Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

They’re at it again… the U.S. and Britain, inciting global war, must be defeated for good

Strategic Culture Foundation | November 22, 2024

This week marks a fateful threshold for the world. In a grave announcement, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the three-year proxy war in Ukraine has now reached a global dimension.

The responsibility for this abysmal moment lies fully with the United States’ elitist rulers and their British accomplices. They are inciting global catastrophe in a desperate bid to save their hegemonic empire.

Putin’s announcement on November 21 came only hours after Russia launched a retaliatory strike against Anglo-American aggression. Russia’s new hypersonic ballistic missile destroyed a munitions center in Dnepropetrovsk in central Ukraine. The conventionally armed missile – called Oreshnik – was deployed in combat for the first time. It delivered several warheads at Mach-10 speed. There is no air defense against such a unique weapon.

The Oreshnik attack was in response to the firing of long-range missiles by the United States and Britain on November 19 and 21 against the pre-conflict territory of the Russian Federation. There is no doubt that the U.S. and British forces were directly involved because, as Moscow has noted, the Ukrainian regime does not have the personnel or logistics capability to operate these advanced NATO weapon systems.

The conclusion is stark. The world is on the cusp of World War Three, a war that would inevitably become a nuclear conflagration and precipitate the end of life on Earth. The evil facing humanity is staggering.

Western barefaced lies to the public

Ludicrously, or perhaps more accurately, fiendishly, Western politicians and media are condemning Russia for the escalation. Their accusations are in flagrant contradiction with the facts. The Western public is being lied to about the sequence and causes of war.

In a move beyond reckless, the United States and Britain attacked Russia with long-range missiles from the territory of Ukraine. The ATACMS and Storm Shadow weapons were aimed at Bryansk and Kursk Oblasts in Western Russia. The American missiles were shot down by Russian air defense, while the British Storm Shadow cruise projectile caused deaths in Kursk.

That barrage marked an open act of war against Russia by the United States and Britain. Hence, the Russian leader commented that the proxy war in Ukraine had now taken on a global dimension.

The American and British leadership went ahead with this aggression even after Russia had explicitly warned several weeks ago that the deployment of such weapons against Russian territory would be seen by Moscow as an act of war. It also followed only hours after Russia revised its nuclear defense doctrine on November 19, defining that the use of long-range conventional weapons from the territory of a non-nuclear state (Ukraine) supplied by nuclear states (the U.S. and Britain) would constitute a joint attack, thereby giving Russia the right to retaliate with nuclear force.

The situation has thus entered the realm of nuclear world war.

Given the aggression initiated by the U.S. and Britain with their ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles, Russia has the legal right to hit those territories and any other territory of the NATO alliance. Russia chose not to do so – for now – limiting its Oreshnik’s target to the territory of Ukraine.

What happens next over the coming days depends on the U.S. and its NATO partners. So far, the White House and Pentagon have sought to (irrationally) blame Moscow for escalation and are saying that the United States will continue to deploy long-range missiles from Ukraine against Russian territory. That remains to be seen if the insanity prevails.

Russia has shown incredible restraint

Far from escalating conduct, Russia has shown incredible restraint, given the relentless provocations by the U.S. and NATO over many months and, indeed, years.

The U.S. and its allies have continually weaponized their corrupt, NeoNazi Ukrainian proxy regime – whose pretend-president and former cross-dressing comedian Vladimir Zelensky was given a standing ovation in the European Parliament this week – despite repeated warnings from Moscow that the dynamic is leading to a world war.

The insanity is compounded by Zelensky’s insatiable demands for more weapons and Western taxpayer handouts worth hundreds of billions of dollars, along with hubristic Western notions that “Russia is bluffing.”

How delusional! The Western leaders are playing Russian Roulette. The United States and its NATO partners are now legitimate targets for Russian strikes. Russia demonstrated this week that it has the capability to breach any Western defense, and it is warning that any further aggression on its territory will be responded to.

President Putin admonished Western ruling elites to think carefully about the choices they are going to make. They can pull back from the abyss and negotiate a diplomatic end to the proxy war. Or they can choose to keep escalating to inevitable disaster.

Western ruling class beyond reason

However, of acute concern is that the Western ruling class seems to be beyond reason and sanity. The U.S. hegemon is facing an existential crisis from its terminal collapse as a global power and loss of imperial supremacy. Starting a war with Russia – even to the point of catastrophe – seems to be the only way the Western imperialist system led by the U.S. can respond.

Significantly, the Biden administration is only a matter of weeks from exiting in disgrace. Incoming President Donald Trump has vowed to end the conflict in Ukraine through prompt negotiations. The U.S. deep state is in a quandary.

The American people voted for Trump on November 5 in large part out of repudiation of the Biden administration, the Democrat Party and its servile adherence to the deep state’s endemic warmongering.

Before Trump’s inauguration on January 20, the American ruling class is desperately pushing the proxy war in Ukraine to prevent a negotiated settlement.

Biden’s approval for using ATACMS – followed by the British lackey Prime Minister Keir Starmer – was a brazen U-turn. Only a month ago, they refused such a move. The election of Trump and the prospect of diplomacy with Russia has caused the Western establishment to ramp up the proxy war.

This week saw the 1,000th day of conflict in Ukraine since Russia launched its special military operation to stop NATO aggression on February 24, 2022. The conflict has reached its most dangerous point.

Russia again this week repeated that it is open to a diplomatic settlement, just as it was in late 2021 when it presented far-reaching security proposals to prevent hostilities. The Western elites dismissed that opportunity, choosing the path of war instead. They also sabotaged the Minsk Accords in 2014 and 2015, and the Istanbul peace deal in March 2022. Millions of casualties later, they still want more war, slaughter, and global war, with their grotesque masks of “defending democracy and rules-based order.”

The American people want to end the conflict. The incoming Trump administration appears to be willing to honor the popular demand.

But sanity, morality and democracy are not qualities shared by the imperialist ruling class in the U.S. and its NATO accomplices.

An American deep state coup, then and now

A couple of observations are notable. November 22 marks the date 61 years ago when an American president, JFK, was murdered by the U.S. deep state. A coup d’état was executed very much for the objective of keeping the Cold War going with the Soviet Union because of the vested economic interests of U.S. militarism and the military-industrial complex.

