Military Chairman of NATO Admiral Rob Bauer: Preemptive Attack on Russia Should Be Considered

NATO Military Committee Chairman Admiral Rob Bauer from The Netherlands discussed the need for preemptive strikes on Russia in the event of armed conflict.

Joe Biden and NATO are hoping for all-out war with Russia, the world’s second largest nuclear power, before President Trump enters office in January.

Tucker Carlson calls these recent developments the most evil thing he has seen in his lifetime.

The EurAsia Daily reported:

NATO is discussing the possibility of preemptive precision strikes on the territory of Russia in the event of an armed conflict with the alliance countries. This was stated at a conference in Brussels by the head of the Military Committee of the bloc, Admiral Rob Bauer.

He called positive the fact that NATO has changed its attitude to the essence of the organization as a defense alliance, as well as the perception that it is necessary to “sit and wait for us to be attacked” and only then react.

Keep reading

What We Know About The New Hypersonic Oreshnik Missile Russia Used Against Ukraine

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday that Moscow would continue testing the hypersonic Oreshnik ballistic missile in “combat conditions” a day after firing one on Ukraine. “We will continue testing this newest system. It is necessary to establish serial production,” he said in a televised meeting with military chiefs.

President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that Russia would keep testing the hypersonic Oreshnik missile it fired at Ukraine a day earlier and begin serial production of the new system.

Putin, in televised comments, said the missile was incapable of being intercepted by an enemy.

Keep reading

Who Takes International Law Seriously?

The Washington Post published a despicable editorial in response the International Criminal Court’s warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant:

But the arrest orders undermine the ICC’s credibility and give credence to accusations of hypocrisy and selective prosecution. The ICC is putting the elected leaders of a democratic country with its own independent judiciary in the same category as dictators and authoritarians who kill with impunity.

If the ICC had not issued these warrants in the face of the overwhelming evidence that the Israeli government was using starvation as a weapon, that would have been devastating to the Court’s credibility in the eyes of most nations. Everyone would have concluded that the ICC had bowed to American political pressure by letting these officials off the hook. It is a victory for international law that they didn’t allow fears of the insane backlash from Washington to influence their decision.

One of the problems that the Court has had since its inception is that Western and Western-backed governments always seem to get a pass when they commit war crimes. Many critics did complain about hypocrisy and selective prosecution in the past because for many years it seemed as if the ICC only went after African leaders. That started to change when the ICC issued a warrant for Putin’s arrest last year. The Post was singing a very different tune then, saying that the Court had taken an “important step” when it did that. There were no complaints about the wrong “venue” at that time. The Post had no objection to the ICC going after a war criminal leader that they oppose.

It will come as a revelation to the Post’s editors, but democratically elected leaders can be guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The ICC did not put Netanyahu and Gallant in the same category as dictators and authoritarians. They did that themselves with their brutal and atrocious policies. If they didn’t want to be classed with other rogue leaders, they shouldn’t have committed such terrible violations of international law.

Spencer Ackerman explained recently that the ICC struck a blow for international against the so-called rules-based international order. International law isn’t just for one’s enemies or the world’s pariahs, but it has to be applied to all equally if it means anything. As Ackerman put it, “It’s sufficient to observe here that international law requires universal application, while the Rules-Based International Order preserves American and allied Exceptionalism, making war crimes less about barred conduct than about who gets to commit it.” Cheerleaders of the rules-based order assume that some people and some states are above the law, and these warrants are a direct challenge to that. That is one reason why there has been such an angry reaction in Washington.

Keep reading

Biden Administration Pressuring Israel To End Lebanon War Before Hezbollah Destroyed As IDF Reaches Latani River-Nerve Gas Found In Tunnels-Hezbollah Readies Strike

Reports are emanating from Israel that the Netanyahu security cabinet is about to approve a ceasefire in its war against Hezbollah in Lebanon after severe pressure from the Biden administration. The measure will not need full government approval as it is not a formal agreement but a tactical measure.

It seems The White House wants to see Hezbollah remain in-tact and live to fight another day and continue to threaten Israel from the north. This outcome is being forced under threat of a United Nations Security Council resolution demanding a stop to the war, and sanctions against The Jewish State. A complete weapons embargo is also being threatened.

