patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,257,332 comments by 15,004 users - keeprubbersidedown, Patrick, RandalRay, SunnyvaleCA online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 237 - 276 of 1,034 Next » Last » Search these comments
237
RayAmerica
2023 Jun 21, 9:50am
RayAmerica
2023 Jun 21, 9:50am
Biden Says Threat of Putin Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’
The president previously recognized the danger of nuclear war but has done nothing to ease tensions
President Biden warned Monday that the threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is “real.”
The president made the comments to donors during a trip to California. “When I was out here about two years ago saying I worried about the Colorado River drying up, everybody looked at me like I was crazy,” he said, according to Reuters.
“They looked at me like when I said I worry about Putin using tactical nuclear weapons. It’s real,” Biden added.
Biden has previously recognized that the policy of the US and NATO backing Ukraine against Russia risks nuclear war. In October 2022, he said the chances of “nuclear armageddon” were higher than at any point since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
But since warning of nuclear armageddon, Biden has done nothing to ease tensions with Russia and has escalated US involvement in the war, including by giving the green light for European countries to send US-made F-16s to Kyiv.
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/06/20/biden-says-threat-of-putin-using-tactical-nukes-is-real/
The president previously recognized the danger of nuclear war but has done nothing to ease tensions
President Biden warned Monday that the threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is “real.”
The president made the comments to donors during a trip to California. “When I was out here about two years ago saying I worried about the Colorado River drying up, everybody looked at me like I was crazy,” he said, according to Reuters.
“They looked at me like when I said I worry about Putin using tactical nuclear weapons. It’s real,” Biden added.
Biden has previously recognized that the policy of the US and NATO backing Ukraine against Russia risks nuclear war. In October 2022, he said the chances of “nuclear armageddon” were higher than at any point since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
But since warning of nuclear armageddon, Biden has done nothing to ease tensions with Russia and has escalated US involvement in the war, including by giving the green light for European countries to send US-made F-16s to Kyiv.
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/06/20/biden-says-threat-of-putin-using-tactical-nukes-is-real/
238
RayAmerica
2023 Jun 29, 10:29am
RayAmerica
2023 Jun 29, 10:29am
June 29, 2023 The American Thinker
Is Nuclear War Inevitable?
By Alexander G. Markovsky
During Napoleon's War of 1812, the Russian officers’ sabers were adorned an inscription, “Do not draw out without need. Do not put it back without glory!”
Whether Putin has drawn out his saber without the need may be debatable, but the geopolitical reality is that he will not put it back without glory, whatever the cost. Putin, who revived Russia, and rebuilt its economy from the ruins of the collapsed Soviet Union, cannot permit his odyssey to end in the country's dissolution.
On the other side of this Ukrainian confrontation is President Biden, who cannot afford the humiliation of another defeat after the disastrous retreat from Afghanistan. He also needs a victory at any cost.
If history is any guide, weak Russia, with its huge territory and abundant natural resources, will become prey for invaders. In the West, Europeans, driven by compulsion, are eager to retaliate for defeats and loss of territories, some centuries-old, others more recent. Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Finland have never accepted borders of the post-Second World War period.
Nor is the West the only threat facing Russia. In the East, Japan dreams of the return of the Sakhalin and Kuril islands. And Russia’s “sworn friend,” China, envisages living space for 1.5 billion Chinese and the acquisition of vast natural resources in the Russian Far East.
The imperative of winning puts no limitation on the modus operandi of the war. After 16 months of hostilities, though the war escalates in scope and intensity, NATO and its European allies maintain martial enthusiasm. Driven by the urge for expansion, NATO sees little risk in continuing fighting. Indeed, this time NATO engineered a perfect arrangement. It contracted the Ukrainian army as a mercenary. NATO directs and finances the war, provides strategic and tactical planning, intelligence, and supplies weapons and materiel while the Ukrainians do the fighting. Hence unlike the previous NATO misadventures, thousands of American and other NATO warriors are not coming home in zinc coffins.
America skillfully exploited Ukrainian leaders’ frantic ambition to make Ukraine a member of NATO, ostensibly to protect Ukraine from Russia. The supplicant exhibited a complete lack of judgment, failing to realize that membership in NATO and protection from Russia were mutually exclusive objectives. Consequently Ukraine finds itself in a peculiar situation; membership in NATO is not forthcoming, the country is getting destroyed, and as long as the Ukrainians are dying, the American and European publics are not overly concerned about the war.
At ease with the arrangement, at the recent gathering at G7, the leaders of the so-called advanced democracies committed to supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. Indeed, prolonging the conflict appears to be a new NATO strategy.
In his famed book, The Art of War, Sun Tzu concluded that “no country benefited from a prolonged war.” This wisdom may not apply to the current conflict. In previous world wars, the winner out-produced the loser. During the Second World War, Americans were losing, on average, six Sherman tanks for every German Tiger tank lost. But at the same time, American industry was manufacturing six Sherman tanks faster than Germans could produce one Tiger. Americans were producing more bombers than Germans were shooting down, which was true for almost every other type of military equipment.
Given that the combined GDP of NATO’s countries exceeds the Russians’ by twenty-fold, Russia cannot win a war of attrition against Europe and the United States in the long run. The folly of this strategy, nevertheless, is that if the economic assumptions prove correct, it will render nuclear confrontation almost inevitable. The recent rhetoric seems to suggest that NATO military planners accept this possibility, believing that Europe is safe under the American nuclear umbrella. Any attack on Europe would invite American nuclear retaliation. Therefore, even if Russians resolve to use a nuclear weapon, they will deploy it on Ukraine.
There is a lot of wishful thinking in this scenario. First, geography prevents Russians from using nuclear weapons in Ukraine because it is too close to Russia and Belarus to evade radioactive peril.