All these years later, the U.S. deep state is attempting another coup against the democratic wishes of the American people for a peaceful end to the proxy war in Ukraine. The U.S. ruling elite want the war against Russia to persist in maintaining their lucrative profits and for existential reasons of empire. Joe Biden is a brain-dead president who is signing orders pushed in front of him by deep-state operatives like Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan just before he wanders off to a retirement home – or into the Amazon jungle à la the hilarious photo-op at the G20 summit in Brazil this week.

Ukraine proxy war back to Nazi Germany

This long perspective also puts the Ukraine proxy war into a proper, wider historical context. The conflict in Ukraine did not start in February 2022. It did not even start with the CIA-backed coup in Kiev against an elected president in February 2014. It did not even start with the U.S.-financed Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004. This conflict goes back at least to the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany in 1945 when the United States and its imperialist allies immediately responded by creating the Cold War with its newly forged imperialist instrument known as NATO, in part by deploying Ukrainian fascist collaborators to covertly attack Russia. After World War Two, the CIA and Nazi remnants like spymaster Major General Reinhard Gehlen were united in purpose along with the British MI6 to defeat the Soviet Union. What is transpiring today in Ukraine is the culmination of a systematic conflict, essentially about projecting and maintaining Western imperial power.

The emergence of Russia, China, the BRICS, and the Global South has amplified Western imperial angst and diehard hostility to preserve global power and privilege. The latter hegemonic Western system is the epitome of fascism and neocolonialism.

Historical nemesis

There is a profound historical nemesis at this juncture. Will the U.S. imperial aggressor and its NATO front go down in defeat, or will it push the world to a final global war?

Russia is not bluffing. It won’t back down because of the historical sacrifices it has made already to defeat fascist tyranny – 27 to 30 million dead in World War Two alone. The Russian nation’s pain and suffering from imperialist aggression make it defiant and resolute in a way that the Western regimes could never comprehend or emulate.

Will sanity prevail? The American and European people have onerous obligations to hold their criminal elite rulers accountable.

November 23, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia’s final warning to NATO – you’ll get your war, but it’ll be over in 15 minutes

By Drago Bosnic | November 23, 2024

We are inches away from a global thermonuclear war. And no, this isn’t a meaningless, overused catchphrase. Quite the contrary, it’s as serious as it gets. We have reached a historical boiling point. At no other time in human history have we been closer to the scenario of annihilation, not even during the so-called “Cuban” Missile Crisis. It should really be called “Turkish” or something along those lines. And it’s important to note that we’re not digressing from the topic by mentioning this.

Namely, the mainstream propaganda machine just loves maintaining its narratives that essentially whitewash the political West and denigrate the actual world. This is why the fact that the United States initiated the “Cuban” Missile Crisis by deploying nuclear-tipped missiles in Italy and Turkey back in 1961 (although some sources claim it was as early as 1959) is ever so “conveniently” forgotten. The USSR waited a full year (at the very least) to respond by placing its own missiles in Cuba.

Thus, it’s perfectly clear who initiated that confrontation. And yet, as previously mentioned, modern historiography remembers the event as the “Cuban” Missile Crisis, sending a subliminal message that it was initiated by the Soviet Union and Cuba. Why is this important? Because the same people are now telling us that Russia “escalated” the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict by “firing missiles at a democratic Ukraine”, once again “forgetting” to mention the preceding events.

Namely, as we all know, the political West gave the Neo-Nazi junta the go-ahead to use long-range missiles against targets deeper within Russia. And they just did. In the last two days, approximately a dozen ATACMS and “Storm Shadow”/SCALP-EG missiles have been used (on the same day Moscow updated its nuclear doctrine, mind you). So, how did the “evil Kremlin”, led by the “crazy, bloodthirsty tyrant Putin”, respond to this? Well, not with nukes, as we’re still here, even though the doctrine allows it.

However, Russia did fire what is technically an ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile). This marks the first time such a weapon was used in a conflict. And while ICBMs normally carry thermonuclear warheads, this one was conventionally armed. To better understand what sort of weapon this is, we have to go back a decade or so, specifically to the RS-26 “Rubezh” program that was supposed to deter NATO’s crawling aggression in Europe and the post-Soviet space.

Namely, the RS-26 was envisaged as the successor to the formidable RSD-10 “Pioneer” IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missile). Essentially a shortened version of the three-stage RS-24 “Yars” ICBM, with one stage removed (and some other modifications), the RS-26 had a shorter range, but was no less deadly. In fact, it carried more powerful warheads than the “Pioneer” (at least four 300 kt instead of the latter’s three 150 kt ones), while also being more accurate and impossible to intercept.

This enabled it to target even massive underground command centers or any other high-priority targets across NATO-occupied Europe. However, there was a (geo)political problem with the RS-26. Namely, it was made at a time when the INF Treaty was still in force (banning all missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 km). So, for the RS-26 to formally comply with this, it had to have a range greater than 5,500 km. Otherwise, it would violate the INF Treaty and be designated as an IRBM.

To avoid this, it was designed to achieve a maximum range of 5,800 km, just enough to be designated as an ICBM. However, this created another problem, as it affected the New START treaty. Namely, this would force Russia to reduce the number of its, so to speak, “purebred” ICBMs such as “Yars”, R-36M2 “Voevoda” and RS-28 “Sarmat”. As a result, in 2011, the program was postponed to a period after 2027, with most resources diverted for the development of Russia’s new hypersonic weapons.

However, on August 2, 2019, the US unilaterally withdrew from the INF Treaty and started developing previously banned intermediate and medium-range missiles, prompting Russia to respond. These programs accelerated significantly after the start of the special military operation (SMO), resulting in new designs, as well as massive improvements to the existing ones. However, we still didn’t hear almost anything about the RS-26, indicating that the program might have even been scrapped altogether.

But, on April 12 this year, Moscow tested an “unnamed ICBM”. To this day, the Russian military is yet to publicly reveal the exact type of the missile launched that day. At the time, I argued that the missile was actually the RS-26, as it had striking similarities with the previously mentioned RS-24 that the “Rubezh” was actually based on, including the way it conducted wobbling maneuvers designed to confuse NATO’s ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems, making it virtually impossible to intercept.

For seven months, no news came through about this “mysterious ICBM”. Until the early hours of November 21, that is. Initially, the Russian military didn’t reveal what missile it was, letting NATO contemplate what to do next. However, the “mysterious ICBM” was soon not only uncovered, but actually named – “Oreshnik” (“Hazel” in Russian). However, solid information about the missile is extremely scant, fueling all sorts of speculation, wild guessing and outright misinformation.