Israeli leaders are considering this development in order to get a more friendly American leader in power to Jewish interests, even though a ceasefire will be hard to end once established and there is no fighting for a period of months.

A ceasefire will bring no ‘exclusion zone’ patrolled by Israeli troops in southern Lebanon, no prevention of Lebanese army assets that may be infiltrated in the region, no punishment of Hezbollah collaborators along the Israeli border, and French diplomats involved in the ceasefire implementation, who are not seen as friendly to Israel.

This comes on the heels of discoveries by IDF troops of nerve gas, chemical equipment, a large amount of weapons and date rape drugs in the Hezbollah tunnels according to reports by pro-Israeli journalists.

Keep reading

Biden’s ‘Samson Option’

It has been clear since the terror attacks in New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001 — the date I choose to mark a great turn in the global order — that America’s abdication of its postwar hegemony was to rank high among the 21st century’s defining events. 

The questions from that day onward have been how the policy cliques in Washington would respond to such a change in America’s place in the community of nations and what they might do — how great the risks they would take — to avoid, or at least forestall, this world-historical shift. 

How chaotically or otherwise, to put this question another way, would the arrival of a new, post–American world order prove?  

We have just witnessed a week’s worth of shocking provocations as the U.S. and Britain escalate their proxy war against Russia under the pretense of defending Ukraine in a war that is already lost.

Washington and London — the latter with the former’s assent — have now authorized the grossly irresponsible regime in Kiev to fire American– and British-made missiles into Russian territory. 

The Ukrainians wasted no time doing so. The Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) launched a volley of U.S.–made ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) missiles at Russian targets last Tuesday. A day later the AFU fired a similar barrage of British-made Storm Shadow missiles into Russian territory. 

The degree of planning and coordination behind these attacks seems to me self-evident. Nobody in Washington, London, or Kiev is commenting on the targets hit, but these, too, were without question chosen after careful consultation.      

Moscow has responded just as it said it would weeks ago. It now considers itself at war with the Western powers and, last Thursday, attacked a Ukrainian target with a new-generation hypersonic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

The message could scarcely be clearer — providing, I must add, one is capable of reading it accurately.    

So we now have answers to the above-noted questions. 

It was never difficult to foresee that those planning and executing U.S. foreign policy, lacking all imagination and anything remotely resembling courage, would prove incapable of an orderly transition to a multipolar world order.

After the Sept. 11 events, a continued commitment to American primacy was ineluctably going to prove a commitment to one or another degree of disorder.  

The Biden regime’s latest escalation of its proxy war in Ukraine indicates the limits of this commitment: There are none.

We are now on notice that the world — bitter to write this — is condemned to unceasing chaos and violence so long as the American imperium’s ideologues are capable of mounting a resistance against against the world as it struggles to be.

Keep reading

Europe Considers Troop Deployment to Ukraine, Businesses Told to Prepare For ‘Wartime Scenario’

The world appears to be sleepwalking into World War III, with U.S. leadership noticeably absent. European leaders are beginning to take the lead in Ukraine, but not in a beneficial way.

Firstly, European leaders are in discussions about whether to send their troops to Ukraine to help direct the fighting.

According to the Express:

Britain and France are in talks to send troops to Ukraine to deter Vladimir Putin, it has emerged.

London and Paris want to create a “core of allies in Europe” as fears intensify that President-elect Donald Trump could withdraw military support for Ukraine.

British and French troops could be among European allies deployed to deter the Kremlin from attacking Ukraine again.

This could make European capitals and military installations legitimate targets in the eyes of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and his generals.

If Putin were to take action against British or French troops beyond the borders of Ukraine, the USA would be required to respond under mutual defense treaties.

This is not mere speculation; a top NATO official recently warned European business leaders to prepare for a wartime scenario.

Keep reading

Russia May Deploy Medium, Short-Range Missiles in Asia if US Missiles Appear There

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov has not ruled out the deployment of medium- and shorter-range missiles in the Asia-Pacific region as a retaliatory measure against the United States.

“Of course, this is one of the options that has also been repeatedly mentioned. The appearance of such US systems in any region of the world will determine our next steps, including in the field of organizing a military and military-technical response,” Ryabkov told reporters, answering the question whether Russia is considering the possibility of deploying medium-range and short-range missiles in Asian countries.