Second, Western leaders may rely too much on the credibility of the so-called massive retaliation doctrine designed to prevent the invasion of Europe by conventional Soviet forces during the Cold War era. The current scenario is entirely different. The danger is not from the Russian conventional forces but the Russian first-strike nuclear capabilities. The modern weapon is so colossally destructive that given the high density of the European population, one nuclear strike could easily wipe out a hundred million people and turn the continent into a desert. The issue is whether America put itself at risk of monumental destruction on behalf of already devastated Europe. At the heart of the problem is the inherent uncertainty of the nuclear guarantee.
The issue was first raised in January 1967 during a meeting between Henry Kissinger and Konrad Adenauer. Adenauer, then the first Chancellor of the Republic of Germany and a highly regarded politician, asked Kissinger, “Do you think that I still believe you will protect us unconditionally?”
Those who are old enough but do not suffer historical amnesia must remember that in the past, America, despite the rhetoric, abandoned Hungary when the Red Army ravaged Budapest in 1956, abandoned Germany when the Soviets built the Berlin Wall in 1961, and abandoned Czechoslovakia when the Red Army invaded the country in 1968. In all those instances, America stood by helplessly, watching the carnage, all full of bluster and no action.
Although it may sound cynical, America acted in its national interests when it decided that those countries were not worth the risk of nuclear destruction. So, what has changed now? The countries are the same, but the risk is even greater. What makes the Europeans think that the outcome would be different?
This leads us to another relevant issue raised by Adenauer “Are any leaders still able to conduct a genuine long-range policy? Is true leadership still possible today?”
Although the question was raised about 60 years ago, it has acute relevance today. The current crop of Western leaders is not made of the same stuff as Konrad Adenauer, Charles de Gaulle, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, or Donald Trump. They are not visionary; they are not even managerial types. Some of them are simply illiterate when it comes to history and geography. They cannot extrapolate from lessons of the past. Their obsession swept aside the previous safeguards, allowing for a constantly elevating level of conflict without regard for respective national interests and survival. They pushed Europe into the war that was neither necessary nor wise.
No one knows the limits of Russian endurance, but when Moscow starts losing the war, it will be forced to employ nuclear weapons. On the other hand, if Ukraine starts losing the war, some hardheads in Washington are already considering providing Ukraine with nukes as a deterrent. Either way, incompetent leaders are pushing the world toward unparalleled catastrophe.
Alexander G. Markovsky is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a conservative think tank that examines national security, energy, risk analysis, and other public policy issues. He is the author of Anatomy of a Bolshevik and Liberal Bolshevism: America Did Not Defeat Communism, She Adopted It. Mr. Markovsky is the owner and CEO of Litwin Management Services, LLC. He can be reached at alex.g.markovsky@gmail.com
Is Nuclear War Inevitable?
By Alexander G. Markovsky
During Napoleon's War of 1812, the Russian officers’ sabers were adorned an inscription, “Do not draw out without need. Do not put it back without glory!”
Whether Putin has drawn out his saber without the need may be debatable, but the geopolitical reality is that he will not put it back without glory, whatever the cost. Putin, who revived Russia, and rebuilt its economy from the ruins of the collapsed Soviet Union, cannot permit his odyssey to end in the country's dissolution.
On the other side of this Ukrainian confrontation is President Biden, who cannot afford the humiliation of another defeat after the disastrous retreat from Afghanistan. He also needs a victory at any cost.
If history is any guide, weak Russia, with its huge territory and abundant natural resources, will become prey for invaders. In the West, Europeans, driven by compulsion, are eager to retaliate for defeats and loss of territories, some centuries-old, others more recent. Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Finland have never accepted borders of the post-Second World War period.
Nor is the West the only threat facing Russia. In the East, Japan dreams of the return of the Sakhalin and Kuril islands. And Russia’s “sworn friend,” China, envisages living space for 1.5 billion Chinese and the acquisition of vast natural resources in the Russian Far East.
The imperative of winning puts no limitation on the modus operandi of the war. After 16 months of hostilities, though the war escalates in scope and intensity, NATO and its European allies maintain martial enthusiasm. Driven by the urge for expansion, NATO sees little risk in continuing fighting. Indeed, this time NATO engineered a perfect arrangement. It contracted the Ukrainian army as a mercenary. NATO directs and finances the war, provides strategic and tactical planning, intelligence, and supplies weapons and materiel while the Ukrainians do the fighting. Hence unlike the previous NATO misadventures, thousands of American and other NATO warriors are not coming home in zinc coffins.
America skillfully exploited Ukrainian leaders’ frantic ambition to make Ukraine a member of NATO, ostensibly to protect Ukraine from Russia. The supplicant exhibited a complete lack of judgment, failing to realize that membership in NATO and protection from Russia were mutually exclusive objectives. Consequently Ukraine finds itself in a peculiar situation; membership in NATO is not forthcoming, the country is getting destroyed, and as long as the Ukrainians are dying, the American and European publics are not overly concerned about the war.
At ease with the arrangement, at the recent gathering at G7, the leaders of the so-called advanced democracies committed to supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. Indeed, prolonging the conflict appears to be a new NATO strategy.
In his famed book, The Art of War, Sun Tzu concluded that “no country benefited from a prolonged war.” This wisdom may not apply to the current conflict. In previous world wars, the winner out-produced the loser. During the Second World War, Americans were losing, on average, six Sherman tanks for every German Tiger tank lost. But at the same time, American industry was manufacturing six Sherman tanks faster than Germans could produce one Tiger. Americans were producing more bombers than Germans were shooting down, which was true for almost every other type of military equipment.
