Tag: nuclear war

Media Urge Expansion of Ukraine War—Nuclear Risk Be Damned

Ukraine has for months been asking the Biden administration for permission to use long-range US, British and French weapons to strike deeper in Russian territory, which would be a clear escalation in the war. Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that the move would cross a red line for him, and recently announced that he was loosening Russia’s nuclear doctrine for using nuclear weapons.

Despite the risks of such escalation—and a lack of evidence that it would shift the war in Ukraine’s favor—Biden’s public reluctance to loosen his limits has been met in the war-hungry media primarily with derision.

The US, Britain and France have all supplied Ukraine with long-range missiles, including Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS). But Biden has thus far limited their use to border areas. Britain and France are following Biden’s lead on range limitations.

Last month, in response to further advances by Russia into Ukraine, Ukraine launched a surprise invasion into Russian territory in Kursk. Since then, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has pressed the US for more and longer-range missiles, Putin has increasingly raised the specter of nuclear retaliation.

Under its 2020 nuclear doctrine, Russia could respond with nuclear strikes to nuclear or conventional attacks it deemed a “threat to its existence,” if they came from a nuclear power. His new doctrine lowers the bar, so that a “critical attack” on Russia carried out with the “participation or support of a nuclear power” would be grounds for launching a nuclear response—including against the supporting power.

In other words, if Ukraine used long-range missiles supplied by a NATO power to launch an attack on Russia that it deemed “critical,” Putin could respond with a nuclear strike, against either Ukraine or against that NATO country.

Keep reading

Why Kamala Harris Will Kill at Least 5 Billion People if She Becomes President

Kamala Harris said on September 26th that the United States is at war with Russia in Ukraine, and that Donald Trump would “surrender” to Russia if he becomes President again. She made clear that the war between Russia and Ukraine is also war between Russia and America — it is America’s war, just as-if Ukraine were a U.S. state. Here is how this was reported by France’s Agence France-Presse, under the headline “Harris meets Zelensky and slams Trump’s ‘surrender policy’ for Ukraine”:

Harris did not mention Trump by name but said there were “some in my country who would instead force Ukraine to give up large parts of its sovereign territory.”

“These proposals are the same of those of (President Vladimir) Putin. And let us be clear, they are not proposals for peace. Instead, they are proposals for surrender,” she said, referring to the Russian leader.

She was virtually repeating President Joe Biden’s statement on the same day, that Ukraine must and will win this war against Russia with America’s help, and must never yield any of the territory in Ukraine that Russia now occupies. “Russia will not prevail, Ukraine will prevail, in this war”, he said. He made this commitment there, in the presence of, and to, Ukraine’s leader, Volodmyr Zelensky. In other words: If WW3 is necessary in order defeat Russia in Ukraine, then America will do it.

On the night of September 25th, CNN headlined “Republicans follow Trump’s lead of icing out Zelensky”, and reported that,

Former President Donald Trump on Wednesday criticized Volodymyr Zelensky and claimed the Ukrainian president “refuses to make a deal” amid Russia’s war in Ukraine, marking Trump’s most explicit criticism of Zelensky’s handling of the war to date. 

“Those cities are gone, they’re gone, and we continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refused to make a deal, Zelensky. There was no deal that he could have made that wouldn’t have been better than the situation you have right now. You have a country that has been obliterated, not possible to be rebuilt,” Trump said during a campaign speech in Mint Hill, North Carolina. …

 Republican leaders are so far declining to meet Zelensky while he is in Washington, DC, while Democrats are embracing the opportunity. Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson are not currently scheduled to meet with the Ukrainian president, sources told CNN, while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Vice President Kamala Harris are scheduled to have meetings. …

“Every time he came to our country, he’d walk away with $60 billion. He’s probably the greatest salesman on Earth,” Trump said of Zelensky on Wednesday.

Trump says Ukraine should have given up territory to stop the war earlier

In his speech, Trump blamed Biden and Harris for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and claimed they “caused this situation by the stupidity of what they said, by every move they make, but they caused the situation and now they’re locked in.”

