Tag Archives: Nuclear war

The Last Lie Government Will Ever Tell, by George F. Smith

The possibility of the Ukraine-Russia war going nuclear is not trivial. From George F. Smith at lewrockwell.com:

The more powerful a government, the more likely it is to engage in war and conquest.  Case in point: US involvement in Ukraine.

In 2014 the US led a coup that displaced a “democratically-elected” president, Viktor Yanukovych.

In November 2013, . . . Yanukovych rejected a major economic deal he had been negotiating with the EU and decided to accept a $15 billion Russian counteroffer instead. That decision gave rise to antigovernment demonstrations that escalated over the following three months . . .

Instead of waiting around for the next election, Yanukovych fled to Russia on February 22, 2014.

The new government in Kiev was pro-Western and anti-Russian to the core, and it contained four high-ranking members who could legitimately be labeled neofascists. . . .

[It was] clear that Washington backed the coup. [U.S. assistant secretary of state Victoria] Nuland and Republican Senator John McCain participated in antigovernment demonstrations . . . As a leaked telephone recording revealed, Nuland had advocated regime change and wanted the Ukrainian politician Arseniy Yatsenyuk to become prime minister in the new government, which he did.

In 2019, comedian and actor Volodymyr Zelensky was elected president with 73.23 percent of the vote.  In spite of the media’s love affair with Zelensky, portraying him “as something equivalent to a reincarnation of Winston Churchill and Mother Teresa,” the Ukraine government remains one of the most corrupt on the planet.

Continue reading

The Dire Significance of Putin’s Feb 21 Speech, by David Sant

David Sant makes a strong argument for some extremely unsettling conclusions. From Sant at thesaker.is:

On Tuesday, February 21st President Putin gave a speech that was expected to be very significant. After it was delivered, however, most pundits said he didn’t say anything we didn’t already know. Most of them focused on his announcement of the withdrawal from the START II treaty. However, he said something far more significant.

An Existential Threat

What Mr. Putin said, when read through the lens of international law, should be chilling to the West.

We would do well to remember that Mr. Putin majored in international law. His speech made a legal case against NATO.

First he listed, by my count, 30 different ways in which the Western nations have attacked Russia. These included the expansion of NATO to Russia’s borders, support of terrorists in Russia, economic war, terrorist sabotage of the Nordstream Pipeline, financing of the coup and war in Ukraine, directly assisting Ukraine to attack targets in Russia including Russia’s nuclear bombers, and plotting to destroy and partition Russia into pieces.

Nestled in the middle of these was an important statement.

“This means they plan to finish us once and for all. In other words, they plan to grow a local conflict into a global confrontation. This is how we understand it and we will respond accordingly, because this represents an existential threat to our country.”

Continue reading

On The Eve of PSYOP-WW3: The Coming Existential Threat: Do We Act In Common Or Is It Going To Be Every Man for Himself? By Gilbert Doctorow

The Russians are eliminating a self-imposed restrain on their use of nuclear weapons, aligning their policy more closely to the U.S.’s. From Gilbert Doctorow at gilbertdoctorow.com:

I returned to Brussels on Sunday after a month of travels in exotic and warm lands south of the equator. The re-entry shock upon arrival in Belgium was a lot greater than the 27 degree Centigrade drop in outdoor air temperature.  After a month of only very limited reception of Russian news, due to satellite issues and hotel service issues, last night I switched on Russian state television’s news and talk show “Sixty Minutes” on www.smotrim.ru and got a full blast of the current state of relations with the US, which are very close to Doomsday.

Allow me to share with you the key point, namely the soon to be announced changes to the Russian doctrine on first use of nuclear weapons and their new more precise red lines that have come about from the plans for Russia’s partition and destruction that seem to be aired daily on US television.

As usual, Yevgeny Popov, State Duma member and host of “Sixty Minutes,” put a lot of video segments from Western television up on the screen, including a lengthy statement by Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, former commander of all U.S. forces in Europe from 2014 to 2017, on how the Ukrainians must be given long range precision missiles for them to attack Russian Crimea and also further into the Russian heartland. The interview from which this declaration was made does not yet appear in Google search, but from interviews posted in 2022 it is clear that Hodges is no madman, and his statements must, as Popov said, be taken with utmost seriousness.

The context, of course, for the radical escalation now being discussed in the United States is the expectation of a massive Russian offensive to begin shortly as the anniversary of the Special Military Operation approaches. The imminent defeat of Ukrainian forces has focused minds in Washington.

Continue reading→

Let’s talk about nuclear war, by Ruben Bauer Naveira

Is the world sliding inexorably towards nuclear war? From Ruben Bauer Naveira at thesaker.is:

The United States and Russia – the two greatest nuclear powers on the planet – have embarked on a wide-ranging “indirect war”. All that now remains is for them to engage in direct warfare, which will end up happening sooner or later. If later, it will be exactly because both powers are aware that any direct war between them will inevitably escalate into nuclear war, with a good chance of devastating them both.