For instance, the Pentagon insists the missile that hit Dnepropetrovsk was fired from Kapustin Yar, a testing site in the Astrakhan oblast (region) in southern Russia, located over 1000 km to the east. This distance is too short for an ICBM, raising questions about the veracity of the US military’s claims. Then, videos from Kazakhstan emerged, specifically over the city of Satbayev, which is 1,500 km to the east of Kapustin Yar. Even more interestingly, some 450 km to the southeast lies Sary Shagan.

This place is home to one of the largest and most important missile test sites in the former Soviet Union, with the Russian military still using it extensively, including during the aforementioned April 12 test. It’s simply impossible to see “Oreshnik” fly over Satbayev if it was fired from Kapustin Yar to Dnepropetrovsk. However, it’s certainly possible that the missile was fired from Sary Shagan. Still, NATO doesn’t want to reveal that it flew nearly 2,400 km before hitting its targets with pinpoint precision.

Even more interestingly, videos over Satbayev also show that the missile is wobbling and maneuvering just like the “mysterious ICBM” tested on April 12, further reinforcing the notion that the “Oreshnik” could actually be a conventionally armed “Rubezh”. In addition, its maximum range exceeds 5,000 km, which puts virtually all of Europe in range. And indeed, it makes little sense to get a completely new missile if you have the “Rubezh”, as it’s already a largely finished product.

Technically speaking, there are several possibilities when it comes to the “Oreshnik”. First, it doesn’t even have to be a regular missile and could be some sort of MaRV (maneuverable reentry vehicle), MIRV (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle), HGV (hypersonic glide vehicle), etc. or perhaps even a hybrid, with the “Rubezh” being the primary missile carrier. The “Rubezh” itself can already carry the “Avangard”, so if the “Oreshnik” is an HGV, it shouldn’t be a problem for the “Rubezh” to deploy it.

Another possibility is that the “Oreshnik” is a completely new missile (not necessarily ballistic, but likely a more advanced hypersonic, maneuvering weapon) that has its own MIRV/MaRV/HGV warheads. There are no definite claims about this at present, simply because very little is publicly known about it. However, personally, I am more inclined to believe that the “Oreshnik” is a conventionally armed HGV that can be carried by nuclear-capable ICBM/IRBMs like the RS-26 “Rubezh”.

The reason is quite simple, because why would someone make something completely new when they already have a finished project that can immediately go into production (the “Rubezh” uses the same production lines as the “Yars”)? This reinforces the notion that the RS-26 is a highly modular design which can be equipped with various types of warheads, including conventional ones. It also harkens back to President Putin’s vision of Russia’s strategic preemptive strike capabilities.

One more thing that should be noted about the “Oreshnik” is that it was certainly an overkill against the Neo-Nazi junta. Russia’s more tactical and operational level missiles could’ve easily conducted this. However, given the fact that Moscow is faced with the increasingly delusional and aggressive West, it just had to demonstrate its firepower, prompting Putin to authorize the long-range strike on Dnepropetrovsk. This is a particularly important message to both the US and EU/NATO.

In terms of the functioning of the missile’s warhead, the available footage shows at least 30 smaller projectiles divided into five groups (six in each). The lack of visible detonations (although at least one was seen) suggests these are probably advanced kinetic penetrators capable of annihilating heavily defended and dug-in positions. This means that any NATO base anywhere in Europe and/or elsewhere would be in range, but Russia wouldn’t need to rely on its thermonuclear arsenal to deter aggression.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

November 23, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Putin outlines Moscow’s response to Ukraine escalation (FULL SPEECH)

Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a televised address from the Kremlin on Thursday evening

RT | November 21, 2024

President Vladimir Putin has promised a decisive response to any aggression, criticizing the West for escalating tensions, and reiterated Moscow’s willingness to engage in peace talks to resolve the Ukraine conflict.

Here’s a full text of Putin’s address, as provided by the Kremlin.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: I would like to inform the military personnel of the Russian Federation Armed Forces, citizens of our country, our friends across the globe, and those who persist in the illusion that a strategic defeat can be inflicted upon Russia, about the events taking place today in the zone of the special military operation, specifically following the attacks by Western long-range weapons against our territory.

The escalation of the conflict in Ukraine, instigated by the West, continues with the United States and its NATO allies previously announcing that they authorise the use of their long-range high-precision weapons for strikes inside the Russian Federation. Experts are well aware, and the Russian side has repeatedly highlighted it, that the use of such weapons is not possible without the direct involvement of military experts from the manufacturing nations.

On November 19, six ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles produced by the United States, and on November 21, during a combined missile assault involving British Storm Shadow systems and HIMARS systems produced by the US, attacked military facilities inside the Russian Federation in the Bryansk and Kursk regions. From that point onward, as we have repeatedly emphasised in prior communications, the regional conflict in Ukraine provoked by the West has assumed elements of a global nature. Our air defence systems successfully counteracted these incursions, preventing the enemy from achieving their apparent objectives.

The fire at the ammunition depot in the Bryansk Region, caused by the debris of ATACMS missiles, was extinguished without casualties or significant damage. In the Kursk Region, the attack targeted one of the command posts of our group North. Regrettably, the attack and the subsequent air defence battle resulted in casualties, both fatalities and injuries, among the perimeter security units and servicing staff. However, the command and operational staff of the control centre suffered no casualties and continues to manage effectively the operations of our forces to eliminate and push enemy units out of the Kursk Region.

I wish to underscore once again that the use by the enemy of such weapons cannot affect the course of combat operations in the special military operation zone. Our forces are making successful advances along the entire line of contact, and all objectives we have set will be accomplished.

In response to the deployment of American and British long-range weapons, on November 21, the Russian Armed Forces delivered a combined strike on a facility within Ukraine’s defence industrial complex. In field conditions, we also carried out tests of one of Russia’s latest medium-range missile systems – in this case, carrying a non-nuclear hypersonic ballistic missile that our engineers named Oreshnik. The tests were successful, achieving the intended objective of the launch. In the city of Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine, one of the largest and most famous industrial complexes from the Soviet Union era, which continues to produce missiles and other armaments, was hit.

We are developing intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles in response to US plans to produce and deploy intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. We believe that the United States made a mistake by unilaterally destroying the INF Treaty in 2019 under far-fetched pretext. Today, the United States is not only producing such equipment, but, as we can see, it has worked out ways to deploy its advanced missile systems to different regions of the world, including Europe, during training exercises for its troops. Moreover, in the course of these exercises, they are conducting training for using them.