“They just don’t know what to do. They’re locked into a situation. It’s sad, they just don’t know what to do. Because Ukraine is gone, it’s not Ukraine anymore. You can never replace those cities and towns, and you can never replace the dead people, so many dead people,” Trump said.

He said making a deal earlier in the conflict to cede some territory to the Russians would have prevented more catastrophe. Trump argued Biden should have been able to orchestrate a deal between Russia and Ukraine that avoided any bloodshed and argued that even a “bad deal” and one where Ukraine had “given up a little bit,” would’ve been preferable to the war.

Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and the Democratic Party, have made clear, again and again, that the U.S. will never allow Russia to win in Ukraine. Everyone by now agrees that Russia is winning in Ukraine. Zelensky is asking Biden for permission to use U.S. weapons in order to strike deep into Russia, including The Kremlin itself — with U.S. weapons.

Keep reading

Putin Updates Nuclear Doctrine As Zelensky Begs U.S. for Long-Range Missile Strikes w/ Glenn Diesen

Zelensky is on his “victory plan” tour to the U.S. this week, where he is once again pleading with the Biden Administration to lift restrictions on Kiev’s use of long-range missiles against Moscow—therefore directly involving Washington in the strikes deep inside Russian territory.

This, as Russian President Putin updated Moscow’s nuclear doctrine this week to state that “aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear state” that is “supported by a nuclear power should be treated as their joint attack.“

Keep reading

Nuclear arms to be used as soon as NATO attacks Belarus, Lukashenko says

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has said during a meeting with students that nuclear weapons will be used as soon as NATO attacks the republic.

“I <…> have been saying that attacking Belarus is World War Three. Actually, recently, Putin confirmed this making amendments to the nuclear doctrine that, in the event of an attack on Russia and Belarus we are using nuclear arms,” the BelTA news agency quoted him as saying. “He confirmed my words. This is the essence of my statement,” the Belarusian leader added.

“If we use nuclear weapons, they may respond. And to Russia as well, so it will use all of its arsenal. And this is a world war already. The West doesn’t want it either. They are not ready for it. Yet we are openly telling them: the state border is the red line. If they set foot on it, the response will be immediate,” Lukashenko asserted.

Keep reading

Russia Announces Changes to Nuclear Doctrine: Western Missile Strikes Deep Inside Russia Will Trigger an Atomic Response

WORLD WAR III UPDATE: The globalist left moved the world closer to nuclear war on Wednesday.

Russian President Vladimir Putin met with officials on Wednesday and announced changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine.

Putin lowered the threshold regarding Russian strategic forces’ use of nukes.

In a televised address to Russia’s Security Council, Putin said nuclear doctrine has been effectively revised in light of recent developments.

Putin warned NATO in his message to top Russian leaders after meetings on Wednesday.

Vladimir Putin: “The updated version of the document proposes that aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear weapons state but with the participation or support of a nuclear weapon state should be regarded as a joint attack on the Russian federation.

The conditions for Russia’s transition to the use of nuclear weapons are also clearly defined. We will consider such a possibility as soon as we receive reliable information about a massive launch of aerospace attack NEDS and their crossing of our state border. Meaning strategic or tactical aircraft, cruise missiles, drones, hypersonic missiles and other aircraft…

…We reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in the event of aggression against Russia and Belarus as a member of the union state. All of these agreements have been agreed upon with the Belarussian side and with the president of Belarus.

Keep reading

Negotiate with Moscow to end the Ukraine war and prevent nuclear devastation

The New York Times reported Thursday that the Biden administration is considering allowing Ukraine to use NATO-provided long-range precision weapons against targets deep inside Russia. Such a decision would put the world at greater risk of nuclear conflagration than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis.

At a time when American leaders should be focused on finding a diplomatic off-ramp to a war that should never have been allowed to take place, the Biden-Harris administration is instead pursuing a policy that Russia says it will interpret as an act of war. In the words of Vladimir Putin, long-range strikes in Russia “will mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia.”