The fate of Russia’s moratorium on the deployment of medium-range and short-range missiles depends entirely on the US policy, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said on Monday.

“[Russian] President [Vladimir Putin] said what he said. The issue of placement is exhaustively reflected in his statement. As before, what is happening depends entirely on the choice that our opponents will make at this extremely alarming, very dangerous moment, and on the line that they will pursue,” Ryabkov told reporters.

When asked whether this meant that the fate of the moratorium depended on the actions of the United States, Ryabkov answered in the affirmative.

There are currently no restrictions on the deployment of Russia’s new Oreshnik medium-range ballistic missile under existing international obligations, the diplomat said.

At the same time, the 1998 memorandum of understanding between Russia and the United States on notifications of missile launches continues to be in effect, Ryabkov said, adding that it was within the framework of this document that Russia notified the United States of the test combat launch of the Oreshnik missile.

When asked if the US tried to contact Russia after the test launch, the diplomat said no.

US bases in Europe, including those where tactical nuclear weapons are deployed, are not excluded as potential targets for Russia in the event of a hypothetical military conflict, Ryabkov said.

Keep reading

Discussions Begin on Sending European Soldiers to Fight Russia in Ukraine — Report

According to a report from Le Monde on Monday, the U.K. and France are mulling the notion of deploying European military forces to Ukraine to fight Russia directly.

“As the conflict in Ukraine enters a new phase of escalation, discussions over sending Western troops and private defense companies to Ukraine have been revived, Le Monde has learned from corroborating sources,” Le Monde said Monday. “These are sensitive discussions, most of which are classified – relaunched in light of a potential American withdrawal of support for Kyiv once Donald Trump takes office on January 20, 2025.”

Keep reading

Biden Regime Discussed Giving Ukraine Nuclear Weapons

Joe Biden and his handlers are moving quickly to ignite World War III before Christmas and before President Trump can be inaugurated and bring peace to the region.

Last Sunday, Joe Biden’s regime approved Ukraine’s use of US-made long-range missiles to strike deep inside Russia.

The Washington Post reported that Biden will allow Ukraine to use a powerful American long-range weapon for strikes inside Russia, supposedly in response to North Korea’s recent aid to Russia in the form of thousands of troops. Ukraine will be specifically allowed to use the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) to hit targets inside Russia.

As The Post noted, ATACMS is a supersonic-guided missile system that can be used with either cluster munitions or conventional warheads. It has a maximum range of about 190 miles.

The Post elaborates that Ukraine is expected to focus on and around the Kursk region at first but could expand its targets.

On Tuesday, Ukraine fired six US-made long-range missiles inside Russia. The first Ukrainian strike targeted the border region of Bryansk in Russia.

According to BRICS News – Five missiles were shot down by S-400 & Pantsir AA systems last week, one was damaged, its fragments fell in the technical zone of a military facility, causing a fire, Russian Defense Ministry says.

Putin, following reports of Biden’s decision to give Ukraine permission to “long-range” missiles, approved the updated nuclear doctrine of the Russian Federation. As part of the new doctrine Russia spelled out that aggression against Russia and its allies by a non-nuclear country with the support of a nuclear state will be considered a joint attack.

On Wednesday morning Joe Biden approved antipersonnel land mines for Ukraine – undoing his previous policy.

On Thursday Russia unleashed the Oreshnik hypersonic missile on Ukraine.

Keep reading

Now That Warheads Are Raining Down, Does Anyone Still Think the Russians Are “Bluffing”?

This didn’t have to happen.  Years of catastrophically bad decisions by the western elite have brought us to the brink of nuclear war.  For more than two years, our leaders have assured us that the Russians were bluffing and that they would never actually risk nuclear war.  But now that Russian warheads are raining from the sky, is there anyone out there that still believes such nonsense?

Last night, the Russians sent a very clear message to the entire world by pummeling Ukraine’s fourth-largest city of Dnipro with warheads from a ballistic missile

Kyiv Air Force said today that Russia had launched an ICBM at the city of Dnipro in the early hours of the morning.

If firmed up, it marks the first time the nuclear-capable missile has ever been used as part of an ongoing conflict.

Unverified footage appeared to show warheads from the ferocious R-26 Rubezh raining down on Dnipro overnight, lighting up the sky with explosions.

Keep reading