As a reminder, Russia has voluntarily and unilaterally committed not to deploy intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles until US weapons of this kind appear in any region of the world.

To reiterate, we are conducting combat tests of the Oreshnik missile system in response to NATO’s aggressive actions against Russia. Our decision on further deployment of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles will depend on the actions of the United States and its satellites.

We will determine the targets during further tests of our advanced missile systems based on the threats to the security of the Russian Federation. We consider ourselves entitled to use our weapons against military facilities of those countries that allow to use their weapons against our facilities, and in case of an escalation of aggressive actions, we will respond decisively and in mirror-like manner. I recommend that the ruling elites of the countries that are hatching plans to use their military contingents against Russia seriously consider this.

It goes without saying that when choosing, if necessary and as a retaliatory measure, targets to be hit by systems such as Oreshnik on Ukrainian territory, we will in advance suggest that civilians and citizens of friendly countries residing in those areas leave danger zones. We will do so for humanitarian reasons, openly and publicly, without fear of counter-moves coming from the enemy, who will also be receiving this information.

Why without fear? Because there are no means of countering such weapons today. Missiles attack targets at a speed of Mach 10, which is 2.5 to 3 kilometres per second. Air defence systems currently available in the world and missile defence systems being created by the Americans in Europe cannot intercept such missiles. It is impossible.

I would like to emphasise once again that it was not Russia, but the United States that destroyed the international security system and, by continuing to fight, cling to its hegemony, they are pushing the whole world into a global conflict.

We have always preferred and are ready now to resolve all disputes by peaceful means. But we are also ready for any turn of events.

If anyone still doubts this, make no mistake: there will always be a response.

November 22, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Putin: Russia Strikes Ukrainian Defense Facility With New Oreshnik Ballistic Missile

Sputnik – 21.11.2024

The Russian president announced that the country’s armed forces carried out a combined strike using the latest Oreshnik medium-range missile against a Ukrainian defense industry facility in response to US and British weapon strikes on Russian territory.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that Kiev’s use of long-range weapons will not affect the course of the special military operation, and all its objectives will be achieved.

Illusions about the possibility of delivering a strategic defeat to Russia, about the events currently unfolding in the zone of the special military operation, particularly in light of the use of long-range Western-made weapons against our territory [should not be held],” Putin said in his address on Thursday.

On the Response to Long-Range Weapon Attacks

The president reported that on November 19, Ukrainian forces attacked targets in the Bryansk region with six ATACMS missiles, followed by Storm Shadow system strikes in the Kursk region on November 21. Air defense systems repelled the attacks, resulting in no casualties or significant damage.

Putin emphasized that the conflict in Ukraine has acquired global dimensions after these attacks.

“From this moment, as we have repeatedly emphasized, the conflict in Ukraine, provoked earlier by the West, has acquired global characteristics,” he stressed.

He noted that the use of long-range munitions against Russia is impossible without specialists from the countries where they were manufactured.

“We consider ourselves entitled to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow their weapons to be used against our facilities. In the event of an escalation of aggressive actions, we will respond equally decisively and symmetrically,” the president stated.

He added that Kiev’s use of long-range weapons will not affect the course of the special military operation, and all its objectives will be achieved.

On the International Security System

Putin likewise emphasized that the international security system was destroyed by the United States, which made a mistake by withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019.

“Let me stress once again that it was not Russia but the United States that destroyed the international security system, and by clinging to its hegemony, it is pushing the entire world toward a global conflict,” he noted.

Putin added that Moscow will respond decisively and symmetrically in the event of escalation. He stated that Russia always advocates resolving disputes peacefully but warned against underestimating its readiness for any developments.

The president also said that the deployment of Russian intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles will depend on the actions of the US and its allies. Targets for future tests of advanced missile systems will be chosen based on threats to Russia.

“Of course, when selecting targets for such systems as Oreshnik on Ukrainian territory as a necessary countermeasure, we will inform civilians and request citizens of friendly nations in those areas to leave dangerous zones in advance,” the head of state stressed.

“This will be done openly, publicly, and out of humanitarian considerations, without fear of opposition from the enemy,” Putin emphasized during his address.

NATO Actions Prompt Oreshnik Missile Tests

The Oreshnik missile system is being tested in combat conditions as a response to NATO countries’ aggressive actions against Russia, he announced.

“In response to the use of American and British weaponry on November 21 this year, Russian armed forces conducted a combined strike on one of Ukraine’s defense-industrial complex facilities. This included testing one of Russia’s latest medium-range missile systems in combat conditions. In this case, a ballistic missile equipped with non-nuclear hypersonic technology, referred to as Oreshnik by our missile forces, [was used]” Putin stated during his address.

Modern air defense systems cannot intercept Oreshnik missiles, which attack targets at a speed of Mach 10—about 2.5-3 kilometers per second, Putin explained.

“Existing modern air defense systems worldwide, including the missile defense systems created by Americans in Europe, cannot intercept such missiles. It’s impossible,” Putin said in his speech.

November 21, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Putin reveals Russia has used its new ‘Oreshnik’ hypersonic ballistic missile

RT | November 21, 2024

The Russian military has launched a start-of-the-art intermediate-range ballistic missile against a Ukrainian target, President Vladimir Putin said in a public address on Thursday.

As part of what the president called a “combat test,” the hypersonic missile, dubbed ‘Oreshnik’ (‘Hazel’), successfully struck a military industrial facility in the Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk (also known as Dnipro in Ukraine), Putin added.

The strike was a response to Ukrainian attacks on military facilities located on internationally recognized Russian territory, the president stated. On Tuesday and Thursday, Kiev’s forces launched the attacks, using US-made ATACMS and HIMARS systems as well as British-made Storm Shadow missiles, he said.

Earlier, the Western media reported that Kiev had received approval from Washington and London for the use of Western-made long-range systems for strikes deep into Russia.

One of the strikes resulted in some casualties at a Russian command center in the Kursk Region but failed to disrupt its operations, the president said, adding that such developments have also drastically changed the nature of the Ukraine conflict, making it a more “global” one.

November 21, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

West has made Ukraine conflict ‘global’ – Putin

FILE PHOTO: Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). © Global Look Press / Keystone Press Agency / Defense Ministry
RT | November 21, 2024

Russian President Vladimir Putin has confirmed that long-range missiles supplied to Ukraine by the US and the UK have been used against targets within the internationally-recognized territory of Russia.

A volley of six US-made ATACMS rockets was launched at Bryansk Region on Tuesday, while a number of British-made Storm Shadow missiles were fired at Kursk Region on Wednesday, the president said.