Some American analysts believe Putin is bluffing, and favor calling his bluff. As the Times reported, “‘Easing the restrictions on Western weapons will not cause Moscow to escalate,’17 former ambassadors and generals wrote in a letter to the administration this week. ‘We know this because Ukraine is already striking territory Russia considers its own — including Crimea and Kursk — with these weapons and Moscow’s response remains unchanged.’”

These analysts are mistaking restraint for weakness. In essence, they are advocating a strategy of brinksmanship. Each escalation — from HIMARS to cluster munitions to Abrams tanks to F-16s to ATACMS — draws the world closer to the brink of Armageddon. Their logic seems to be that if you goad a bear five times and it doesn’t respond, it is safe to goad him even harder a sixth time.

Such a strategy might be reasonable if the bear had no teeth. The hawks in the Biden administration seem to have forgotten that Russia is a nuclear power. They have forgotten the wisdom of John F. Kennedy, who said in 1963, “Nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.”

We should take this advice seriously. Putin has signaled numerous times that Russia would use nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances. In September 2022, Putin said, “If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will without doubt use all available means to protect Russia and our people — this is not a bluff.” In March 2023, he struck a deal with Belarus to station tactical nuclear weapons there. Earlier this month, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov announced that Russia would be amending its nuclear doctrine in response to Western involvement in the Ukraine war.

Imagine if Russia were providing another country with missiles, training and targeting information to strike deep into American territory. The U.S. would never tolerate it. We shouldn’t expect Russia to tolerate it either.

This game of nuclear “chicken” has gone far enough. There is no remaining step between firing U.S. missiles deep into Russian territory and a nuclear exchange. We cannot get any closer to the brink than this.

Keep reading

Americans Can’t Hide From Nuclear War, Moscow Warns As West Mulls Escalation

The Kremlin has issued yet more warnings following reports that the Biden administration could soon greenlight long-range attacks by Kiev forces on Russian territory using US-supplied arms.

Both the UK and Canada are on board, we reported earlier, and British Prime Minister Ken Starmer is visiting Washington where he’s directly lobbying Biden to jump on board and grant Zelensky’s urgent request to lift all restrictions on Western weaponry.

However, The New York Times suggests that saner minds are prevailing at this point. “President Biden’s deliberations with Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain about whether to allow Ukraine to attack Russia with long-range Western weapons were fresh evidence that the president remains deeply fearful of setting off a dangerous, wider conflict,” the publication writes.

Let’s hope this is the case, given this is arguably the most dangerous moment and decision-point of the war to date. Pentagon leadership has recently stressed that granting the permission for long-range strikes will do little strategically to change the battlefield, where Russian momentum has continually gained in eastern Ukraine.

Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov on Friday added to prior Kremlin warnings, telling Rossiya 24 channel that he fears American leadership and the people are under “illusion”.

He said they seem to think that “if there is a conflict, it will not spread to the territory of the United States of America.”

Antonov continued by stressing that Americans can’t hide from nuclear war if this unthinkable happens. “I am constantly trying to convey to them one thesis that the Americans will not be able to sit it out behind the waters of this ocean. This war will affect everyone, so we constantly say – do not play with this rhetoric,” Antonov stated according to state media translation. 

As for UK PM Starmer’s visit to Washington, The Wall Street Journal had earlier previewed that “While the final decision on Storm Shadow will be made by the U.K. government, British officials will ask for the Biden administration to weigh in because some components of the missiles are made in the U.S.”

But based on NSC spokesman John Kirby’s words as of Friday afternoon, Washington’s policy has not changed and no permission has yet been given to Ukraine.

Keep reading

WWIII: Pentagon Orders Study Of Potential Nuclear Strike In Eastern Europe

The US Defense Department has ordered a study to simulate the impact of a nuclear conflict on global agriculture. According to a solicitation notice posted on a government procurement platform, the study will focus on regions “beyond Eastern Europe and Western Russia,” which in the simulation is the epicenter of the hypothetical nuclear weapons deployment.