Given that the combined GDP of NATO’s countries exceeds the Russians’ by twenty-fold, Russia cannot win a war of attrition against Europe and the United States in the long run. The folly of this strategy, nevertheless, is that if the economic assumptions prove correct, it will render nuclear confrontation almost inevitable. The recent rhetoric seems to suggest that NATO military planners accept this possibility, believing that Europe is safe under the American nuclear umbrella. Any attack on Europe would invite American nuclear retaliation. Therefore, even if Russians resolve to use a nuclear weapon, they will deploy it on Ukraine.
There is a lot of wishful thinking in this scenario. First, geography prevents Russians from using nuclear weapons in Ukraine because it is too close to Russia and Belarus to evade radioactive peril.
Second, Western leaders may rely too much on the credibility of the so-called massive retaliation doctrine designed to prevent the invasion of Europe by conventional Soviet forces during the Cold War era. The current scenario is entirely different. The danger is not from the Russian conventional forces but the Russian first-strike nuclear capabilities. The modern weapon is so colossally destructive that given the high density of the European population, one nuclear strike could easily wipe out a hundred million people and turn the continent into a desert. The issue is whether America put itself at risk of monumental destruction on behalf of already devastated Europe. At the heart of the problem is the inherent uncertainty of the nuclear guarantee.
The issue was first raised in January 1967 during a meeting between Henry Kissinger and Konrad Adenauer. Adenauer, then the first Chancellor of the Republic of Germany and a highly regarded politician, asked Kissinger, “Do you think that I still believe you will protect us unconditionally?”
Those who are old enough but do not suffer historical amnesia must remember that in the past, America, despite the rhetoric, abandoned Hungary when the Red Army ravaged Budapest in 1956, abandoned Germany when the Soviets built the Berlin Wall in 1961, and abandoned Czechoslovakia when the Red Army invaded the country in 1968. In all those instances, America stood by helplessly, watching the carnage, all full of bluster and no action.
Although it may sound cynical, America acted in its national interests when it decided that those countries were not worth the risk of nuclear destruction. So, what has changed now? The countries are the same, but the risk is even greater. What makes the Europeans think that the outcome would be different?
This leads us to another relevant issue raised by Adenauer “Are any leaders still able to conduct a genuine long-range policy? Is true leadership still possible today?”
Although the question was raised about 60 years ago, it has acute relevance today. The current crop of Western leaders is not made of the same stuff as Konrad Adenauer, Charles de Gaulle, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, or Donald Trump. They are not visionary; they are not even managerial types. Some of them are simply illiterate when it comes to history and geography. They cannot extrapolate from lessons of the past. Their obsession swept aside the previous safeguards, allowing for a constantly elevating level of conflict without regard for respective national interests and survival. They pushed Europe into the war that was neither necessary nor wise.
No one knows the limits of Russian endurance, but when Moscow starts losing the war, it will be forced to employ nuclear weapons. On the other hand, if Ukraine starts losing the war, some hardheads in Washington are already considering providing Ukraine with nukes as a deterrent. Either way, incompetent leaders are pushing the world toward unparalleled catastrophe.
Alexander G. Markovsky is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a conservative think tank that examines national security, energy, risk analysis, and other public policy issues. He is the author of Anatomy of a Bolshevik and Liberal Bolshevism: America Did Not Defeat Communism, She Adopted It. Mr. Markovsky is the owner and CEO of Litwin Management Services, LLC. He can be reached at alex.g.markovsky@gmail.com
239
HeadSet
2023 Jun 29, 3:28pm
HeadSet
2023 Jun 29, 3:28pm
RayAmerica says
France and Britain have nukes as well.
America acted in its national interests when it decided that those countries were not worth the risk of nuclear destruction.
France and Britain have nukes as well.
240
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 6, 9:19pm
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 6, 9:19pm
This just keeps escalating with no end in sight and Ukraine has virtually no chance whatsoever to win.
Report: Joe Biden to Supply Ukraine with Controversial Cluster Bombs
President Joe Biden is expected to supply Ukraine with cluster bombs, which much of the world has vowed not to use due to their long-term effects on civilians.
A senior Biden administration official told the New York Times that the United States will provide Ukraine with cluster munitions after Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky pushed for America to provide the country with the controversial and widely-banned weapon.
Cluster munitions are a category of rockets, bombs, missiles, and artillery projectiles that break apart in the air and blanket a large area. The munitions often fail and can devastate civilians.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/07/06/report-joe-biden-to-supply-ukraine-with-controversial-cluster-bombs/
Report: Joe Biden to Supply Ukraine with Controversial Cluster Bombs
President Joe Biden is expected to supply Ukraine with cluster bombs, which much of the world has vowed not to use due to their long-term effects on civilians.
A senior Biden administration official told the New York Times that the United States will provide Ukraine with cluster munitions after Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky pushed for America to provide the country with the controversial and widely-banned weapon.
Cluster munitions are a category of rockets, bombs, missiles, and artillery projectiles that break apart in the air and blanket a large area. The munitions often fail and can devastate civilians.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/07/06/report-joe-biden-to-supply-ukraine-with-controversial-cluster-bombs/
241
komputodo
2023 Jul 6, 9:34pm
komputodo
2023 Jul 6, 9:34pm
RayAmerica says
well they need to sell them to someone
Report: Joe Biden to Supply Ukraine with Controversial Cluster Bombs
well they need to sell them to someone
243
richwicks
2023 Jul 6, 10:45pm
richwicks
2023 Jul 6, 10:45pm
komputodo says
The population has been threatened by this for decades. Nuclear war makes EVERYBODY have a worse life, there are no winners.
Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations. They will degrade you life though.
RayAmerica says
Is Nuclear War Inevitable?