“From that moment, the Ukraine conflict previously provoked by the West acquired elements of a global nature, just as we warned more than once,” Putin said on Thursday, in a televised address to the nation.

The US and its NATO allies have previously stated they would allow Kiev to use their weapons, Putin said, noting again that such attacks could not take place without the participation of Western military personnel.

The attack on the munitions depot in Bryansk was intercepted by air defenses, causing no casualties and only minor property damage. The second strike, on a military command post in Kursk, resulted in deaths and injuries among the security and support personnel, Putin said. However, the command staff was unharmed and continued to manage the expulsion of Ukrainian invaders from that region of Russia, he added.

In response to these attacks, Russia struck a Ukrainian military-industrial site in Dnepropetrovsk using a new, non-nuclear hypersonic missile dubbed ‘Oresshnik’ (Hazel), Putin revealed.

The use of Western-supplied missiles is not going to change the situation on the ground, where Russian forces are advancing all along the front line and intend to achieve all their objectives, the president concluded.

November 21, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Biden’s Lust for War

By Andrew P. Napolitano | Ron Paul Institute | November 21, 2024

The war in Ukraine is an American war for which the United States government should be ashamed and blamed.

It was initiated by President Joe Biden and then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, both of whom advised Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that if he rejected a peace treaty that his own government had freely negotiated and agreed to in 2022 with Russian negotiators, Ukraine could join NATO. The treaty was more than 100 pages in length, each page of which had been initialed by both sides, and its essence accepted by the Kremlin and by Kyiv — until Biden and Johnson advised against it.

Their advice was essentially to trust their military support, as it would be strong enough to resist any Russian incursion into eastern Ukraine and relieve Kyiv of the need to make concessions to the Kremlin. They used Zelensky as a puppet, since their purpose was not motivated by peace or empathy or justice, rather by hatred for all things Russian.

So, the U.S. and the U.K. encouraged bloodshed instead of peace, confrontation instead of communication, and Congress began paying for a war without declaring one. Motivated by years of anti-Russian jingoism, heedless of its duties under the Constitution, thumbing its nose at at least three treaties ratified by the Senate that permit war only when the U.S. or an ally is gravely threatened, Congress permitted Biden to start an undeclared war against a country that poses no threat whatsoever to the national security of the United States.

Here is the backstory.

The war began in 2014 when the U.S. State Department and the CIA engineered a coup against the popularly elected and neutral-leaning government of Ukraine. Much of Russian-speaking and Russian culturally oriented Ukraine in the east was unhappy with the coup. The American and British plotters then installed a puppet regime that actually began attacking Russian Ukrainians in eastern Ukraine.

The area of eastern Ukraine in which this government-orchestrated violence was taking place has been Russian in culture, religion and language since before the American Revolution. The American and British plotters of the 2014 coup did not expect the resistance that their coup generated. Yet, they looked the other way when the Ukraine government attacked its own people for demonstrating a decided affinity for Moscow over Kyiv; so decided, that the province of Crimea actually voted overwhelmingly to return to Russia.

One person who did not look the other way was Russian President Vladimir Putin. Who could blame him? The U.S. has known since the early 1990s that Russia will not accept an eastward expansion of NATO. The George H.W. Bush administration promised the late Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev as much in return for the peaceful liberation of eastern Europe and especially the reunification of Germany. Nevertheless, with Poland’s entry into NATO, the western perfidy became apparent, as NATO — and its heavy weaponry — moved toward Moscow.

Angry that his predecessor had permitted this, fearful of the same mentality that engineered the 2014 coup now managing NATO, Putin came to the rescue of Russian Ukrainians. When the U.S. and U.K. succeeded in busting the Russia/Ukraine treaty tentatively agreed to in Istanbul, and tempted Zelensky with Ukrainian membership in NATO, Putin’s only alternative was to resist NATO expansion and the Ukrainian military by the use of Russian force.

Who can blame Putin? How would American presidents react to the threat of Chinese offensive weaponry in Mexico?

I know this is not a popular history in the U.S., as mainstream media as well as popular culture and government schools have demonized Russia since the end of the Cold War. That demonization gave Biden cover to promise Zelensky “whatever he needs for as long as it takes.” In his nearly four years in the White House, Biden has declined to articulate as long as it takes to do what.

Biden’s war has cost the American taxpayers nearly $240 billion and Ukraine 600,000 dead troops. It was not declared by Congress. It was facilitated by many Americans on the ground in Ukraine — military in uniform and out, intelligence personnel, and defense contractors. Much of the military equipment that the U.S. has sent to Ukraine — most from America’s substance, not surplus — required U.S. troops and other personnel to train Ukrainian troops in the use of it.

But last weekend, Biden — whose presidency has been thoroughly repudiated by American voters — authorized the use of offensive weaponry that can reach 190 miles into Russia and which can only be manned by U.S. personnel. At this writing, the U.S. equipment has attacked and destroyed a warehouse holding artillery ammunition some 70 miles inside the Russian border.

Who is firing U.S. offensive weaponry?

There is no dispute but that the U.S. is waging war on Russia — without a congressional declaration, without the consent of the United Nations (as the U.S. is obliged to do under a treaty that the U.S. wrote) and solely on its own. I say solely on its own because the weaponry that destroyed the Russian military warehouse requires secret U.S. satellite technology to operate, and U.S. personnel with top-secret security clearances to aim and trigger. It would be an act of espionage to permit Ukrainians to do this.

War is politics by other means. But it is the most deadly, destructive and irreversible means — and must always be a last resort. The Constitution intentionally separated the war-declaring power from the war-waging power. Its author, James Madison, poignantly argued that if presidents could both choose the enemy and fight it, such a person would be a prince and not a president.

Joe Biden’s presidency has been an abysmal failure, and he doesn’t know it. He must perversely hope that history will reward him if he keeps the killing coming to the last Ukrainian and even risks a wider war. Can a presidency of peace come soon enough?

To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
COPYRIGHT 2024 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

November 21, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

All Risk, Little Gain: U.S. Authorizes Long-Range Strikes into Russia

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | November 21, 2024

On November 17, the United States told the world what they told Ukraine three days earlier: Ukriane had permission to fire American supplied long-range missiles deeper into Russian territory.