The project will be spearheaded by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC).

According to the notice posted earlier this week, the ERDC has already chosen Terra Analytics, a Colorado-based company that specializes in advanced data visualization and analyses, as the contractor. However, it states that other potential contractors are invited to share their proposals if they are able to provide similar services.

The notice lists requirements for contractors to fulfill, such as providing personnel, equipment, facilities, supervision, and other items necessary to conduct the study. The contractor would, among other things, need to incorporate aerial mapping in the simulation and model a scenario in which a “non-destructive nuclear event” takes place. The cost of the contract has been set at $34 million.

Keep reading

The crisis-ridden U.S. empire wants to take the world down with it in nuclear flames

The United States defines itself in zero-sum terms. Its national myth – let’s indulge the preposterous arrogance for a moment – is that it is an exceptional nation in the history of the world. It is supposedly the indispensable leader of the “free world”, a paragon of democratic virtue and it possesses the most powerful and benevolent military force the world has ever seen.

Thankfully, many decent American citizens know that this is propaganda hogwash. Still, its political class and complacent mass media view the United States as the world’s supreme uni-power. All other nations must pay homage to this consummate hegemon.

Therein lies a fatal contradiction. This untenable definition is essential for justifying its presumed privileges. And yet, by doing so, the U.S. cannot brook any genuine equality or mutual respect essential for peaceful multilateral relations. It must be the top dog – at all costs. That is a definition of imperialism. The concomitants are aggression, belligerence, lawlessness, and duplicity – of course, all concealed with impossibly virtuous rhetoric, or in short, propaganda. So-called allies are merely servile functionaries to augment American global ambitions.

Hence, when the real world does not match the mythical notions of the U.S., there is consequently an ineluctable existential crisis. The zero-sum, all-dominant demands of the would-be hegemony are not achievable. In this situation, the hegemonic power behaves like a drunk in a bar who is refused another drink. Mayhem and violence are almost inevitable.

American narcissism denies there that the U.S. is an empire. It is preferred to pretend that its power is benign and ever-so-magnanimous. Let’s leave such vanity aside. The U.S. is an empire with military garrisons dotted around the world to ensure its economic and political interests are enforced down the barrel of a gun. No nation has conducted as many wars as the United States in its 248-year history.

The exploitation of its allies and the rest of the world with financial leverage through the arbitrarily appointed dollar as the primary global reserve currency is another mechanism of coercion and neocolonial predation of other nations’ resources.

However, all this American pretense and delusion of absolute power is coming to a shuddering, calamitous end. The empire is fragmenting and failing. And that presents a dangerous existential crisis.

Keep reading

Russia says it will change nuclear doctrine because of Western role in Ukraine

Russia will make changes to its doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons in response to what it regards as Western escalation in the war in Ukraine, state media quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov as saying on Sunday.

The existing nuclear doctrine, set out in a decree by President Vladimir Putin in 2020, says Russia may use nuclear weapons in the event of a nuclear attack by an enemy or a conventional attack that threatens the existence of the state.

Some hawks among Russia’s military analysts have urged Putin to lower the threshold for nuclear use in order to “sober up” Russia’s enemies in the West.

Putin said in June that the nuclear doctrine was a “living instrument” that could change, depending on world events. Ryabkov’s comments on Sunday were the clearest statement yet that changes would indeed be made.

“The work is at an advanced stage, and there is a clear intent to make corrections,” state news agency TASS cited Ryabkov as saying.

He said the decision is “connected with the escalation course of our Western adversaries” in connection with the Ukraine conflict.

Moscow accuses the West of using Ukraine as a proxy to wage war against it, with the aim of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia and breaking it apart.

The United States and its allies deny that, saying they are helping Ukraine defend itself against a colonial-style war of aggression by Russia.

Keep reading