Of course not...there will be no nuclear war
The population has been threatened by this for decades. Nuclear war makes EVERYBODY have a worse life, there are no winners.
Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations. They will degrade you life though.
244
AD
2023 Jul 6, 10:55pm
AD
2023 Jul 6, 10:55pm
richwicks says
Lets hope and pray this is all cold war era-style theater and grandstanding or posturing
.
Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations.
Lets hope and pray this is all cold war era-style theater and grandstanding or posturing
.
245
richwicks
2023 Jul 6, 11:03pm
richwicks
2023 Jul 6, 11:03pm
ad says
It's just continued insanity, stupidity, inanity, I believed we dispensed with in the 1990s.
I'm tired of the game of terror. I do not believe them.
richwicks says
Sociopaths don't degrade their life and that is who runs all nations.
Lets hope and pray this is all cold war era-style theater and grandstanding or posturing
It's just continued insanity, stupidity, inanity, I believed we dispensed with in the 1990s.
I'm tired of the game of terror. I do not believe them.
246
Misc
2023 Jul 7, 3:24am
If someone pops a few nukes, it will destroy the illusion that nukes will "end the world".
There has been a massive world-wide propaganda effort to get the world's populous to view a nuclear war as un-winnable because everyone would die. (My Favorite was the fictional tale of 'On the Beach').
Nope, the world does not end with a Global Thermonuclear War. Cities are just far too big and infrastructure far too massive for this to occur. It would take several hundreds of our most powerful nuclear warheads all working correctly to level a single city.
There has been a massive world-wide propaganda effort to get the world's populous to view a nuclear war as un-winnable because everyone would die. (My Favorite was the fictional tale of 'On the Beach').
Nope, the world does not end with a Global Thermonuclear War. Cities are just far too big and infrastructure far too massive for this to occur. It would take several hundreds of our most powerful nuclear warheads all working correctly to level a single city.
247
RWSGFY
2023 Jul 7, 8:07am
RWSGFY
2023 Jul 7, 8:07am
Misc says
Yep, and tac nukes are even more of a nothingburger. Besides, to pop a nuke one needs to deliver it and recently even wonderful Soviet "hypersonic missiles" can't deliver shit being shot down by overhyped and fragile Western-supplied EAD.
Nukes are truly all or nothing weapons and only work when employed 100% (and then you die, because the response will be 100% too), so threatening nuke use to get something small is as useful as robbing people at gas station with a hand grenade.
If someone pops a few nukes, it will destroy the illusion that nukes will "end the world".
There has been a massive world-wide propaganda effort to get the world's populous to view a nuclear war as un-winnable because everyone would die. (My Favorite was the fictional tale of 'On the Beach').
Nope, the world does not end with a Global Thermonuclear War. Cities are just far too big and infrastructure far too massive for this to occur. It would take several hundreds of our most powerful nuclear warheads all working correctly to level a single city.
Yep, and tac nukes are even more of a nothingburger. Besides, to pop a nuke one needs to deliver it and recently even wonderful Soviet "hypersonic missiles" can't deliver shit being shot down by overhyped and fragile Western-supplied EAD.
Nukes are truly all or nothing weapons and only work when employed 100% (and then you die, because the response will be 100% too), so threatening nuke use to get something small is as useful as robbing people at gas station with a hand grenade.
248
FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden
2023 Jul 7, 8:45am
realistically, if russia nukes… there won’t be response. i hope they don’t, it would kill a lot of people.
everyone can justify use of nukes, we did.
everyone can justify use of nukes, we did.
249
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 13, 8:11am
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 13, 8:11am
World War III is put on hold. Had Ukraine been allowed to join NATO, WW III would have begun in earnest, instead of the little, extremely unsuccessful proxy war that is being waged on Russia, while using Ukraine as fodder.
Recall the old saying; 'A picture is worth a thousand words.' The only thing missing in this photo is Zelensky wearing clown shoes.
Recall the old saying; 'A picture is worth a thousand words.' The only thing missing in this photo is Zelensky wearing clown shoes.
250
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 14, 8:02am
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 14, 8:02am
Fine example of incrementalism:
Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/07/13/biden-authorizes-military-to-call-reservists-to-active-duty-to-support-ukraine-war/
Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/07/13/biden-authorizes-military-to-call-reservists-to-active-duty-to-support-ukraine-war/
251
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 8:25am
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 8:25am
Pentagon officials said no troops would be deployed for combat to Ukraine.
Right. They are called 'advisors' instead.
Right. They are called 'advisors' instead.
252
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 14, 8:31am
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 14, 8:31am
Trollhole says
Where have I heard that one before? Viet Nam maybe?
Right. They are called 'advisors' instead.
Where have I heard that one before? Viet Nam maybe?
254
Onvacation
2023 Jul 14, 9:24am
Onvacation
2023 Jul 14, 9:24am
RayAmerica says
Congress needs to declare war. Or get the fuck out!
Fine example of incrementalism:
Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War
Congress needs to declare war. Or get the fuck out!
255
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 14, 9:30am
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 14, 9:30am
The escalation continues:
Russia warns U.S., NATO: We consider F-16 deal for Ukraine a nuclear threat
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/13/russia-says-f-16-deal-ukraine-amounts-nuclear-thre/
"Any deployment of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will be seen as a direct nuclear threat to Moscow because of their ability to carry atomic weapons," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday.
“We have informed the nuclear powers, the United States, Britain and France, that Russia cannot ignore the ability of these aircraft to carry nuclear weapons. No amount of assurances will help here,” Mr. Lavrov said.
“We will regard the very fact that the Ukrainian armed forces have such systems as a threat from the West in the nuclear sphere,” he said.