How we reached this point will not be examined in depth here. Very briefly, both parties regard this as a struggle for existence – Russia, in order to continue to exist as a nation (in Putin’s words, “there is no compromise, a country is either sovereign or a colony”), and the United States, to continue to exist as the nation with hegemony over the rest (the US economy has become so reliant on that hegemony that its end would entail the country’s collapse).

Accordingly, both are willing to take the conflict to its ultimate consequences in order to prevail, and thus nuclear war becomes more inevitable with every passing day.

Among those responsible for a nuclear war that will be the downfall of all Humankind, there can be no “good guy”. However, when one side is fighting to subsist with autonomy, while the other is fighting in order to dominate the rest, it is not difficult to discern which is most the “bad guy”. Also, if it is still possible, after the hecatomb, to bring the culprits to some kind of justice, it will make all the difference to distinguish who “pressed the button” first (that is, who deliberately chose for millions of people to die) from whoever operated their buttons in retaliation to the incoming attack.

Continue reading→

Doomsday Approaches, by The Zman

Is there any line U.S. rulers will not cross? Let’s hope there’s one drawn at nuclear warfare. From The Zman at thezman.com:

The shadow that has hung over the Ukraine war is the fear that it could lead to a direct clash between Washington and Moscow. Given that both sides have large arsenals of nuclear weapons, conflict could lead to Armageddon. Compounding things is the fact that Biden cannot stop talking about nuclear war. Given his mental condition, this suggests that he is often in earshot of the decision makers, who may be seriously discussing the possible use of nuclear weapons.

The dynamic of the war thus far has been Washington poking Moscow hoping for a response, which it can use to justify escalation. First, they said that they would not supply Ukraine with Western weapons, then they sent Western weapons. Then it was long range guided missiles. Now we see modern tanks being prepped, with discussions about F-16 fighter jets on the agenda. All of these weapons transfers are intended to provoke a response from Moscow.

The proof of that is the fact that none of these systems can make a difference on the battlefield for a number of reasons. The biggest reason is that the West has designed its weapons to be used in combined arms warfare. Alone, these weapons are not terribly useful and may even be a hinderance to the Ukrainians. The M777 howitzer, for example, is known for being maintenance heavy. Giving the Ukrainians these weapons just adds to their onerous sustainment burden.

Continue reading→

‘Doomsday clock’: 90 seconds to midnight, by Pepe Escobar

Russia was supposed to be defeated and regime-changed by now. Instead, Russia is wiping the floor with Ukraine and the world is as close as ever been to nuclear warfare since World War II. From Pepe Escobar at thesaker.is:

The Doomsday Clock, set by the US-based magazine Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, has been moved to 90 seconds to midnight. 

That’s the closest ever to total nuclear doom, the global catastrophe.

The Clock had been set at 100 seconds since 2020. The Bulletin’s Science and Security Board and a group of sponsors – which includes 10 Nobel laureates – have focused on “Russia’s war on Ukraine” (their terminology) as the main reason.

Yet they did not bother to explain non-stop American rhetoric (the US is the only nation that adopts “first strike” in a nuclear confrontation) and the fact that this is a US proxy war against Russia with Ukraine used as cannon fodder.

The Bulletin also attributes malignant designs to China, Iran and North Korea, while mentioning, only in passing, that “the last remaining nuclear weapons treaty between Russia and the United States, New START, stands in jeopardy”.

“Unless the two parties resume negotiations and find a basis for further reductions, the treaty will expire in February 2026.”

As it stands, the prospects of a US-Russia negotiation on New START are less than zero.

Now cue to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov making it very clear that war against Russia is not hybrid anymore, it’s “almost” real.

“Almost” in fact means “90 seconds.”

So why is this all happening?

Continue reading→

Let’s Nuke The World Over Who Governs Crimea: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix, by Caitlin Johnstone

Caitlin Johnstone has a gift for pinpointing insanity. From Johnstone at caitlinjohnstone.com:

Critics of the US empire have spent months compiling mountains of evidence showing that the empire knowingly provoked the war in Ukraine. Supporters of the US empire have spent months posting dog memes and accusing strangers of being paid by Putin. It’s clear who’s in the right.

So does everyone else in the world get a vote on whether their lives should be risked in an offensive to control who governs Crimea? Or will the Biden administration just be making that call on behalf of all living creatures?

It’s so crazy how the fate of everyone alive and everyone who could potentially be born in the future is riding on the way two governments choose to navigate a conflict in Ukraine, just because those two governments have most of the world’s nuclear weapons. It’s like two people in a bar getting into a brawl that kills everyone in their city. Nobody else in the world gets a vote on the decisions being made that could kill everyone alive and end humanity forever; just a few people within those two governments and their militaries.

The US empire is telling Moscow “I’m the craziest motherfucker around, I’ll keep ramping up the brinkmanship looking you right in the eye and daring you to use nukes,” while telling the rest of the world “I am the voice of sanity that you should all look to for leadership.”

One of the empire’s faces is the virtuous upholder of freedom and democracy, while the other face puts on an intimidating show of viciousness like a prisoner biting off someone’s cheek in the prison yard. At least one of those faces is necessarily lying.

