by Germán Gorraiz Lopez

The outbreak of the Ukrainian conflict revealed the worrying servility of Western countries, which translated into the loss of decision-making power of European institutions and their total subordination to the geopolitical dictates of the United States, leaving France as an irrelevant power in the new cartography. geopolitics of the Cold War 2.0.

However, Macron’s thinking would be rigid and incorrigible since it does not take into account the contrary reasons and only collects data or signs that confirm the prejudice to turn it into conviction, so everything indicates that Macron would be determined to lead Europe by personally committing himself to unwavering support for the Ukrainian people and forcing NATO into open conflict with Putin’s Russia.

Thus, as the US is immersed in the electoral campaign for the November Presidential elections, France, Poland and the United Kingdom would be the trident chosen by the globalists to implode the Ukrainian front next summer and provoke the subsequent entry of NATO into an open conflict with the Russia of a Putin reelected until 2030.

NATO entry into the Ukrainian war?

The Ukrainian conflict would have meant the return to the Cold War between Russia and the United States and the return to the Doctrine of Containment, the bases of which were exposed by George F. Kennan in his essay “The Sources of Soviet Behavior”, published in Foreign magazine. Affairs in 1947 and whose main ideas are summarized in the quote “Soviet power is impervious to the logic of reason but very sensitive to the logic of force.”

Thus, the Polish president, Andrzej Duda, stated that his country is “willing to accept nuclear weapons” from allied countries on its territory, which has received a harsh and forceful response from Moscow when it warned that “the placement of this type of weaponry in Poland will make this country a priority objective in Russian military planning.

Likewise, in a statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry, Russia has warned that the “arrival of the F-16 fighters in Ukraine will be seen as carriers of nuclear weapons and we will consider this step by the US and NATO as a deliberate provocation,” while at the same time which accuses the West of openly supporting Ukraine’s sabotage actions in Russian territory and of supplying Kiev with British and French long-range missiles as well as the new American ATACMS, which can reach Russian territory.

Within the action-reaction dynamic typical of the new Cold War 2.0 scenario, Putin ordered his country’s Armed Forces to carry out maneuvers with tactical nuclear weapons on the southern border with Ukraine. Likewise, Putin warned that “the use of weapons by Ukraine against Russian territory could lead to very serious problems” and in response, “Moscow could provide long-range weapons to third parties to attack Western targets.”

Ignoring these warnings, in a televised interview with the France 2 and TF1 channels, Macron announced that France “will provide Ukraine with Mirage 2000-5 fighters, and will train pilots and a brigade of 4,500 Ukrainian soldiers whom it will equip, train and will lend weapons.” He also reiterated that “Ukraine should be allowed to use weapons provided by its Western allies to attack Russian military targets and neutralize the points from which the country is being attacked.”
Paris’ current priority, according to its Defense Minister, Sebastian Lecornu, would be to supply Zelensky with high-tech precision-guided AASM bombs and advanced artillery pieces as well as the production of 40 units of France’s powerful SCALP cruise missile.

Macron and the nuclear saber

Macron, established as “a champion of the defense of Western values ​​against Russian barbarism”, would be the only European leader willing to use the “nuclear saber” in the face of Putin’s threats to “use nuclear force in the event of being endangering the integrity of Russia. Although responsibility for the armed forces is shared by the President and the Prime Minister according to the 1958 French Constitution, a 1962 decree only attributes to the President the ability to authorize the use of nuclear weapons.

Let us remember that the “Force de Frappe” was born in 1960 as a consequence of the proclamation of the Fifth French Republic by General De Gaulle. and it was conceived as one of the key elements of the country’s economic, diplomatic and military independence from the two great powers in conflict worldwide (the US and the USSR).

Under Sarkozy, the French atomic arsenal was reduced to the current 290 nuclear warheads and bases part of its power on the use of ballistic nuclear submarines (SLBM), the M51 missile being the longest range with a range of 9 km and also including bombers. land and maritime missiles with medium-range, high-speed Air-Sol Moyenne Portée (ASMP) nuclear cruise missiles. In this context, the French Minister of Defense, Sébastien Lecornu, confirmed that “a first test shot of a new short- and medium-range supersonic air-to-ground nuclear missile” known as ASMPA-R had been successfully launched from an aircraft. Rafale of the Strategic Air Forces (FAE) over French territory and has a range of 500 kilometers and can transport nuclear charges of 300 kilotons.