Russia warns U.S., NATO: We consider F-16 deal for Ukraine a nuclear threat
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/13/russia-says-f-16-deal-ukraine-amounts-nuclear-thre/
"Any deployment of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will be seen as a direct nuclear threat to Moscow because of their ability to carry atomic weapons," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday.
“We have informed the nuclear powers, the United States, Britain and France, that Russia cannot ignore the ability of these aircraft to carry nuclear weapons. No amount of assurances will help here,” Mr. Lavrov said.
“We will regard the very fact that the Ukrainian armed forces have such systems as a threat from the West in the nuclear sphere,” he said.
256
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 9:59am
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 9:59am
RayAmerica says
But the old MiGs the Ukranians had could carry nuclear weapons, too.
"Any deployment of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will be seen as a direct nuclear threat to Moscow because of their ability to carry atomic weapons," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday.
But the old MiGs the Ukranians had could carry nuclear weapons, too.
257
The_Deplorable
2023 Jul 14, 12:03pm
RayAmerica says
Yesterday Biden told us that the USA run out of ammo and today he is calling "Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War?" So what are they going to use against the Russians? Rocks?
"Fine example of incrementalism: Biden Authorizes Military to Call Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War"
Yesterday Biden told us that the USA run out of ammo and today he is calling "Reservists to Active Duty to Support Ukraine War?" So what are they going to use against the Russians? Rocks?
258
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 2:19pm
https://public.substack.com/p/why-do-we-fight
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 2:19pm
Then, around noon yesterday, Biden said there was “no possibility” that Russian President Vladimir Putin could win the war in Ukraine. Indeed, reassured Biden, Putin had “already lost.”
But then, a few hours after that, Biden issued an executive order mobilizing 3,000 additional U.S. reserve troops to Europe. "This [executive order] reaffirms the unwavering support and commitment to defend NATO's eastern flank in the wake of Russia's illegal and unprovoked war on Ukraine," said Army Lt. Gen. Douglas A. Sims II, Joint Staff Director of Operations.
But… why? Because, Sims said, "This new designation benefits troops and families with increases in authorities, entitlements, and access to the reserve component forces and personnel."
So, the US military is deploying more troops to Europe to… benefit troops and families? Not exactly. In fact, Biden’s order mobilized soldiers who had already completed their contract to serve and were on their way to becoming civilians.
As such, the deployment highlights that the situation is far more desperate than Biden was letting on. And indeed, later in the press release, the Pentagon confesses that “fighting is severe.”
https://public.substack.com/p/why-do-we-fight
259
richwicks
2023 Jul 14, 3:43pm
richwicks
2023 Jul 14, 3:43pm
Trollhole says
It's unbelievable. These stupid assholes seem to believe their own fucking propaganda.
Then, around noon yesterday, Biden said there was “no possibility” that Russian President Vladimir Putin could win the war in Ukraine. Indeed, reassured Biden, Putin had “already lost.”
It's unbelievable. These stupid assholes seem to believe their own fucking propaganda.
260
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 4:08pm
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Jul 14, 4:08pm
Nahhh...that was just a straight out lie for the Useful Idiots from Biden Admin Left Foot that didn't know Pentagon Right Hand was going to simultaneously fuck all that up an hour or so later.
Occam's Razor meets Murphy's Law.
Occam's Razor meets Murphy's Law.
263
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 30, 7:44am
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 30, 7:44am
The escalation continues. Where will it end?
Ukrainian Drone Attacks on Moscow Force Airport to Shut Down
(AP) — Russian authorities say three Ukrainian drones attacked Moscow in the early hours on Sunday, injuring one person and prompting a temporary closure for traffic of one of four airports around the Russian capital.
It was the fourth such attempt at a strike on the capital region this month and the third this week, fueling concerns about Moscow´s vulnerability to attacks as Russia’s war in Ukraine drags into its 18th month.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/07/30/ukrainian-drone-attacks-on-moscow-force-airport-to-shut-down/
Ukrainian Drone Attacks on Moscow Force Airport to Shut Down
(AP) — Russian authorities say three Ukrainian drones attacked Moscow in the early hours on Sunday, injuring one person and prompting a temporary closure for traffic of one of four airports around the Russian capital.
It was the fourth such attempt at a strike on the capital region this month and the third this week, fueling concerns about Moscow´s vulnerability to attacks as Russia’s war in Ukraine drags into its 18th month.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/07/30/ukrainian-drone-attacks-on-moscow-force-airport-to-shut-down/
264
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 31, 3:08pm
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 31, 3:08pm
Medvedev Says Russia Could Use Nuclear Weapon If Ukraine Offensive Wins
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/medvedev-says-russia-could-use-nuclear-weapon-if-ukraine-offensive-wins
Senior Russian national security official Dmitry Medvedev has issued a dire nuclear warning and threat aimed at Ukraine and its Western backers (though certainly not for the first time).
He said in a Sunday Telegram post that Russia could be forced to mount nuclear attack if Ukraine's counteroffensive succeeds. In effect it is to say that if Ukraine "wins", nukes would be deployed. This would happen in the scenario of "part of our land being taken away," he said.
"Just imagine that the offensive… in tandem with NATO, succeeded and ended up with part of our land being taken away. Then we would have to use nuclear weapons by virtue of the stipulations of the Russian Presidential Decree," the former president and now deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council asserted, which is being widely cited in Western press reports.
... He added in the Telegram statement, "Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends." Such threats are perhaps why Washington has remained hesitant on supplying Ukraine forces with longer-range missiles, also at a moment President Zelensky is actively vowing to 'return' the war to Russia.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/medvedev-says-russia-could-use-nuclear-weapon-if-ukraine-offensive-wins
Senior Russian national security official Dmitry Medvedev has issued a dire nuclear warning and threat aimed at Ukraine and its Western backers (though certainly not for the first time).