Continue reading→

The War in Ukraine Will End with a Bang — Soon, by Philip Kraske

Will the U.S. use the Ukraine war as cover for a nuclear attack on Russia? From Philip Kraske at unz.com:

Amidst indignant reactions to ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel’s revelations about the Minsk accords, worry about Americans “advising” Ukrainians en situ, and the back-and-forth of battle lines, it’s easy to forget what the Ukraine War is all about: the struggle of the United States to maintain its status as the world’s only superpower. More exactly, America’s attempt to suppress China as a rival superpower is the center of this tragedy.

China, allied with its back-door gas station Russia, is a nearly unbeatable foe. China’s seaports can easily be cut off if container ships are threatened against docking there. Its back door is another matter. So those hard-eyed folks in Washington, obsessed with the Wolfowitz Doctrine, need to eliminate or take over Russia. That is the sine qua non of the American strategy. Without this step, the strategy falls apart.

And the step needs to be taken quickly; already the confrontation with China is picking up momentum.

Hence the Ukraine War. As President Biden ad-libbed himself, “[Putin] cannot remain in power.” He later walked back the comment, but the slip obviously reflects thinking in the Oval Office. The nice way to remove him is to cause a Russian defeat in Ukraine and the resignation — or worse — of its president, replaced (neocons hope) by a pliable drunk like Boris Yeltsin. I would imagine that foreign-policy blobbers long ago convinced themselves that they would really, actually, in their heart-of-hearts prefer to do things this way. Because the other way is not nice.

Not nice at all: the other option is a nuclear attack. Invasion of Russia won’t do the trick. Russians would see it coming a mile off. And they wouldn’t stand for a conventional war on their territory because they know they would lose. Nor would they stand for another Yeltsin, nor a foreign ruler that broke the country into ten pieces. Long before the Yankees got to within a HIMARS-throw of Moscow, Russia would resort to nuclear weapons.

Continue reading→

Washington Has Resurrected the Threat of Nuclear Armageddon, by Paul Craig Roberts

A succession of American presidents thought preventing nuclear war was their most important duty. No more. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

As a participant in the 20th century Cold War, I can tell you that the Cuban Missile Crisis had the effect of convincing the leaders of the US and the USSR that trust had to be created between the two nuclear superpowers in order resolve differences and prevent a reoccurrence of tensions at the level of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

President John F. Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev worked together independently of their military/security bureaucracies to resolve the issue. Both paid a price.  President Kennedy was murdered by the CIA and Joint Chiefs of Staff who were determined not to lose the Soviet enemy that justified their power and budgets.  Khrushchev was removed from power by Communist Party hardliners suspicious of accommodation to the capitalist enemy.

After President Johnson destroyed himself in the military/security complex’s Vietnam War, President Nixon renewed the tension reducing policy of President Kennedy.  The Strategic Arms Limitations Talks (SALT) and arms limitations agreements followed.  President Nixon topped them off by opening to China and replacing that tense relationship with the “one China” policy.  This was again too much for the US military/security complex, and they orchestrated with the Washington Post the “Watergate” scandal to remove him from office.

President Carter tried to continue building bridges. He signed the SALT II agreement that Nixon had initiated,  but Carter had his hands full with Israel and Palestine.  The situation awaited President Reagan to bring about the end of the Cold War.

President Reagan was a cold warrior who wanted to end it.  He hated what he called “those godawful nuclear weapons.”  He thought it was terrible that the world continued to live under the threat that they might be used.

Continue reading→

A Time of Unimaginable Sorrow is Upon Us, by Stucky

So you think there’s such a thing as a winnable nuclear war? From Stucky at theburningplatform.com:

The Top 10 Largest Nuclear Explosions, Visualized

It was a nice cool sunny morning with some blue birds soaking up the sun, all in a row on the high wire.  It took some time to figure out what happened.  There were a few low rumbles, they seemed to be coming from north of here.  We live on a farm out in the wooded hills of southern Missouri, and north would be up towards St Louis.  Soon as the booming sounds started the power went off.  At first, I didn’t pay much attention, but with all the military stirrings going on in the world these days, you just don’t know what to expect.

I went inside the house, but with the power off there’s no internet, so no way to find out what’s going on.  At least until the power comes back on, or until I get the generator started up.  More distant thunderous booms that echo now less like thunder and more like tremendous explosions – and I’m starting to get worried.  My kids are at work and the grandkids are in school.  I swear I‘m seeing sparks and smoke coming from under the hood of my car, but it’s not running.  Now the power line where those bluebirds were singing looks like it’s getting really hot and smoke is coming from the bucket transformer on the poles.  Wow! The transformer just blew up sending a shower of sparks and molten metal flying all around the pole!  I can hear blasts all over the countryside from more pole transformers exploding.  All the fences are sparking and smoking.  The woods around the power lines and transformers are starting to go up in extremely violent flames.  And the cars are now on fire – all of them!  Even the old broken-down ones out in people’s pastures.  Our emergency generators are smoking – I’ve got to get them away from the houses before they burn up.

Continue reading→