Not much needs to be said about the risks involved in the decision. They are the same risks that have caused the Joe Biden administration to hesitate green lighting the strikes for months. Russian President Vladimir Putin clearly said in September that because long-range strikes into Russia “are impossible to employ without intelligence data from… NATO satellites,” that “mean[s] that NATO countries… are at war with Russia.” And that, Putin says, “will clearly change the very essence, the very nature of the conflict.”

The calculation whether or not to take a risk can only be made by weighing it against the benefits. But the benefits of green lighting the long-range strikes are illusory.

The Biden administration has not given Ukraine carte blanche to launch missiles into Russia. The license comes with boundaries; the missiles can only be fired into the Kursk region of Russia that Ukrainian troops invaded in August.

The United States has given two reasons for their permission to use their missiles to strike the Kursk region. The Biden administration seems to have been tipped in favor of allowing the strikes by the introduction of North Korean troops into Kursk. The hoped for benefit would be deterring North Korea from sending more troops.

The presence of 10,000 elite North Korean troops who are currently in combat in Kursk has not been proven. And deterring their arrival cannot come close to balancing the risk of direct U.S. involvement in firing missiles into Russia. North Korean troops, even if present, do not alter the balance on the battlefield. The Russian armed forces are growing by 30,000 volunteers a month. 10,000 North Koreans represents only about ten days worth of soldiers. Russia is neither desperate for troops in the Donbas, where they are rapidly advancing, nor in Kursk, where U.S. officials say they have amassed a force of tens of thousands of soldiers without having to pull a single soldier out of Ukraine.

The second hoped for benefit is helping the Ukrainian armed forces hold onto Kursk until the arrival of the inevitable negotiations, at which time Kursk can be bartered for Ukrainian territory held by Russia.

That benefit is as illusory as the first. Ukraine seems to be throwing everything into holding onto the territory it has seized in Kursk. There are reports that Kiev has made the hard to understand decision to prioritize holding onto Kursk over defending its own territory in Donbas. According to these reports, the best military equipment and the best troops are being sent into Kursk to hold onto land instead of into Donbas to reinforce the crumbling front lines. Now, the risk is being taken to throw in the long-range missiles.

Russia, though, is not likely to negotiate until they reclaim Kursk, which they likely eventually will, even faced with long-range missiles. And even if Russia failed to reclaim Kursk, it is not at all clear that Putin would trade that frontier land for the large ethnic Russian Donbas territory.

In the face of the unrealistic benefits, one other possible motive remains. Granting Ukraine permission to fire U.S.-supplied missiles into Kursk is the trump card in the Biden administration’s policy of “Trump-proofing” the war in Ukraine. Freeing Ukraine to escalate and provoking Russia to respond creates a terrain that is much more difficult for Donald Trump to keep his campaign promise of ending the war in Ukraine. As Anatol Lieven, Director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, suggested to me, the legacy of Biden as the “fearless defender of Ukraine” also makes it easier for Democrats to “attack Trump for ‘surrender’ over a future peace deal.”

But “Trump-proofing” the war can only serve to prolong the fighting, pile on the dead, and contribute to a greater loss of Ukrainian territory. The likely ending, even if Ukraine holds Kursk for a while, is a negotiated settlement that looks much like the one on the table in the first weeks of the war, but with the additional costs the past three years has brought to Ukraine.

Ironically, “Trump-proofing” can also have an opposite, unintended effect. The policy, and the long-range missile decision, were meant to make it harder for Trump to end the war. Putin knows that too. The New York Times reports that Russian commentators are already framing it that way. Seeing the long-range missile decision in that light gives Putin a motive for patience. He can resist the provocation, not retaliate in a way that escalates the war, and wait for Trump.

The hoped for benefits do not justify the real potential of the risk. And there are longer term risks too.

Geoffrey Roberts, professor emeritus of history at University College Cork and a specialist in Soviet military policy, told me that he “doubts the decision will make much difference militarily.” He called it “another publicity stunt by the Ukrainian-Western side.” He said that he “expects Russia will act with restraint and continue to focus on winning on the battlefield ahead of a ceasefire and peace negotiations when Trump takes power.”

Not only will long-range missiles not significantly change the larger battlefield, Alexander Hill, professor of military history at the University of Calgary, told me that “this decision is unlikely to have a dramatic impact [even] on the fighting at the frontline in the Kursk region.” Though there may be some initial tactical successes, he says that the Russian armed forces will quickly make “the sorts of restrictions on troop and supply concentrations that they did in the Donbass that have minimized the consequences of ATACMS” and other Western missile systems for Russia.

On Monday, November 19, Ukraine fired American-made ATACMS long-range missiles into Russia for the first time. Ukrainian officials say the missiles struck an ammunition depot in the Bryansk region of southwest Russia, which borders on, but is not in, Kursk. The Russian Ministry of Defense, though, says that, of the six ATACMS that were fired, five were shot down and the other was damaged. They say that falling fragments from the damaged missile caused a fire at the munition depot but no damage or casualties.

The long-range missile decision won’t significantly impact troop numbers, North Korean or otherwise, and it won’t enhance the Kursk card in negotiations. But the decision “escalates tensions to a qualitatively new level,” as Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov said. And it continues to poison trust and relations between Russia and the West. The escalation in arming Ukraine against Russia could even contribute to a belief in Moscow, Richard Sakwa, professor of Russian and European Politics at the University of Kent, told me, that “Ukraine has to be destroyed to remove a permanent threat to the Russian Federation’s security.”

Though Putin could demonstrate patience and wait out the sunset of the Biden administration and the start of the Trump administration, the crossing of a Russian redline could also lead to further escalation. Hill told me that Russia could “supply allies such as Iran and North Korea with capabilities that they currently do not possess: that is, after all, what the U.S. and its allies did for Ukraine.” They could intensify attacks on military sites or energy infrastructure in Ukraine. They could strike distribution hubs in Poland or Romania through which ballistic missiles and other weapons transit on their way to Ukraine (something Russia has refrained from doing). They could even, Ian Proud, former British diplomat at the British Embassy in Moscow, suggests, “make a limited and pre-signaled strike on a US military facility in Europe or elsewhere.”

Almost simultaneously with the first ATACMS missile strike, Putin signed a revised nuclear doctrine that had been formulated in September. The revised doctrine specifies that a conventional attack on Russia by a country that is supported by a nuclear power will be treated as a joint attack on Russia. Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, reminded the West on the sidelines of the G20 meeting that, “If the long-range missiles are used from the territory of Ukraine against the Russian territory, it will mean that they are controlled by American military experts and we will view that as a qualitatively new phase of the Western war against Russia and respond accordingly.” He also, however, said, “Russia is strictly committed to a position of avoiding nuclear war, and that the weapons act as a deterrent.”