He said in a Sunday Telegram post that Russia could be forced to mount nuclear attack if Ukraine's counteroffensive succeeds. In effect it is to say that if Ukraine "wins", nukes would be deployed. This would happen in the scenario of "part of our land being taken away," he said.
"Just imagine that the offensive… in tandem with NATO, succeeded and ended up with part of our land being taken away. Then we would have to use nuclear weapons by virtue of the stipulations of the Russian Presidential Decree," the former president and now deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council asserted, which is being widely cited in Western press reports.
... He added in the Telegram statement, "Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends." Such threats are perhaps why Washington has remained hesitant on supplying Ukraine forces with longer-range missiles, also at a moment President Zelensky is actively vowing to 'return' the war to Russia.
265
The_Deplorable
2023 Jul 31, 3:34pm
RayAmerica says
Zero Hedge is not providing a link that verifies the above Medvedev quote! Nothing!
Instead, Zero Hedge says that this Medvedev assertion, "is being widely cited in Western press reports" and provides a link to CNN news.
In other words this is Propaganda and Fake News.
"Medvedev Says Russia Could Use Nuclear Weapon If Ukraine Offensive Wins"
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/medvedev-says-russia-could-use-nuclear-weapon-if-ukraine-offensive-wins
Zero Hedge is not providing a link that verifies the above Medvedev quote! Nothing!
Instead, Zero Hedge says that this Medvedev assertion, "is being widely cited in Western press reports" and provides a link to CNN news.
In other words this is Propaganda and Fake News.
266
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 31, 7:46pm
RayAmerica
2023 Jul 31, 7:46pm
This is not fake news ...
As reported by the New York Post:
Ex-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev threatens ‘global nuclear fire’ over Ukraine counteroffensive: ‘No other option’
https://nypost.com/2023/07/31/kremlins-dmitry-medvedev-threatens-global-nuclear-fire/
As reported by the New York Post:
Ex-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev threatens ‘global nuclear fire’ over Ukraine counteroffensive: ‘No other option’
https://nypost.com/2023/07/31/kremlins-dmitry-medvedev-threatens-global-nuclear-fire/
267
The_Deplorable
2023 Aug 1, 12:02pm
RayAmerica says
It is Fake News because the context is missing. This is what he said (from the link) and this is nothing new:
"“Imagine if the … offensive, which is backed by NATO, was a success and they tore off a part of our land then we would be forced to use a nuclear weapon,” he wrote."
He did not say anything new because according to Russian military doctrine, Russia will not fight another war on Russian soil and will respond with a nuclear attack.
The people who are flirting with nuclear war are the neoCon Globalists who are suffering a humiliating defeat in Ukraine.
"This is not fake news ... As reported by the New York Post: Ex-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev threatens ‘global nuclear fire’ over Ukraine counteroffensive: ‘No other option’ https://nypost.com/2023/07/31/kremlins-dmitry-medvedev-threatens-global-nuclear-fire/ "
It is Fake News because the context is missing. This is what he said (from the link) and this is nothing new:
"“Imagine if the … offensive, which is backed by NATO, was a success and they tore off a part of our land then we would be forced to use a nuclear weapon,” he wrote."
He did not say anything new because according to Russian military doctrine, Russia will not fight another war on Russian soil and will respond with a nuclear attack.
The people who are flirting with nuclear war are the neoCon Globalists who are suffering a humiliating defeat in Ukraine.
268
richwicks
2023 Aug 1, 9:05pm
richwicks
2023 Aug 1, 9:05pm
RayAmerica says
What was Medvedev original statement? Was it in Russian or English? Did he state this on video, or write it? Where is the video, what is the document, where is the post?
Our "news" media lies, and lies, and lies, and lies and lies. I don't see why people pay any attention to it. It is worthless to cite "authoritative sources", and it's pointless. Show original sources, provide links to them, or it never happened.
I know what you're thinking "The XXX media organization wouldn't lie!" - sure they would. They ALL lie. The only people who can't lie without consequences are "independent media". When they fuck up, they are torn a new asshole. There's LOTS of people an independent sources I used to listen to, until they fucking lied to me.
I eliminated all corporate media from ANY consideration 15 years ago. The DAILY SHOW was the LAST bit of "real news" on television back in 2005. A comedy show. They climbed to fame by DEBUNKING Fox News and Iraq War propaganda. They've been coasting ever since.
I am tired of checking sources, when people can just fucking post them. Nobody should believe anything unless proof is provided at this point.
This is not fake news ...
As reported by the New York Post:
Ex-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev threatens ‘global nuclear fire’ over Ukraine counteroffensive: ‘No other option’
https://nypost.com/2023/07/31/kremlins-dmitry-medvedev-threatens-global-nuclear-fire/
What was Medvedev original statement? Was it in Russian or English? Did he state this on video, or write it? Where is the video, what is the document, where is the post?
Our "news" media lies, and lies, and lies, and lies and lies. I don't see why people pay any attention to it. It is worthless to cite "authoritative sources", and it's pointless. Show original sources, provide links to them, or it never happened.
I know what you're thinking "The XXX media organization wouldn't lie!" - sure they would. They ALL lie. The only people who can't lie without consequences are "independent media". When they fuck up, they are torn a new asshole. There's LOTS of people an independent sources I used to listen to, until they fucking lied to me.
I eliminated all corporate media from ANY consideration 15 years ago. The DAILY SHOW was the LAST bit of "real news" on television back in 2005. A comedy show. They climbed to fame by DEBUNKING Fox News and Iraq War propaganda. They've been coasting ever since.
I am tired of checking sources, when people can just fucking post them. Nobody should believe anything unless proof is provided at this point.
269
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 2, 8:13am
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 2, 8:13am
Russia Deploys Intercontinental Ballistic Missile for ‘Combat Duty’
MOSCOW (AP) – The head of Russia’s Roscosmos space agency said Friday that the country has deployed an advanced intercontinental ballistic missile that President Vladimir Putin once said will make Russia’s enemies “think twice.”
Agency head Yuri Borisov said Sarmat missiles have been placed on combat duty, according to Russian news agencies. Further details were not reported.
The Sarmat is one of several advanced weapons whose development Putin announced in 2018. The silo-based missile, capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads, is intended to replace the R-36 ICBMs that are known by the NATO reporting name of Satan.
The Sarmat reportedly has a short initial launch phase, allowing little time for surveillance systems to track it.
In 2022, about two months after sending troops into Ukraine, Putin said the Sarmat would “reliably ensure the security of Russia from external threats and make those who, in the heat of aggressive rhetoric, try to threaten our country, think twice.”
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/09/02/russia-deploys-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-for-combat-duty/
MOSCOW (AP) – The head of Russia’s Roscosmos space agency said Friday that the country has deployed an advanced intercontinental ballistic missile that President Vladimir Putin once said will make Russia’s enemies “think twice.”
Agency head Yuri Borisov said Sarmat missiles have been placed on combat duty, according to Russian news agencies. Further details were not reported.
The Sarmat is one of several advanced weapons whose development Putin announced in 2018. The silo-based missile, capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads, is intended to replace the R-36 ICBMs that are known by the NATO reporting name of Satan.
The Sarmat reportedly has a short initial launch phase, allowing little time for surveillance systems to track it.
In 2022, about two months after sending troops into Ukraine, Putin said the Sarmat would “reliably ensure the security of Russia from external threats and make those who, in the heat of aggressive rhetoric, try to threaten our country, think twice.”
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/09/02/russia-deploys-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-for-combat-duty/
270
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 12, 7:29pm
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 12, 7:29pm
Blinken OKs Attacks On Russia With US Missiles
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said at the start of this week that it was up to Ukraine whether or not to target Russian territory with US-provided weapons, a policy that brings the US and Russia closer to a direct clash.
Blinken made the comments after ABC News reported that it’s likely the Biden administration will soon arm Ukraine with Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS), which have a range of up to 190 miles.
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/09/11/blinken-us-does-not-oppose-ukraine-targeting-russian-territory-with-us-provided-missiles/
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said at the start of this week that it was up to Ukraine whether or not to target Russian territory with US-provided weapons, a policy that brings the US and Russia closer to a direct clash.
Blinken made the comments after ABC News reported that it’s likely the Biden administration will soon arm Ukraine with Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS), which have a range of up to 190 miles.
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/09/11/blinken-us-does-not-oppose-ukraine-targeting-russian-territory-with-us-provided-missiles/
271
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 16, 10:02am
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 16, 10:02am
Why is Ukraine worth the risk of starting WW III?
Warmonger Neo-Con Mike Pence Says U.S. Military May Have to Fight if Ukraine Loses War to Russia
“I’m convinced that if the Ukrainian military doesn’t stop and repel that Russian invasion, it’s not going to be too long before that Russian army crosses a border that our men and women in uniform are going to have to go and fight (for) under our NATO Treaty. I truly believe it,” Pence said.
However, according to NATO, “Ukraine is not a NATO member. Ukraine is a NATO partner country, which means that it cooperates closely with NATO but it is not covered by the security guarantee in the Alliance’s founding treaty.”
Pence argues that providing aid to Ukraine is in America’s interest for “peace and security in the world.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/09/warmonger-mike-pence-says-u-s-military-may/
Warmonger Neo-Con Mike Pence Says U.S. Military May Have to Fight if Ukraine Loses War to Russia
“I’m convinced that if the Ukrainian military doesn’t stop and repel that Russian invasion, it’s not going to be too long before that Russian army crosses a border that our men and women in uniform are going to have to go and fight (for) under our NATO Treaty. I truly believe it,” Pence said.
However, according to NATO, “Ukraine is not a NATO member. Ukraine is a NATO partner country, which means that it cooperates closely with NATO but it is not covered by the security guarantee in the Alliance’s founding treaty.”
Pence argues that providing aid to Ukraine is in America’s interest for “peace and security in the world.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/09/warmonger-mike-pence-says-u-s-military-may/
272
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 18, 7:12pm
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 18, 7:12pm
Can anyone explain what exactly are America's interests in Ukraine? I'd really like to know.
And while you're at it, what were our interests (outside of the Poppy fields) in Afghanistan?
And while you're at it, what were our interests (outside of the Poppy fields) in Afghanistan?
273
richwicks
2023 Sep 18, 7:18pm
richwicks
2023 Sep 18, 7:18pm
RayAmerica says
A bunch of the Jewish mafia that is giving kickbacks to US representatives (like Burisma, and Hunter Biden) want to continue exploiting the country and have gambled that that they can use this war to collapse Russia, and take them over. A gamble I think they will lose.
If the war is successful, they can go back to exploiting Russia in the same way. Putin saw this and put and end to it in 2000, Boris Yeltsin was a drunk and a moron, he had no clue what was going on, and he didn't care. When Putin cracked down on the corruption (and there's plenty still), that became a problem for the mafia, who is directly involved with bribing US representatives.
IF you really want to know the truth. This is nothing more than an attempt for a mafia to seize control of resources of Russia and they were betting the resources they had in Ukraine against it, and leveraging the people they controlled in Washington to do it.
And it is a mafia, it just happens to be Jewish. NOT all Jews are involved in this, of course. This is a mafia turf war which is more widely understood as a proxy war. The US as a nation has no interest in Ukraine, but the "donor class" does.
Can anyone explain what exactly are America's interests in Ukraine? I'd really like to know.
A bunch of the Jewish mafia that is giving kickbacks to US representatives (like Burisma, and Hunter Biden) want to continue exploiting the country and have gambled that that they can use this war to collapse Russia, and take them over. A gamble I think they will lose.
If the war is successful, they can go back to exploiting Russia in the same way. Putin saw this and put and end to it in 2000, Boris Yeltsin was a drunk and a moron, he had no clue what was going on, and he didn't care. When Putin cracked down on the corruption (and there's plenty still), that became a problem for the mafia, who is directly involved with bribing US representatives.
IF you really want to know the truth. This is nothing more than an attempt for a mafia to seize control of resources of Russia and they were betting the resources they had in Ukraine against it, and leveraging the people they controlled in Washington to do it.
And it is a mafia, it just happens to be Jewish. NOT all Jews are involved in this, of course. This is a mafia turf war which is more widely understood as a proxy war. The US as a nation has no interest in Ukraine, but the "donor class" does.
274
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Sep 19, 12:17am
DOGEWontAmountToShit
2023 Sep 19, 12:17am
The U.S. Army War College* has released a brief overview of "Lessons from the War in Ukraine".
In particular, it has a forecast of US casualties and mobilization reserves in a conflict of this level.
Thesis:
- military doctors project a [KIA and WIA] casualty rate for the US Armed Forces of 3,600\day.
- The combat replenishment rate is 25% or 800 troops per day.
- In 20 years of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. has lost about 50,000 people.
In a conflict of the Ukrainian level, the U.S. would suffer such losses in 2 weeks.
- The recruitment shortage is a major problem.
- every soldier not recruited today is a strategic mobility asset [IRR or reservists] that the US will not have in 2031**
- IRR was 700K in 1973, 450K in 1994, now at 76K.
- These numbers will not make up for the projected losses.
275
socal2
2023 Sep 19, 8:53am
RayAmerica says
The better question is what is in Russia's interests at this point to continue to send men and material into a meat grinder other than to save Putin's hide?
As an American, I don't want one our largest geopolitical adversaries "win" in Ukraine as it will give the US MIC more excuses to spend Trillions on defense and Ukraine will be a festering wound in Europe for the rest of our lives possibly requiring the US to send more troops to Europe to beef up existing NATO members.
Can anyone explain what exactly are America's interests in Ukraine? I'd really like to know.
The better question is what is in Russia's interests at this point to continue to send men and material into a meat grinder other than to save Putin's hide?
As an American, I don't want one our largest geopolitical adversaries "win" in Ukraine as it will give the US MIC more excuses to spend Trillions on defense and Ukraine will be a festering wound in Europe for the rest of our lives possibly requiring the US to send more troops to Europe to beef up existing NATO members.
276
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 19, 8:56am
RayAmerica
2023 Sep 19, 8:56am
Could Ukraine Turn Into a Nuclear World War III That Kills Billions of People?
For the first time since the days of the Soviet Union, Russia has now moved tactical nuclear weapons beyond its borders into Belarus, a move which further suggests Putin may in fact be inclined to use them.
...powerful tactical nuclear weapons are now “arriving” in Belarus, a provocative and changing dynamic that highlights Russia’s well-known “escalate-to-win” strategy.
Russia has long had an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons and is perceived as being willing to aggressively threaten, posture, and intimidate rivals by adding high numbers of heavy and low-yield nuclear weapons.
Some of the atomic bombs delivered to Belarus were three times more powerful than the atomic bombs the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, according to a story in Reuters. The Reuters article also cited ominous warnings from President Biden on Russia’s resolve to use nuclear weapons, saying “It's real.”
Russia’s “escalate to win” strategy was cited as part of the Pentagon’s rationale for adding lower-yield, tactical nuclear weapons to the U.S. arsenal. While some express concern that the addition of low-yield nuclear weapons to the U.S. arsenal could “lower the threshold” to nuclear war and encourage thinking that there may be a possibility for a “winnable” nuclear weapons exchange.
More here: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/could-ukraine-turn-into-a-nuclear-world-war-iii-that-kills-billions-of-people/ar-AA1cRiCz
For the first time since the days of the Soviet Union, Russia has now moved tactical nuclear weapons beyond its borders into Belarus, a move which further suggests Putin may in fact be inclined to use them.
...powerful tactical nuclear weapons are now “arriving” in Belarus, a provocative and changing dynamic that highlights Russia’s well-known “escalate-to-win” strategy.
Russia has long had an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons and is perceived as being willing to aggressively threaten, posture, and intimidate rivals by adding high numbers of heavy and low-yield nuclear weapons.
Some of the atomic bombs delivered to Belarus were three times more powerful than the atomic bombs the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, according to a story in Reuters. The Reuters article also cited ominous warnings from President Biden on Russia’s resolve to use nuclear weapons, saying “It's real.”
Russia’s “escalate to win” strategy was cited as part of the Pentagon’s rationale for adding lower-yield, tactical nuclear weapons to the U.S. arsenal. While some express concern that the addition of low-yield nuclear weapons to the U.S. arsenal could “lower the threshold” to nuclear war and encourage thinking that there may be a possibility for a “winnable” nuclear weapons exchange.
More here: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/could-ukraine-turn-into-a-nuclear-world-war-iii-that-kills-billions-of-people/ar-AA1cRiCz
« First « Previous Comments 237 - 276 of 1,034 Next » Last » Search these comments
"President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday suspended Russian participation in the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty with the United States, warning Washington that Russia had put new ground-based strategic nuclear weapons on combat duty," Reuters reports of the new declaration.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/putin-suspends-new-start-nuclear-treaty-puts-new-missiles-combat-readiness