Towards a low intensity nuclear war?

Given that both Macron and Putin are suffering from the so-called Pontius syndrome, which consists of “a distortion in the perception of danger that would have its origin in the excess of adrenaline of the affected person”, neither of them will be deterred by the opposite. , so the conflict could culminate in a low-intensity nuclear war through the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

“Non-strategic” nuclear weapons, also known as “tactical nuclear weapons”, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) and of which Russia would have about 1,800 warheads and NATO would have 250 warheads deployed in Europe, would be warheads designed to used on a limited battlefield, for example to destroy a tank column or an aircraft carrier battle group if used at sea, which is why they are also known as “low performance”.

However, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Princeton University simulation of a US-Russia conflict that begins with the use of a tactical nuclear weapon predicts “a rapid escalation that would leave more than 90 millions of dead and injured”, with which the beginning of a low-intensity nuclear conflict could degenerate into a large-scale nuclear conflagration with disastrous results for Humanity.

via Impact News

What are the Chances of an Attack on the U.S. Mainland?

At this point, almost zero, in my opinion. And the biggest reason is that until our financial system crashes and the U.S. can no longer pay their financial obligations, all these countries will continue to prosper from doing business with the U.S.

And while we have sanctions in place against Russia, they have been largely symbolic, and they have further driven Russia to do more business with China, where most of their oil is exported to, for example.

China and the U.S are the largest economies in the world, and they are intertwined so closely, that any talk about a hot war between China and the U.S. will almost always just be rhetoric, as the real war between the two countries is an economic war because both countries depend upon each other so intrinsically, where China has a huge advantage when it comes to manufacturing and labor, while the U.S. has remained the stronger nation due solely its financial system and the use of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency, which is quickly coming to an end.

Last year (2023) we saw many of America’s billionaires go to China to court President Xi’s favor, and JP Morgan Chase bank CEO Jamie Dimon admitted that it would take at least a decade for the U.S. to “decouple” from China and our dependency on China’s exports to the U.S.

So if there is some kind of “attack” on U.S. soil seen anytime soon, please understand that the odds are greatly in favor of it being a “false flag” attack by our own government on its own citizens, but framed to be an attack by one of our alleged enemies, such as Russia, China, or Iran.

As of today, none of these countries would benefit from a direct attack on U.S. soil, but would suffer great losses economically themselves.

But with more and more banks facing failures in the U.S. along with the development of the BRICs alliance and their efforts to move away from the U.S. dollar, at some point American shareholders are just going to blow up the entire financial system themselves, taking everyone else down with them, and then try to “build back better” according to the UN Climate Change agenda.

The Emerging “Golden Triangle” – Iran, Russia, China

Sam Parker, writing for Behind the News Network, has just published a 3-part series titled: The Covert War between Iran & Israel.

He covers a lot of history, from a non-western and pro-Islamic perspective, about the relations between Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China.

He refers to Iran, Russia, and China as the emerging “Golden Triangle in Eurasia“.

The developing economic, political and military links binding Iran, China and Russia-the emerging Golden Triangle in Eurasia, are continuing to deepen in significant areas. At present, the dynamic of the past several years of closer cooperation by the three pivotal states of the Eurasian Heartland is gaining strategic momentum.

In brief, we have a deepening of military defense links between the three points of the emerging Eurasian Triangle. This will have huge consequences, not merely for stabilization of Syria and Iraq in the Middle East. It will also give a major boost to the emerging economic links between the three great powers of the Eurasian Heartland.

Parker thinks that Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), the Crown Prince and Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia, is now being educated on geopolitcal matters by Putin, since 2017.

In 2017, with the formation of OPEC+, Putin went on a charm offensive with MBS. One of the results of this was a change in mentors for MBS, from MBZ of Abu Dhabi to Putin in Moscow.

MBS got educated real fast on the global geopolitical equation, and realized the long-term danger that a rift between Iran and the Gulf Arabs posed to the region.

MBS wants to develop his nation, not wage war on his neighbors. The 7 year long Yemen war cost Abu Dhabi and Riyadh some $500 billion.

This was money better spent at home. Many secret meetings were conducted between Teheran/Moscow, Riyadh/Moscow and Moscow/Beijing.

The culmination of these meeting was a truce signed between Iran and Saudi Arabia, in March 2023, and brokered by China.

This, of course, infuriated Israel and the US. There would be no more chance to play the “divide-and-rule” game in order to have an excuse to stay in the region anymore.

Putin told MBS that the US is looking for the 1st chance to remove MBS from equation, so keep quiet and continue with the statement to the Israelis, that, “you will sign the Abrahamic Accords, PROVIDED Palestine can have a state”.

And, to the Americans: “Yes, I will sign the Abrahamic Accords, but provide me with nuclear arms and a civilian nuclear program”.

Many critics in the Muslim/Arab world are making a noise about the help provided by Saudi Arabia to Israel, in terms of allowing a “land bridge” from Dubai to Israel, via Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

Most of these do not understand geopolitics. They see the surface picture only.

What they don’t realize is that MBS, as per Putin’s guidance, is playing it very carefully, by not appearing to be hostile to Israel or America.

With these assurances given to both Israel and the US, MBS has stumped them. MBS is NOT saying no, but with these, all the 3 musketeers (Iran, Russia, China) know full well that these 2 families (Rothschilds and Rockefellers) will not accept these terms. That leaves MBS safe for the moment.

The next issue is BRICS. As of writing (April 20th), MBS has not signed the papers officially making Saudi Arabia a member of BRICS.

I personally believe that he is waiting for the right time, under Putin’s suggestion.

By the actions of Hamas, the US, Israel and the Rothschild’s EU will get even more stretched militarily, economically and financially.

The aim of these 3 is to weaken the 2 networks over time, and eventually box them into a corner.

They either fight or withdraw from the Middle East. If they fight, they will lose. If they don’t fight, they will lose. If they withdraw, they will lose. And, when any of these options take place, then America’s next step would be to initiate the “Fortress America” plan; followed by the ICE NINE scenario and implementation of the CBDC nightmare.(Source.)

Ever since I reported in April that there was no sign that Israel ever retaliated back on Iran after Iran shot more than 300 missiles and drones into Israel, the first time in history that Iran has ever attacked Israel, as Israel and Iran have a long history of being allies, even as recent as the 198os under Reagan during the Iraq – Iran war when Israel helped Iran by supplying them weapons, I have been looking for a credible explanation as to why Israel never struck back after this major attack by Iran.

They were clearly poised to do so, until the U.S. had Joe Biden call Netanyahu and told him to stand down.

Parker has given the most plausible reason why Israel backed down that I have read so far (although I don’t agree with every single point.)

Read this very carefully, because if this (or most of it) is true, World War 3 is all but over already.

Iran Sends a Message: The Straw that Broke the Camel’s Back

On 1 April 2024, Israel’s air strike on an Iranian consulate building in the Syrian capital Damascus killed an important senior commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Brig Gen Mohammad Reza Zahedi, along with other IRGC commanders, who were meeting to co-ordinate the next phase in the Axis of resistance’s attacks on Israel.

Over the next two weeks, many people in Israel began panic-buying groceries and essentials- all in fear of an Iranian retaliation! The holy month of Ramadan ended on Wednesday 10th April. The next day, Iran sent a message to Israel via the Turks and Saudis that they are going to strike Israel.

Panic ensued.

A little over 48 hours before Iran’s aerial message to Israel across the skies of West Asia, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov confirmed, on the record, what so far had been, at best, hush-hush diplomatic talk: The Russian side kept in contact with Iranian partners on the situation in the Middle East after the Israeli strike on the Iranian consulate in Syria.

Here, concisely, we had Russia’s top diplomatic coordinator with BRICS – in the year of the multipolar organization’s Russian presidency – indirectly messaging that Russia has Iran’s back.

Iran, it should be noted, just became a full-fledged BRICS+ member in January.

Iran’s aerial message this weekend confirmed this in practice: their missile guidance systems used the Chinese Beidou satellite navigation system as well as the Russian GLONASS system.

This is Russia–China Intel leading from behind and a graphic example of BRICS+ on the move.

Ryabkov’s “we stay in constant touch” plus the satellite navigation Intel confirms the deeply interlocked cooperation between the Russia–China strategic partnership and their mutual strategic partner Iran.

Based on vast experience in Ukraine, Moscow knew that the biblical psychopathic genocidal entity would keep escalating if Iran only continued to exercise “strategic patience.”

The morphing of “strategic patience” into a new strategic balance had to take some time – including high-level exchanges with the Russian side.

And don’t forget the Strait of Hormuz

Tehran did manage to upend the massive western psychological operations aimed at pushing it into a strategic misstep. Iran started with a misdirecting masterstroke.

As US–Israeli fear porn went off the charts, fueled by dodgy western “intel,” the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) made a quick sideways move, seizing an Israeli-owned container ship near the Strait of Hormuz.

That was an eminently elegant manoeuvre – reminding the collective west of Tehran’s hold on the Strait of Hormuz, a fact immeasurably more dangerous to the whole western economic house of cards than any limited strike on their “aircraft carrier” in the Middle East. That did happen anyway.

Iran Breaches Anglo-Zionist Defenses in Historic Attack: A Breakdown

Unlike that ‘moral’ army specialized in killing women, children, and the elderly and bombing hospitals, mosques, schools, universities, and humanitarian convoys, the Iranian attack targeted key Israeli military sites such as the Nevatim and Ramon airbases in the Negev and an intel center in the occupied Golan Heights – the three centers used by Tel Aviv in its strike on Iran’s Damascus consulate.

This was a highly choreographed show.

Multiple early warning signs gifted Tel Aviv with plenty of time to profit from US Intel and evacuate fighter jets and personnel, which was duly followed by a plethora of US military radars coordinating the defense strategy.

It was American firepower that smashed the bulk of what may have been a swarm of 185 Shahed-136 drones – using everything from ship-mounted air defense to fighter jets. The rest was shot down over Jordan by The Little King’s military – the Arab street will never forget his treachery – and then by dozens of Israeli jets.

Israel’s defenses were de facto saturated by the suicide drone-ballistic missile combo. On the ballistic missile front, several pierced the dense maze of Israel’s air defenses, with Israel officially claiming nine successful hits – interestingly enough, all of them hitting super relevant military targets.

Look at the targets that were struck.

Ramon has been badly hit. Nevatim was hit by more than 7 missiles. Air Force Intelligence HQ completely leveled. Other strikes on air defence installations obviously not close to population centres and out of view but I’m sure sat Intel will show extent of damage.And another:

1. Nevatim Airbasein the south of occupied Palestine- this is the base that the F-35’s took off from. It is the most highly defended base in the world. Very heavily protected by a vast array of anti-missile defense systems, all of which are tied connected to the US SatCom system. Reports say that as many as a 100 US officers were manning these complex systems, and they suffered huge losses in this Iranian hit. Of course, neither Israel nor the US will confirm any of this. The funny thing is that we hardly ever hear of any Israeli or American soldiers being killed on the battle field. Rather, they are “wounded”. What else can one accept from the Empire of Lies?

• Ramon Airbasein the south of occupied Palestine-this is the headquarters of the Israeli Air-Force Intelligence. This is the site where the attack on the consulate was planned. This building and its occupants was totally destroyed. Much valuable equipment was destroyed. There have been reports that many senior intelligence officers – reports say about 20- were also killed in this attack.

• The Israeli top-secret intelligence-spy base in Jabal al-Sheikh (Mount Hermon) in the north of the occupied Golan. Israel captured this site from the Syrians in the June 1967 War. In the 1973 October War, a fierce battle was fought here, when Syria managed to re-take this site. Israel counter-attacked and managed to take it back. Since then, Israel has fortified this site. This site is crucial for either side. For Syria, this site could allow them to overlook the entire Galilee and northern Israel. Conversely, with this site in Israel’s control, Israel can see the entire southern region of Syria, and was able to monitor Damascus very closely, in terms of communications. That’s how they were able to know that a meeting was taking place in the Iranian consulate held by the senior-most commanders of the IRGC, who were meeting to take the next steps in the attacks on Israel. It should be noted that the rest of the explosions or hits in other areas of the occupied territories are related to the confrontation of the Israeli air defense systems with the projectiles in the sky or the falling of the wreckage of the interceptor missiles or the wreckage of Iranian missiles.

“Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 20 kilotons and our tactical nuclear weapons are 70 kilotons.

Let’s treat this topic professionally, everyone thinks we’re not going to use them, but we have a nuclear doctrine”

The Russian president explains the possible usage of nukes …

 No word about the strategic nuclear forces.

Germany needs to prepare for war with Russia in the coming years, said German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius.

“Germany needs to prepare for war by 2029,” said the German official. “We must clearly understand: a Russian victory would cost us more than the current support for Ukraine,” he added.

According to Pistorius, the restoration of compulsory military service is becoming urgent for the country.

by Gilbert Doctorow

One of the valuable features of my several platforms for publishing essays is the feedback I get from readers.

In this regard I quote here what one reader sent in about my article earlier today on the violation of free speech that the detention of Scott Ritter yesterday at JFK airport and confiscation of his passport signified, followed as it was, according to RT reports, by the same happening to Judge Napolitano, who was also planning to travel to St Petersburg to participate in the International Economic Forum that begins on the 6^th.

Quote

Andrew Napolitano was not taken off the plane. Scott Ritter phoned him and told him that it was “not wise to travel” to St. Petersburg.

Unquote

I watched this edition of the “Judging Freedom” show and urge you to do the same. Here the Judge discusses with Scott Ritter what happened yesterday. These facts by themselves do not change my determination that yesterday’s events amounted to intimidation by the U.S. government and were a gross violation of constitutional rights.

However, the largest part of the Scott Ritter interview was devoted to a different matter, which I wish to discuss here, namely what the consequences may be of an attack on the Russian heartland coming from Ukraine using the long range missiles it has been given by the United States, the U.K. and France.  

Ritter is repeating what has been intimated by Vladimir Putin, Sergei Lavrov and other Russian officials, namely that Russia is prepared to strike back at the producers of these long range weapons, at those who are providing targeting packages to these weapons from their bases in Europe and the USA.  Ritter then assumes this will necessarily proceed directly to reciprocal massive nuclear exchanges between the United States and Russia which will put an end to human civilization. And he backs up this conclusion by reference to the scenario for conducting nuclear war that has existed within the Pentagon since the days of John F. Kennedy.

I would like to propose a very different scenario basing myself on what I hear on Russian talk shows from top experts. And I juxtapose what these Russians are saying with the realities of U.S.-European mutual defense and of intra-European defense thinking that I see around me here in Belgium, including at the club luncheon on which I reported yesterday.

The first point is that the most likely revenge attack by Russia for any missile strikes on its cities or critical civilian and military infrastructure will be….a massively destructive attack on Kiev.

Why Kiev, you may ask, when the same Russians are saying that the Ukrainians are only the fingers on the button and when all the settings, all the inputs for targeting have been made by Americans or Brits or French, depending on the specific missiles that were used. The reason is that hitting Kiev, decapitating the Ukrainian government, will result in the least possible blowback. It will not lead to a nuclear war. Europe and the USA do not give a damn about Ukrainian lives, so the cost to Russia of such a strike will be nil.

Moreover, striking Kiev will be a demonstration to Europe and to the USA that they are not bluffing, that they have the determination to go all the way in their confrontation with the West to safeguard their sovereignty and national existence. It will be implementing what the political scientist Karaganov was proposing many months ago, whether it is carried out with conventional or tactical nuclear weapons.

If nonetheless, strikes on Russian assets in the RF continue, the next point of attack by the Russians will be the marshalling centers in Poland which receive weapons and other military supplies from the United States and European NATO countries for delivery to Ukraine. One key airport is named in this connection.  Why Poland?  Because the rest of Europe is hardly likely to come to its aid.

Continuing up the escalation ladder, I believe that the Russians will then, and only then, attack military factories and bases in Germany, the United Kingdom, France.  Like the leaders of these countries, Russia does not really expect the United States to come to their aid and honor its Article 5 obligations under the NATO treaty.

Only in the last instance will Russia attack the United States using its strategic nuclear arsenal, meaning only if it is under direct nuclear attack from the USA.  This, notwithstanding the clearly stated Russian understanding that behind all of the European provocations against it stands Washington, the hegemon and puppet master. The United States will be the very last to come under Russian attack precisely because the nuclear exchange that comes will be suicidal for both sides.

This, I think, is also the understanding that the Biden administration has. But their expectation is that both sides in a Russian European war will be decimated, freeing the United States to defend its global hegemony by taking on and defeating China. In this, I firmly believe Washington is mistaken. Europe will be destroyed, Russia will be victorious, because its arms are superior, and its troops are now war hardened. The United States will have lost its European colonies and will be up against the Russia-China alliance alone.

If you are reading this lying on a chaise longue in your back yard in Arlington, Virginia, you may take comfort. If, like me, you are living close to the Russians’ bulls-eye, 20 km from NATO headquarters, the above analysis can get on your nerves.

via Sputnik

NATO cobbling together scheme to move troops from US to Europe – reports

The US-led military bloc is preparing land corridors that would enable US troops to rush to the frontlines in the event of a European war, the Telegraph reported. The move seeks to stave off a potential “Russian attack.”

In theory, US soldiers could arrive at one of five designated ports and then be transported along predetermined logistics routes on the continent. According to the plans, American forces would land in the Netherlands and then be taken to Poland via Germany by train. Other potential options include utilizing ports in the Balkans, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Italy, Greece, and Turkiye.

“In these corridors, national militaries will not be restricted by local regulations and will be free to transport consignments without normal restrictions,” the report said.

The notion of a war with Russia in Europe appears to be fueled by militaristic hysteria. Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it clear that Moscow has no intention of attacking NATO nations, and the alliance has stated that it would not deploy its forces in Ukraine.

Additionally, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has poured cold water on the aggressive suggestions made by French President Emmanuel Macron, indicating that there will be “no boots on the ground” in Ukraine.

The conflict in Ukraine has highlighted the vulnerability of Kiev’s logistics bases to Russia’s pinpoint strikes.

According to Lieutenant General Alexander Sollfrank, Commander of NATO’s Joint Support and Enabling Command (JSEC), larger bases, like those seen in Afghanistan or Iraq, are no longer feasible as they can be targeted and destroyed with ease.

The US is close to making a “fatal” miscalculation in its attempts to deal with Russia and the Ukraine conflict, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has warned.

”I’d like to warn American actors against miscalculations that can lead to fatal consequences. For some unclear reason they underestimate how serious a response they could face,” Ryabkov told journalists.

by Gilbert Doctorow

Ladies and gentlemen, let me open this discussion with an out-of-the-box explanation as to why Russia appears to be laid back over the destruction of one of its early warning radar installations in the south of the country and undetermined damage to another during the past week. This, while the Western mainstream media speak of severe impairment to Russia’s defenses and some military experts in the USA publish denunciations of the Biden administration for exposing the country to nuclear attack from Russia caused by false positives on their monitors that arise in the final minutes of a supposed attack due to the absence of suitable ground radar to double check what the inadequate Russian satellite warning system tells them.

The fundamental issue, as I see it, was flagged long ago when President Putin said that Russia responds in an asymmetric manner to whatever challenges the US and allied militaries present. Washington pulled out of the treaty on ABMs under George W. Bush thereby undermining the foundations of nuclear deterrence and the Russians then headed off in their own direction to find and implement a devastating counter-measure.

As it turns out, Russia’s IT geniuses who went abroad in the Yeltsin years to set up Google and other wonderful and powerful corporations in Silicon Valley serving primarily the consumer sector did not drain Russia of its brainpower. Indeed, more than enough patriotic IT geniuses remained in country to provide Mr. Putin and the country at large with an adequate talent pool to engineer and produce what, 22 years later, we recognize as world-beating Russian defense systems.

No one in the West talks about the implications of what the Russians have developed and in particular what it means in the present context of concern that the poor, blinded Russians do not get early warning of a nuclear attack. Let me say it out loud: the Russians have first nuclear strike capability thanks to their newly introduced Sarmat missiles carrying smaller, unstoppable hypersonic missiles as payload. A fully loaded Sarmat can level to the ground a country the size of the UK; several of them can fairly well erase the USA from the map. In addition the Russians have short to medium range hypersonic missiles that can be launched from frigates 400 km off America’s shores. And they are working on a nuclear torpedo (Poseidon) that alone can take out entire cities in the tsunamis they create.

What this means is that there is a good probability that when push comes to shove, when their intelligence reports the concentration of nuclear cruise and ballistic armed US submarines in the Arabian Gulf for example, when their satellites tell them about missile concentrations in Western, Central and Eastern Europe that have an ominous message, they will threaten and possibly carry out a devastating first strike against the USA, which as they say openly, is the puppet master not only in Ukraine but in all of Western Europe.

The second argument for not looking down our noses at the Russian military for failing to have an equivalent to the US global missile launch detection capability is the investment the Russians have made in building their own version of Iron Domes to protect major cities, and presumably, major military infrastructure from U.S. nuclear attack.

Two days ago I understood what that means when listening to Great Game host Vyacheslav Nikonov talk about the attacks the day before (29 May) using U.S. ATACMS long range missiles fired from Ukraine against the area of the Kerch bridge and other targets deep in Russia.

See the opening minutes of this 46 minute segment of the program: https://rutube.ru/video/ef8865c657153655c76030b72c5ae5ac/

Note that these attacks took place a day before President Biden officially announced U.S. acquiescence in Kiev’s intentions to strike inside Russia. The Biden team gave assurances that the weapons would be used exclusively against militarily valuable targets. The Kerch bridge to Crimea, of course, is now purely civilian infrastructure given that all Russian military deliveries to the front have long been redirected to land-based rail lines running parallel to the Sea of Azov that the Russians have expanded over the past year.

The point made by Nikonov is that all of these missiles were shot down by Russian air defense systems. An invited expert informed the audience that the American missiles have their weak spots which the Russians are exploring and exploiting to destroy them in the air.

This does not mean that Russian air defense is 100% reliable. But it means that as regards missiles of all kinds it does a great job. That contrasts, of course, with defense against the much harder to find smaller and more maneuverable incoming drones, which were the weapon of choice in the Ukrainian attack on Russian radar installations. But drones do not destroy cities and kill hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. Missiles do that.

On the same day, 4 – 6 unmanned British cutters valued at 6 million dollars each which were sent against Russian Black Sea vessels were destroyed by the Russian side.

These latest U.S. and British guided attacks were said to be proof that the U.S. led West now understands perfectly well that Ukraine is facing defeat and are doing what they can to raise the stakes. The F16s soon to be introduced into the conflict will be another major escalation by the West. They will be treated by Russia as a NATO nuclear armed task force to contain Russia. The French led effort to put together a coalition of providers of instructors on the ground in Ukraine is still another dimension of the very dangerous ongoing escalation.

Note: Nikonov and his panelists discussed these existential threats in calm and deliberate manner. None is certain how the Kremlin will respond to a successful attack nominally delivered by Ukraine but de facto Western-guided. Perhaps there will be a massive Russian attack made on the city of Kiev.

I truly wonder what is the benefit of having a 15 minute advance warning of an incoming missile attack if, as is 100% certain, an automatic ‘Dead Hand’ launch has already been scripted. Moreover, what would be the sense of lifting the handset of a Red Phone to Washington to speak to….whom? Biden, Sullivan or any other of the liars and card cheats who populate the top echelons of the federal government? Not a trustworthy person among them with whom you would risk the fate of your nation.

The overriding message I wish to convey is that Americans have forgotten their old folk wisdom that “there are many different ways to skin a cat.” Experts in America’s dissident underground can be just as unwilling to comprehend that Russians are not weak and stupid as American generals and their minions in the press were saying when they denounced Russia’s opening moves in its Special Military Operation for failing to do what America does in such instances: use a Shock and Awe campaign to murder everyone and destroy everything in its path.

NATO is preparing for a protracted war with Russia but there is still a chance to prevent it, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said at a ministerial meeting of the military bloc in Prague on Friday.

NATO member states have been granting approval for Kiev to use Western-supplied weapons to hit targets deep inside Russia. Earlier in the day, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Ukraine had the right to defend itself, which includes the right to strike legitimate military targets inside Russia.

These steps are being taken in preparation “for a long, many-year war,”Hungarian newspaper Magyar Nemzet quoted Szijjarto as saying.

“The express train of war has departed from the penultimate station,” and the question is whether there is still a chance to stop it, he added.

The Hungarian foreign minister said there was “only one emergency brake left,”referring to the European Parliament elections in June. The European people “can make it clear to their governments that they do not want to live with war in Europe for a long time,” Szijjarto added.

Hungary had previously called for a ceasefire and peace talks to resolve the Ukraine conflict. Budapest has refused to send military aid to Kiev and has repeatedly delayed EU sanctions on Moscow.

The Hungarian foreign minister has been a vocal critic of NATO’s position on the conflict. Before the meeting in Prague, he said anti-Russia “war hysteria” was making Western leaders adopt increasingly “crazy ideas” that could lead to grave consequences.

Last week, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban warned that Brussels and Washington could be warming up for a direct military conflict with Russia. Budapest was working to “redefine” its NATO membership status to allow it to opt-out of the military alliance’s “activities outside the bloc’s territory,” Orban stated.

A number of other NATO member states such as Norway, Finland, Latvia, Poland, and reportedly Germany have spoken in favor of Kiev using long-range missiles against targets on Russian territory.

On Thursday, US President Joe Biden was reported to have secretly given Ukraine the green light to use American-provided weapons to strike targets in the part of Russia that borders Kharkov Region.

via RT

by Andrew Korybko via Substack, Excerpt

[ . . . ]

As was explained in this analysis here about why Russia is presently undertaking tactical nuclear weapons exercises, it hopes to deter NATO from a conventional military intervention in Ukraine, barring which it wants to signal that it could resort to these arms if those forces cross the Dnieper.

From Russia’s perspective, the reportedly 100,000-strong force that NATO is preparing to invade Ukraine if its “red lines” are crossed could pose a threat to its territorial integrity if they attack its newly unified regions.

So long as they stay on the western side of the Dnieper, then there’d be no reason for Russia to countenance using tactical nuclear weapons, but they could realistically be employed in the event that they cross the river and credibly appear to be approaching that country’s new borders. In that scenario, Russia would have reason to drop them on the invading forces as a last resort out of self-defense to preemptively neutralize this threat in accordance with its nuclear doctrine.

Having brought the reader up to speed about the context within which Sikorski shared the US’ planned response to Russia potentially exploding nukes in Ukraine, it should now be easier to understand why this amounts to a dangerous game of nuclear chicken.

Essentially, the US wants Russia to stand down from its signaled intent of possibly using tactical nuclear weapons if NATO’s reportedly 100,000-strong invasion force crosses the Dnieper, which could occur if Russia achieves a military breakthrough.

If this sequence of events unfolds – the front lines collapse, NATO conventionally intervenes in Ukraine, its reportedly 100,000-strong invasion force crosses the Dnieper, Russia drops tactical nukes on them, and then the US hits all of its forces in the newly unified regions – then World War III would break out. There’s no way that Russia would sit back and let the US directly attack any target within its borders since it’ll either respond in a tit-for-tat fashion or jump to the chase by launching a nuclear first strike.

The only way to avoid this worst-case scenario is for NATO to eschew its invasion plans under any circumstances, including a potential Russian military breakthrough. If they still go through with them, however, then they should keep their forces on the western side of the Dnieper and ideally rely on a neutral mediator like India to convey to Russia that they don’t intend to cross even if they approach it. Anything less is a dangerous game of nuclear chicken that could literally provoke the apocalypse.