Each of these risks outweighs the dubious hoped for benefits of direct U.S. participation in missile strikes deep into Russia. Instead of holding onto Kursk with its unlikely prospect of improving negotiations, the United States should be pushing for negotiations now. Instead of Trump-proofing and prolonging the war, the Biden administration should be facilitating a transition to diplomacy. Sooner, as Trump promises, or later, as Biden is supporting, the war in Ukraine will end at the negotiating table. And the result will likely be the same, minus all the deaths that are yet to come.

November 21, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s 1,000 Days of War

By Brad Pearce | The Libertarian Institute | November 20, 2024

Tuesday, November 19 marked 1,000 days since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, though Ukraine’s civil war has been ongoing for over ten years. President-elect Donald Trump has a clear mandate to try and end the war, but with staffing picks like Marco Rubio as secretary of State, it is not clear that he wants to. Meanwhile, the outgoing Joe Biden administration has agreed to let Ukraine strike into Russia with U.S.-supplied long-range missiles, something which almost everyone seems to agree is a deliberate attempt to sabotage future peace talks. The Biden administration is also trying to run through all the aid for Ukraine before Trump takes power (not feeling confident of his Ukraine policy), while a European political class which deluded themselves into believing Trump had no chance of winning is rapidly adapting to reality. The current Ukraine policy is probably close to dead, but we are left to watch what further destruction will be wreaked on its way out the door.

It doesn’t seem like all that long ago that Joe Biden made his infamous “minor incursion” comment during the 2022 State of the Union Address. Then, the Biden administration went around saying that an invasion was imminent. Many commentators didn’t believe them, given the government and media’s long history of lying about all matters, especially Russia. Those commentators were proven wrong, though in my view Biden did a lot to cause the invasion. Once the U.S. government claims you’re going to do a false flag attack as a pretense for an invasion, it is more or less an acknowledgment that they intend to do a terrorist attack against you and say you did it to yourself. The media and government kept calling it “an unprovoked invasion” because that is the opposite of the truth, as the Libertarian Institute’s Executive Director Scott Horton has laid out at great length in his newly published book, Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine.

At the start of this conflict it was hard to believe it would last very long, which was partially due to propaganda. From the beginning we saw new information management techniques where the media obfuscated with a constant blare of nonsense instead of reporting anything useful, which indicated the real news wasn’t good for Ukraine. Further, while “Kiev could fall in three days” was just something then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley made up to make any resistance look impressive, at the same time, immediately after the invasion Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was going around telling the public to make their own Molotov cocktails, which gave the impression of imminent collapse. Western governments instantly set up a sanctions regime which seems to have accomplished little but removed their vestigial power over world financial systems. Similarly, NATO countries dumped equipment into Ukraine they persistently showed the shortcomings of their own manufacturing capacities. The debacle over German Leopard tanks, which then had no impact on the battlefield, is just one example. The media continued to paint a rosy picture of brave Ukrainians and their noble fight for freedom, but at the same time, the media has been preparing the public for Ukraine to lose since the late spring of 2022.

What no one can deny is the devastating human cost of this war. Numbers of casualties on either side are unreliable and largely used for propaganda, but people are certainly dying at huge rates, most of all Ukrainian conscripts. Ukraine already had devastating population loss and was the poorest country in Europe, and now much of it is destroyed. Some claim that many Ukrainian refugees will enthusiastically return to rebuild the country when the war is over, but it seems more likely that men will join their wives and children abroad if they are able to. However, Ukrainian refugees are becoming increasingly unpopular in Europe for a variety of reasons, including that the public is being asked to sacrifice much while Ukrainians seek safety instead of fighting for their country. Europe was in many ways in decline before the great increases in energy prices from attempting to refuse Russian gas, and it seems that alone may cause Europe to give up on this conflict.

As it stands, we cannot be sure if the Biden administration has given Ukraine permission to expand strikes in a meaningful sense; there are contradictory reports, but it doesn’t sound good. Once upon a time it was the case that after an election in the United States the president gave a great deal of reverence to the incoming administration’s agenda and didn’t try to make any big changes. But now the norm seems to be to sabotage them. We can’t rely on Trump to be consistent in any efforts to end this war given his support of an enormous financial aid package in the spring, but it is unpopular among his supporters and Trump will want to be seen as the one to bring it to a close.

Since this started, Ukraine has been said to be on the edge of collapse and has held on so far, but Russian advances are picking up speed. It is being reported that the Western powers are coming closer to accepting reality and acknowledging some of Russia’s territorial gains in exchange for peace, but it seems like until then they will continue to climb the escalation ladder and ask men to be among the last to die for a mistake. Still, The New York Times just ran an op-ed titled “Trump Can Speed Up the Inevitable in Ukraine,” which is wholly an argument to accept reality. Regardless, when this grim affair ends, it is likely Ukraine takes a worse deal than it could have gotten in March 2022, and more than 1,000 days of death will have served no purpose but enriching military contractors.

November 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

German army warning companies of war with Russia – media

RT | November 20, 2024

The German military has begun instructing local enterprises on how to prepare and what to do in the event of a conflict between NATO and Russia, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) newspaper has reported.

The Bundeswehr is providing training to the companies based on a 1,000-page document entitled ‘Operational Plan Germany’, which was recently approved by lawmakers, the outlet stated in an article on Monday.

The contents of the plan are classified, but FAZ claimed that it includes lists of buildings and infrastructure facilities that should be protected as a priority in case of an escalation with Moscow. The plan also reportedly details what private businesses should do to help with defense operations.

If the fighting breaks out on NATO’s eastern flank, Germany could become a hub for hundreds of thousands of soldiers, who would have to be transported to the east, as well as for military equipment, food and medical supplies, the article read.

Among other things, the German military urges businesses to draw up specific plans for employees and try to ensure self-sufficiency through diesel generators or wind turbines, FAZ said.

The paper also cited concrete advice given by Lieutenant Colonel Jorn Plischke to companies during a recent meeting at the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce. “For every hundred employees, train at least five additional lorry drivers that you don’t need. [Because] 70 percent of all lorries on Germany’s roads are driven by Eastern Europeans. If there is a war there, where will these people be?” he said.

Similar meetings are taking place across Germany, with the Bundeswehr ordering all state commands to organize them, according to FAZ.

The first joint exercises between civilian forces and the German military, called ‘Red Storm Alpha’, were recently held in Hamburg. They were aimed at protecting the local port from espionage and sabotage attempts, the report read. ‘Red Storm Bravo’ drills are already in preparation, it added.

Plischke told FAZ that, based on Berlin’s intelligence assessments, Russia “will be willing and able” to attack NATO within four or five years.

A few months ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected allegations of Moscow planning aggression against NATO as “nonsense” and “bulls**t.” According to the Russian leader, such claims are made by Western politicians to deceive the public in their countries and justify increased spending on defense and aid to Kiev amid the conflict with Moscow. “In Ukraine, we are just protecting ourselves,” Putin insisted.

November 20, 2024 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Has Biden authorised long-range missiles to save Ukraine or sabotage Trump?

Professor Glenn Diesen on The Spectator | November 18, 2024

I discussed Biden’s decision to strike Russia with long-range missiles with Svitlana Morenets at The Spectator.

My position in this debate was that these missiles are not intended to turn the tide of the war, rather the purpose seems to be to sabotage Trump’s efforts to end the war. Obama similarly escalated tensions with Russia with sanctions, closure of a Russian consulate and expulsion of Russian diplomats before he left office to make it more difficult for Trump to “get along with Russia”. Biden’s actions are much more dangerous as this marks the start of a NATO-Russia War.

Arguing that Ukraine has the right to defend itself is very manipulative, as the main issue is that NATO crosses the line from proxy war to direct war. These are American long-range missiles, their use is entirely dependent on US intelligence and targeting, and American soldiers will operate these weapons and they will be guided by American satellites. This is an American attack on Russia, the world’s largest nuclear power. Putin has warned it will be interpreted as the start of a NATO-Russia War, and he has committed Russia to retaliate.

November 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Democrats Must Remove President Biden Now

IF ONLY WE CAN GET TO JANUARY 20

By LTG USA (RET) Michael T. Flynn | November 19, 2024

Today, the world is likely closer to nuclear war than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis.  In its closing days, the Biden Administration is stumbling our nation into a potential nuclear war with Russia. If you have not been paying attention for the past two days, you need to know the basic facts. Then, let me offer what I believe needs to happen, and quickly.

Just before midnight Sunday night, AP reported “Biden has authorized Ukraine to use U.S.-supplied missiles to strike deeper inside Russia, easing limitations on the longer range weapons…” The long-range, supersonic, ballistic missiles being unleashed on Russia most likely are ATACMs, standing for Army Tactical Missile System. These weapons were developed for offensive — not defensive — purposes. The configuration of the specific ATACMs sent to Ukraine is unknown, but they could have a range of from 100 to 190 or more miles. They can carry different types of weapons, including cluster bombs which can cause a multitude of civilian casualties. Despite many demands from Zelensky and the Ukrainian government, such long-range missiles had not been provided until last month, and until now — two weeks after the November election — their use had not been authorized.

There is a degree of speculation in all of these reports, since the White House has not seen fit to simply provide an advisory of exactly how it has ratcheted up the possibility of a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia. However, it does appear that other NATO members — including UK and France — have followed Biden’s dangerous lead in making similar offerings to Zelensky from their arsenals.

How should we view this shocking news? Perhaps the most succinct analyses came from Donald Trump, Jr., Tweeting: “The Military Industrial Complex seems to want to make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives. Gotta lock in those $Trillions. Life be damned!!! Imbeciles!” Truly, I could not have said it better.

President Putin made clear in September how he would view this development: “Aggression against Russia by any nonnuclear state, but with the support of a nuclear state, is proposed to be considered as their joint attack on Russia.” He added: “Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in case of aggression, including if the enemy using conventional weapons poses a critical threat.” Do not take these words lightly. If Russia had announced it had provided missiles to Mexico and authorized their use to attack Americans living in San Diego, Los Angeles, Tucson, Phoenix, El Paso, and Corpus Christi, what would you expect the U.S. Government would do?

While the neocons who populate the Deep State, and their toadies in the establishment media tell us that it is President Putin who is to blame for everything that happens, as things stand now, these stupid, provocative acts that are endangering our nation are coming from the Biden Administration and not the Kremlin.

That summarizes the problem. Here is what needs to be done, now.

First, Vice President Harris and the Biden Cabinet must invoke the 25th Amendment, and remove Biden as President. Biden is sleep-walking us into a hot war with Russia without a Congressional Declaration of War. If he lives past January 20, Biden will take the position he took with Special Counsel Hur who nine months ago declared Biden could not be held responsible for crimes, as he was on old man with a poor memory. It’s past time to put Kamala in the Oval Office — then we will know the name of the person in charge — someone who was actually elected to office. And she would be a person who could be held accountable for what disaster might befall the nation. Bearing that type of responsibility might force Harris to act responsibly. No longer would decisions be made by Unknown and Unidentified Deep State Operatives who would scatter like roaches should a crisis occur.

Second, at the same time as we hope the Democrats will act, the duty also falls on the current House of Representatives to impeach Biden now for endangering the nation by taking steps that constitute acts of war without a Declaration of War — a power the Constitution gives only to Congress. The indictment should then go immediately to the Senate for trial and removal. President Trump was impeached after he (supposedly) lost the 2020 election. What’s good for the goose.

Third, incoming officials in the Trump Administration need to make contact with President Putin and his staff to de-escalate the situation as best as can be done. This is exactly what I was trying to do in my conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in January 2017. The same Deep State which intercepted my call and leaked it to the Press will do so again, because the Deep State is on the ropes and are desperate. No man who fears going to prison has the moral authority to lead America at this perilous time.

Fourth, the Trump Administration and incoming Attorney General Matt Gaetz need to make it clear that the identities of those Deep State operatives exercising the powers of the Presidency, now urging Biden to act recklessly, will be held to account personally, not just politically, but legally. If these operatives knew they would be named and the subject to prosecution, they just might straighten up, real quick.

Fifth, we need to pray that we have time for the will of the voters to take effect on January 20. Just two weeks ago, on November 5, 2024, the voters spoke on the great issue of war with great clarity. President Trump received a clear mandate for his promise to end the killing in the Ukraine and seeking peace. America had not seen that type of leadership since President Kennedy’s commencement speech at American University, and they voted for it overwhelmingly.

Will any of these approaches work? Maybe not. But we need to ask the Democrats to do their duty, and the Republicans to do their duty, and we need to do our duty to pray as well. We know President Trump will do his duty. If only we can get to Janaury 20.

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »