, MQ-9 Reaper drones, P-8 Poseidon spy planes, assault ships, and a secretive special-operations ship.

The fleet is built for war on Venezuela or its drug cartels, but it is engineered to put enough pressure on Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro to push him from power. The justification for the war is stopping the flow of drugs into the United States by Venezuelan drug cartels; the justification for the coup is that Maduro is the head of those cartels.

But U.S. officials—often those in the best place to know—have disagreed with all three aspects of the military action: the significance of Venezuela’s drug cartels in the flow of drugs, and especially fentanyl, into United States; the role of Maduro in those cartels; and the use of the military to fight them. For their disagreement, many of those officials have left or been forced from their jobs.

U.S. President Donald Trump has insisted that military force is necessary to stop “narco-terrorists” who are smuggling a “deadly weapon poisoning Americans.” He has claimed that “every boat” the U.S. military strikes off the coast of Venezuela is “stacked up with bags of white powder that’s mostly fentanyl” and “kills 25,000 on average—some people say more.”

But current and former U.S. officials disagree. While most of the boats the U.S. military has sunk have been in the passageway between Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago, U.S. officials say that that passage is neither used to transport fentanyl nor is it used to transport drugs to the United States. 80% of the drugs that flow through that passage is marijuana, and most of the rest is cocaine. And those drugs are headed, not to the United States, but to West Africa and Europe. Most of the fentanyl that finds its way into the U.S. comes from Mexico.

The military strikes on Venezuelan boats cannot be justified by the war on drugs and “are unlikely…to cut overdose deaths in the United States,” according to officials. “When I saw [an internal document on the strikes],” a senior U.S. national security official said, “I immediately thought, ‘This isn’t about terrorists. This is about Venezuela and regime change.’”

According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, 90% of the cocaine that transits into the United States enters through Mexico, not Venezuela. And Venezuela is not a source of fentanyl. The dissenting American officials are in agreement with international bodies. The  2025 UNODC World Drug Report assesses that Venezuela “has consolidated its status as a territory free from the cultivation of coca leaves, cannabis and similar crops.” The report says that “[o]nly 5% of Colombian drugs transit through Venezuela.” The European Union’s European Drug Report 2025 corroborates the United Nations report: it “does not mention Venezuela even once as a corridor for the international drug trade.”

U.S. intelligence also disagrees on the Trump administration’s claim that Maduro is at the head of the Venezuelan drug cartels. The Trump administration has insisted that “Maduro is the leader of the designated narco-terrorist organization Cartel de Los Soles.”

Again, though, U.S. officials disagree. A “sense of the community” memorandum dated April 7, 2025 that puts together the findings of the eighteen agencies in the U.S. intelligence community released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence directly contradicts the Trump administration’s claim that Maduro is the leader of Tren de Aragua (TDA) drug cartel.

The memorandum clearly states that “the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with TDA and is not directing TDA movement to and operations in the United States.” It states that the intelligence community “has not observed the regime directing TDA.”

Making the American case against the Maduro government even less credible, the memorandum finds that “Venezuelan intelligence, military, and police services view TDA as a security threat and operate against it in ways that make it highly unlikely the two sides would cooperate in a strategic or consistent way.” The Venezuelan National Guard has arrested TDA members and “Venezuelan security forces have periodically engaged in armed confrontations with TDA.”

The contradiction was seen as a problem. Days after the memorandum’s release, Joe Kent, then acting chief of staff for Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, told a senior intelligence analyst to do a “rethink” of the analysis and offer a new assessment. “We need to do some rewriting so this document is not used against the DNI [Director of National Intelligence] or POTUS [President of the United States],” Kent told intelligence officers.

The rewritten memo still contradicted the Trump administration’s claims about Maduro. One week later, Michael Collins, the acting chair of the National Intelligence Council, and Maria Langan-Riekhof, his deputy, were fired by Gabbard. Gabbard claims the firings were part of a campaign to stop leaks by “deep-state criminals” who are politicizing the intelligence community.

U.S. officials have objected not just to the White House’s claims about Venezuela as a narco-state and about Maduro’s role as head of the cartels, but also to the White House’s militarized answer to the problem. And the objection has come from the highest level of the U.S. military.

On October 16, Admiral Alvin Holsey, head of the U.S. Southern Command, the group that oversees all operations in Central and South America, including the current and any future military actions taken against Venezuela, announced that he was stepping down. The New York Times has reported that there were “real policy tensions concerning Venezuela” between the admiral and Pete Hegseth, the secretary of War. Current and former U.S. officials say that Holsey “had raised concerns about the mission and the attacks on the alleged drug boats.”

But there are also reports that there were questions about whether Holsey would be fired in the days before he announced his resignation. “Hegseth did not believe Holsey was moving quickly or aggressively enough to combat drug traffickers in the Caribbean.” The Washington Post reports that “Hegseth had grown disenchanted with Holsey and wanted him to step aside.” The disenchantment, according to “people familiar with the matter,” started “around the time that the Trump administration began ordering deadly strikes on alleged drug boats off the coast of Venezuela.”

At every level, Venezuela as a significant source of drug deaths in America, Maduro’s role as leader of Venezuela’s drug cartels, and the United State’s militarized solution to the problem, U.S. officials have disagreed with the Trump administration. Some of those officials have paid for doing their jobs with their jobs.

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Sen. Rand Paul Slams Strikes on Boats in Caribbean as ‘Extrajudicial Killings’

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | October 27, 2025

Senator Rand Paul blasted President Donald Trump’s strikes on alleged drug traffickers as unconstitutional and illegal.

“A briefing is not enough to overcome the Constitution. The Constitution says that when you go to war, Congress has to vote on it. … The drug war, or the crime war, has typically been dealt with through law enforcement,” Paul said on Fox News Sunday. “And so far they have alleged that these people are drug dealers … and we’ve had no evidence presented. So at this point we would call them extrajudicial killings.”

So far, the Department of War has bombed ten boats it claims are smuggling narcotics into the US. Nine of the strikes have been on vessels in the Caribbean, against alleged cartels linked to Venezuela. The White House has not provided evidence that the ships were carrying drugs.

“So far, they have alleged that these people are drug dealers. No one said their name. No one said what evidence. No one said whether they’re armed. And we’ve had no evidence presented,” Paul said.

One survivor of a strike was released by Ecuador, finding he was not engaged in wrongdoing when the boat was attacked. One family member said a victim of a US strike was a fisherman, and not working for a cartel.

Trump has discussed expanding the strikes into Venezuela and has given the CIA approval to conduct lethal operations against cartels. Secretary of State Marco Rubio claims that Venezuelan President Maduro is the leader of a cartel designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

If Trump elects to expand the war, he told reporters that he will brief Congress on the plans. He went on to say he did not have to discuss the matter with the Legislator and has not sought a Declaration of War.

The Constitution explicitly grants Congress the authority to Declare War. However, the principle of preventing the President from unilaterally declaring war has been eroded over time. Congress has not declared war since World War 2 II. The last Authorization for Use of Military Force was passed in 2002 for the Iraq War.

Senator Paul has teamed up with Democratic Senator Tim Kaine to push a War Powers Resolution that would stop Trump from launching a war with Venezuela.

October 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

USS Nimitz loses 2 aircraft in South China Sea in 30 minutes

Al Mayadeen | October 27, 2025

Two US Navy aircraft operating from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz were lost to the sea within roughly 30 minutes of each other: an MH-60R Sea Hawk and an F/A-18F Super Hornet.

On Sunday, search-and-rescue forces recovered all five personnel from the two incidents; troops were reported in stable condition. The US Pacific Fleet has characterized the events as separate incidents and opened formal investigations.

Timeline and immediate facts

The first incident involved an MH-60R Sea Hawk assigned to Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron HSM-73; it went into the sea in the mid-afternoon while conducting routine carrier operations.

Approximately 30 minutes later, an F/A-18F Super Hornet from VFA-22 crashed into the South China Sea; both aviators ejected and were recovered. Official statements and reporting indicate both events occurred while the Nimitz was operating in the South China Sea during what has been described as routine deployment activity.

Peacetime losses in a contested theater

A single deck-oriented aviation mishap is an accepted operational risk; two losses from the same carrier within a short span are not. Carrier flight decks are among the most hazardous workplaces in peacetime precisely because routine activity concentrates high-energy operations in a confined, moving environment.

The coincidence of two different airframes, a rotary-wing anti-submarine warfare (ASW) platform and a strike fighter, being lost in quick succession raises immediate questions about whether the events are independent mishaps or symptoms of a common underlying problem, including maintenance, human factors, deck operations, or environmental conditions.

A series of US Navy ‘mishaps’

During extended US operations in the Red Sea, including an all-out aerial and naval aggression against the Yemeni Armed Forces, the Navy recorded several high-profile aviation and deck incidents.

Aircraft were lost overboard, and friendly fire shot down a US fighter that the Navy later admitted to.

Those combat-adjacent mishaps, driven in large part by Yemeni missile and unmanned threats and by an unusually high operational tempo, differ in proximate cause from a routine-operations crash, but together they form a cluster that points to systemic pressure on American naval aviation readiness and risk margins.

How aircraft go overboard

On a carrier, parked and stowed aircraft are secured by brakes, chocks, and multiple tiedowns attached to deck padeyes; moving aircraft are handled with tractors, elevators, and carefully choreographed deck evolutions governed by standardized procedures.

An aircraft can go overboard when one or more protective layers fail: tiedown chains can part under extreme roll/heave or wind, fastening points can be improperly rigged or removed prematurely, tow vehicles or handling errors can permit an uncontrolled move, or a sudden ship maneuver, for example an emergency turn or severe roll in heavy sea state, can create loads that exceed restraints.

Active flight operations introduce other vectors. Bolters, arrested-landing failures, catapult or engine malfunctions, or deck strikes can send an aircraft into the water.

Material costs

The material loss is non-trivial. Modern Super Hornets and missionized Sea Hawks represent tens of millions of dollars apiece in direct replacement and far higher sums over lifecycle accounting; public reporting commonly places a unit-replacement estimate for a Super Hornet at around $70 million and the MH-60R at around $37 million, though precise figures vary by accounting method.

F/A-18 losses

  • One F/A-18F Super Hornet was lost after an arresting cable failed during landing on the USS Harry S. Truman in May 2025.
  • Another F/A-18E Super Hornet was lost in April 2025 when the crew lost control of the aircraft while it was being towed in the hangar bay, causing it and the tow tractor to fall overboard.
  • A third F/A-18 Super Hornet was lost after it was accidentally shot down by the guided-missile cruiser USS Gettysburg.

USS Nimitz on its final deployment

The Nimitz is one of the US Navy’s older nuclear-powered carriers and was reported to be on its final deployment before decommissioning in May 2026. Aging platforms are not inherently unsafe, but prolonged deployments, deferred maintenance, and supply-chain friction raise the probability of mechanical or human-process failures.

Geostrategic implications

Tactically, losing two aircraft is a direct hit to the USS Nimitz strike group’s operational strength in the region. But politically, the impact could be even greater.

The South China Sea remains one of the world’s most contested waters, where US naval presence serves as both a coercive measure against China and a reassurance to Washington’s allies. Incidents like these tend to draw sharp attention. They give rivals an opportunity to point to underlying problems related to US readiness and reliability while allies quietly watch how Washington manages the situation.

When seen alongside earlier mishaps in the Red Sea, including crashes, handling errors, and a friendly-fire shootdown, the Nimitz losses suggest a Navy stretched thin. High operational tempo, aging ships and aircraft, and pressure to sustain global deployments may be eroding safety margins.

October 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »