This is definitely what we need to be sharing and talking about NOW as time is so short!
At the end of the day it’s the GOOD NEWS of John 3:16 that they don’t want us speaking about! Only Jesus Christ can save you from hell and death. He said it himself “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father but by me.” John 14:6
I’m still dealing with major neck/back issues which has led to these migraines. I will post what I can when I can. Thank you for the prayers 🙏and advice.
The mainstream propaganda machine usually claims that the Kiev regime doesn’t have the capacity to create dirty bombs. However, recent reports about “sensitive US nuclear technologies” in Ukrainian nuclear power plants (NPPs) show such claims are patently false.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
The United States is the only country in history to have used all three types of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, biological, chemical), starting with the atomic bombings of Japan in the closing months of the Second World War to mass usage of chemical and biological weapons against numerous other countries it has attacked ever since (particularly Vietnam). And yet, the belligerent thalassocracy just adores chest-thumping about its supposed “morality” and even “warns” that its geopolitical adversaries are about to use such weapons (naturally, without ever providing any evidence). This is precisely what’s been happening in Ukraine in recent weeks.
On April 28, one of the most prominent neoliberal mouthpieces, the New York Times, ran a story about America setting up numerous radiation sensors across Ukraine in order to detect nuclear blasts. The NYT claims that “such sensors can detect bursts of radiation from a nuclear weapon or a dirty bomb and can confirm the identity of the attacker”. It adds that “the goal is to make sure that if Russia detonates a radioactive weapon on Ukrainian soil, its atomic signature and Moscow’s culpability could be verified”, further claiming that “…experts have worried about whether President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would use nuclear arms in combat for the first time since the American bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945″.
Firstly, it should be noted that Russia has a very clear doctrine about the usage of WMDs in an armed conflict, one that has even been updated recently and that states in what sort of situations Moscow would use such weapons. The Ukrainian conflict is still nowhere near a point where Russian WMDs could be used. Secondly, the Russian military dominates the battlefield, inflicting enormous losses on the Kiev regime forces. Even in the case of the much-touted offensive against newly integrated Russian regions in the Donbass and former southern Ukraine, Russia wouldn’t use nuclear weapons. However, the NYT claims precisely that is the case, supposedly because Russia is “desperate” to stop the attack.
Expectedly, “experts” the NYT allegedly spoke to are anonymous and they claim that the goal is to “prevent Russia from conducting a possible dirty bomb false flag in Ukraine”. The operation is officially run by the Nuclear Emergency Support Team (NEST), part of the Nation Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Interestingly, the NYT notes, citing a 2009 book “Defusing Armageddon” by Jeffrey T. Richelson, that “the NEST often teamed up with the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), an elite military unit so secretive that the Pentagon for years refused to acknowledge its existence”. It should be noted that JSOC is being used to conduct covert operations of all kinds across the world, including false flags.
So, according to these so-called “experts”, we are supposed to believe that US agencies and military units involved in actual false flag operations around the globe will prevent an alleged “Russian false flag” and not use the opportunity to conduct yet another covert op to fake such an event and then blame Russia for it? The NYT itself claims that “Moscow could falsely claim that Kyiv set off a nuclear blast on the battlefield to try to draw the West into deeper war assistance” and that “…in theory, with the sensor network in place, Washington would be able to point to its own nuclear attribution analyses to reveal that Moscow was in fact the attacker”.
The NYT then parrots the usual about Russia’s supposed “battlefield failures” that are “making Mr. Putin, if anything, more dependent on his nuclear arsenal” and how this “could increase his willingness to pull the nuclear trigger”. Even though such claims are laughable to anyone familiar with the actual situation on the battlefield, in the minds of rabid Russophobes this makes “perfect sense”. In addition, recent weeks have seen a dramatic surge in Kiev regime’s attacks on civilians not only in the Donbass and other newly integrated Russian regions, but also in areas such as Bryansk and Belgorod oblasts (regions), with dozens of civilian casualties.
All this would be used to push the narrative that Russia could indeed be the alleged culprit behind a dirty bomb false flag. On the other hand, back in October last year, when Moscow warned that the Kiev regime might use a dirty bomb and then blame Russia for it, the political West rejected it all as a “conspiracy theory”. According to their “logic”, it’s only Russia that could do such a thing, because the Neo-Nazi junta, as a “true beacon of freedom and democracy”, certainly has the “moral high ground”. Additionally, the mainstream propaganda machine usually claims that the Kiev regime doesn’t have the capacity to create dirty bombs, so it allegedly couldn’t do it even if it wanted to.
However, recent reports about “sensitive US nuclear technologies” in (former) Ukrainian nuclear power plants (NPPs) show such claims are patently false. Russia controls one of such NPPs, but still hasn’t disclosed what sort of covert US support the Neo-Nazi junta got. Washington DC itself has “demanded” Moscow to return these “sensitive US nuclear technologies”, meaning they are worried about what might be revealed to the world. It’s not unlikely Russia is keeping the evidence secret for the time being as a possible deterrent to US and Kiev regime’s plan on detonating such a device and then blaming Moscow, which could simply reveal the evidence in case a dirty bomb is used.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
Almost anyone with a basic capability to process information has noticed a pattern in the relationship between the political West and its favorite Neo-Nazi puppet regime – Kiev asks for something, the United States, European Union and NATO “categorically deny” they would ever deliver such weapons in order to “avoid antagonizing Russia” and then a few weeks later (at most) there’s a “sudden change of heart”.
This rather comical back and forth started even before Russia launched its counteroffensive, when NATO provided thousands of ATGMs (anti-tank guided missiles) and MANPADS (man-portable air defense systems) to Kiev. Since then, the scope of so-called “lethal aid” has expanded dramatically.
It would seem the same is true regarding the recently announced delivery of Western-made heavy tanks which were first denied and then approved just days later. Mere hours after the political West confirmed this, the Neo-Nazi junta once again started insisting on fighter jets. In a statement for Reuters, Yuriy Sak, currently serving as an adviser to Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov (now exposed for his involvement in a massive corruption scandal), said that the Kiev regime will keep pushing for the delivery of Western-made jets to replace its dwindling fleet of Soviet-era aircraft.
“The next big hurdle will now be the fighter jets,” Sak said, adding: “Every type of weapon we request, we needed yesterday. We will do everything possible to ensure Ukraine gets fourth-generation fighter jets as soon as possible.”
The “fourth-generation fighter jets” request also includes US-made F-16 fighters that have been at the top of the Neo-Nazi junta’s wish list at least since mid-March last year when Volodymyr Zelensky implored the US Congress to send jets to help “close the sky”. After the request proved to be quite unpopular with the American public, the Kiev regime frontman was instructed to “tone it down” as this boils down to enforcing a no-fly zone over Ukraine. This would essentially mean direct armed confrontation between NATO and Russia, further inevitably leading to a world-ending thermonuclear exchange.
And yet, the mainstream propaganda machine is once again preparing its audiences for the eventual delivery of advanced combat aircraft to the Kiev regime. For instance, The Hill admitted that “Western fighter jets and longer-range artillery units, which would allow Ukraine to strike Russian forces deeper in occupied territory, will likely be the next debate for NATO.” If the aforementioned pattern continues, this will be yet another step toward uncontrollable escalation and the proxy conflict turning into a fully-fledged war. The Neo-Nazi junta is perfectly aware that its so-called “begmanding” approach is working and continues insisting on heavier and more advanced weapons.
“They didn’t want to give us heavy artillery, then they did. They didn’t want to give us HIMARS systems, then they did. They didn’t want to give us tanks, now they’re giving us tanks,” Sak boasted, further stating: “If we get them, the advantages on the battlefield will be just immense. It’s not just F-16s: fourth generation aircraft, this is what we want… …Apart from nuclear weapons, there is nothing left that we will not get.”
Given the pattern of incessant escalation, Yuriy Sak’s concluding remarks are quite alarming and could indicate that the Kiev regime never gave up on its quest to acquire WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). Given the sheer magnitude of the Neo-Nazi junta’s clinical Russophobia, fanned up to a hatred of genocidal proportions at this point, any such statement will surely be taken very seriously in Moscow. Despite these psychotically disturbing comments, the political West continues to expand its support for such extremist puppet regimes. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby stated there are “constant discussions” with Kiev officials on what they need, adding that he “can’t blame the Ukrainians for wanting more and more systems”.
“It’s not the first time they’ve talked about fighter jets, but I don’t have any announcements to make on that front,” Kirby said.
Again, here we see the same back-and-forth pattern of the political West’s supposed “reluctance” with a “no” becoming “we’ll see” or “maybe” only to then be announced as “we have no choice due to Russia’s unprovoked aggression” at some point.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
Thalassocratic dominance is of prime significance for the North Atlantic Alliance, as its most powerful members are basing their power on naval supremacy. This is particularly true for the United States and the United Kingdom, both of which formed their empires by controlling key global sea routes. Maintaining this status, preferably expanding it or at least preventing other powers from acquiring it is the primary goal of the political West, especially in regard to (Eur)Asian giants such as Russia and China. Although Moscow and Beijing are traditionally seen as land powers, their naval might should not be taken for granted, as both superpowers are investing significant resources in developing and building new advanced vessels.
The Russian Navy, although smaller in comparison to the Soviet era, is still one of the world’s largest and most powerful. Moscow operates the world’s second most potent nuclear submarine fleet with the capability of wiping out virtually any adversary, including the US. In the aftermath of the USSR’s dismantlement, Russia reduced its reliance on large surface combatants and focused on building smaller vessels with relatively comparable long-range capabilities. This was made possible primarily due to massive advances in missile propulsion technologies, an area in which Moscow retains a significant advantage over its geopolitical rivals, nearly all of whom rely on naval power projection.
Realizing that large surface ships have been made effectively obsolete by the deployment of advanced anti-ship missiles, both supersonic and hypersonic, the Russian Navy made a decision to build smaller vessels that would have the capability to deploy the aforementioned advanced missiles and thus jeopardize much larger hostile capital ships such as aircraft carriers. These are especially relied on by NATO, primarily the US, which operates approximately a dozen carrier groups across the globe. The US Navy has the world’s largest fleet of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers (or more precisely, super-carriers), which are, as previously mentioned, essential for maintaining the political West’s global power projection.
Given NATO’s typical chest-thumping when it comes to its naval arm, it’s quite unusual that the belligerent alliance is alarmed by Russia’s recent deployment of a single frigate to the Atlantic. On January 4, an official ceremony was held before the Russian Navy’s “Admiral Gorshkov” frigate was sent from the Severomorsk port to the high seas. This is the surface combatant’s second long-distance voyage since it entered service in mid-2018. However, this deployment marks the first time in history that a ship is carrying officially operational hypersonic weapons. Equipped with up to 16 3M22 “Zircon” missiles, the Russian frigate is capable of wiping out an entire super-carrier strike group from a distance of 1000-1500 km.
“Admiral Gorshkov” is now reportedly sailing to join the Russian Navy’s operational group deployed in the Mediterranean, where it’s set to assume the role of a command vessel. According to various reports, after conducting the planned activities in the area, including docking in friendly ports such as Russia’s Tartus naval base in Syria, the frigate will proceed to the Red Sea and then into the Indian Ocean. With a displacement of 5,400 tons, the Project 22350 frigates (as per Russian naval nomenclature) are the first larger post-Soviet surface combatants designed and built for the Russian Navy, which currently operates two more vessels of this class, “Admiral Kasatonov” and “Admiral Golovko”.
The ships carry a plethora of multipurpose weapons, including the now legendary “Kalibr” cruise missiles, specifically the NK variant with a range of up to 4,500 km. However, the deployment of the 3M22 “Zircon” hypersonic cruise missile is what caused panic in NATO, as the scramjet-powered weapon is effectively in a league of its own, since no other navy in the world operates such missiles. “Zircon” has been fully operational at least since late 2022 and is set to be deployed on both surface ships and submarines. Numerous sea trials conducted by the Russian Navy in recent years have shown the weapon can reach a speed of Mach 9 (approximately 11,000 km/h or 3.1 km/s), although some claim it can go even faster. Various sources indicate that “Zircon” has a range of up to 2000 km, depending on the target.
To put its speed into perspective, when compared with the US-made “Tomahawk” subsonic cruise missile, “Zircon” is over twelve times faster, giving it a kinetic energy approximately 250 times greater than that of the American weapon. Reportedly, while “Admiral Gorshkov” deploys 16 “Zircon” missiles, newer ships of its class have been upgraded to carry 32. In addition, the Russian frigate is also armed with “Kalibr” cruise missiles, “Otvet” anti-submarine rockets, “Oniks” supersonic missiles, “Poliment-Redut” SAM (surface-to-air missile) system with 32 mid-range or 128 short-range missiles, “Paket-NK” torpedo system, 130 mm AK-192M “Armat” cannon and two “Palash” CIWS (close-in weapon system). The frigate also carries a single Ka-27PL ASW (anti-submarine warfare) helicopter.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon and PayPal are gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
The full interview with Vladimir Kozin, a Russian expert at the Political-Military Studies Center, was made by Jean Toschi Marazzani Visconti at the Russia Today headquarters in Moscow.
Vladimir Kozin denounces the fact that the United States after tearing up the INF Treaty is deploying intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe close to Russia, in addition to the new B61-12 nuclear bombs. Regarding these bombs, he declares:
“The B61-12s are already being sent to Europe, contrary to what was announced by Politico that they will arrive in December. We have information that the bombs already arrived because a specific aircraft such as the US F-35A fighter has already been delivered to NATO member countries. Even to Finland, which has not yet become a full member of NATO but is awaiting ratification. Finland has requested 65 F-35s capable of using nuclear weapons. And recently rumors have come from Helsinki that they would like to have US nuclear weapons on Finnish soil, as Germany has them, Belgium has them like Holland has them, and also Italy and Turkey. So, Europe is becoming a nuclear powder keg”.
Vladimir Kozin calls the current situation “much worse than it was during the Cold War, much deadlier and more dangerous”.
He, therefore, warns that
“if our territory is attacked with nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical or biological, bacteriological and toxic weapons, as well as nuclear, we will respond“.
When asked whether Russia will strike US nuclear bases in Europe, he replies:
“Yes, that’s for sure. If we are attacked.” Kozin calls all this “madness”.
He warns that, if it comes to a nuclear war, “there will be no winners or losers, everyone will lose“.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon and PayPal are gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
HERE IS A NEW GAMING OPTION! We have mobile phone games that we get paid a small commission on for installs. They are family friendly and entertaining! Here is a link for one of the more popular games, Flipper dunk. https://clickrising.app/62ur87/flipperdun
Guest Post by Uriel Araujo, researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts
POLITICO reports that, according to a US diplomatic cable, the sending of upgraded B61-12 air-dropped thermonuclear gravity bombs to Europe, formerly scheduled for next spring, is now planned for this December.
American officials told this to their NATO allies in a closed-door meeting in Brussels last month. The new version is designed so that American and European fighter aircrafts and bomber planes may carry the nuclear weapon. The move is part of a policy of replacing older weapons with newer versions at several NATO storage facilities in the continent. The aforementioned meeting took place only days before the Alliance launched its Steadfast Noon annual nuclear exercise, which ended on October 30. On October 26, Moscow in turn held nuclear drills simulating a massive nuclear strike in retaliation for a nuclear attack on the country.
During the Russian exercise, a Yars land-based intercontinental ballistic missile was fired from its launch site at northern Plesetsk. In addition, a nuclear submarine also launched a Sineva ICBM. NATO’s drill in turn involved about 60 aircraft, including the American long-range B-52 bombers, and figther jets that can carry nuclear weapons.
These exercises took place amid Kremlin’s accusations and warnings that US-backed Ukraine’s plans to stage a provocation by detonating a “dirty bomb” to blame Russia, a claim that should be taken seriously, given Kiev’s record.
Amid such a tense situation, Washington is expected to soon release its Nuclear Posture Review. This review, according to US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, will support the full modernization of the American nuclear triad.
Washington moves to accelerate the timeframe regarding the sending of weapons to Europe now is quite risky; the timing could not be worse. Some experts, such as Tom Collina, a director of policy at the Ploughshares Fund, believe it is all about “assuring” US allies, who feel “threatened by Russia.” He reasons that there already are working B61 nuclear bombs in the continent, albeit older ones, and thus bringing new ones is “not really that much of a difference.”
But even Collina himself adds that any nuclear-related move (even a “small” one) can generate unintended results: “It could be escalatory.” Many analysts in fact believe it could bring the world closer to a global nuclear war.
Hans Kristensen, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Nuclear Information Project, for instance, has claimed that “It would be odd to rush it. They have been saying we don’t respond to this situation with nuclear weapons. I don’t think they want to go down that one.”
These developments are part of a larger context, which includes Washington’s policy of “dual containment” on Moscow and Beijing at the same time. Moreover, amazingly, calls for nuclear confrontation have been made in the West and not by lone voices. For instance, in late April, Britain’s Liz Truss (who has recently resigned) called for the creation of a “global NATO”.
Also in April, US Senator Chris Coons said Washington should “not merely send arms to Ukraine” but should actually consider sending “troops to the aid in defense” of that Eastern European country. This is basically to call for a regional conflict to fully turn into a Russia-NATO war (thereby making it an existential issue for the Kremlin), which could escalate into global and nuclear warfare. Fully aware of that, former Secretary of Defense assistant Seth Cropsey, who is an influential lobbyist in Washington, argued in May that the US must be prepared to “win a nuclear war”.
In today’s world, with weapons much more powerful than they were in 1945, one cannot win a nuclear war, though. According to a 2019 scientific study (which involved experts from the US National Center for Atmospheric Research, and other institutions) the outcome of such a war would be simply apocalyptical.
One should keep in mind that NATO’s June 30 Summit for the first time, in its Declaration, addressed China as a “challenge” to the Atlantic Alliance “interests, security, and values”, while naming Russia “the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security.” The same document emphasized the “unprecedented level of cooperation with the European Union” and vowed to strengthen this “strategic partnership”.
In June US President Joe Biden claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin was looking for the “Finlandization of Europe”, but would get instead the “NATOization” of the continent. Before the current Russian-Ukrainian conflict, there were about 80,000 American troops in Europe. The figures in the near future are expected to reach 100,000. We have therefore seen an increasingly militarized European continent and Washington desires to make it increasingly nuclearized also.
This new further nuclearization developments can escalate tensions with Russia in an already dangerous situation in Europe, while the US is also sending B-52 strategic bombers to Australia (thus increasing friction with China there). Australia has become a focal point of American-Chinese tensions over the issue of the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal. Beijing claims it involves “the illegal transfer of nuclear weapon materials, making it essentially an act of nuclear proliferation.”
To sum it up, amid its own domestic crises, an overburdened and overextended American superpower is currently entrenched in two simultaneous arenas, trying to contain and encircle two nuclear great powers at once (Moscow and Beijing, namely), while dragging the whole world closer to a doomsday scenario of thermonuclear war. The only way out of it, on the West’s side, depends on European leaders conducting good diplomacy and the US, in turn, exercising restraint to stop the escalatory dynamic that has ensued.
Guys this whole thing is about to erupt sooner rather than later! You don’t have a full blown ambassador saying things like this unless it was DEADLY SERIOUS! In this report you will see how he tells us that even the emergency back channel communications are down and those are what saved the world from nuclear war in October 1962! Isn’t it ironic that EXACTLY 60 years later the US and Russia are staring each other down but this time no one is backing down? The Cuban missile crisis ran from the 16th of Oct to the 29th of Oct. and for those 13 days the world sat on the edge of nuclear Armageddon, just like now.
You’ll find all of that and more in today’s video report. I’m also including the article from warnews 247, translated to English for your convenience.
Large movements of American and Polish forces with Abrams and TOMA tanks are recorded on the borders with Belarus and Ukraine with the Russian ambassador revealing that all channels of communication with the US have been cut.
The intervention of the Russian ambassador is of great importance as the Polish-Ukrainian-Belarusian border will be “on fire” in the next period of time. All countries are gathering forces towards Western Ukraine.
We remind you, as WarNews247 revealed yesterday, that the Russian Foreign Minister S. Lavrov emphasized that “Russia sees no point in maintaining a diplomatic presence in the West”. Therefore, it is not excluded that Russia and the USA will end up recalling ambassadors.
The Ambassador of Russia in Washington, Anatoly Antonov, specifically stated:
“There are no channels of communication between Washington and Moscow for de-escalation, such as those that prevented a nuclear war between the two countries 60 years ago.
Communications between Russia and the United States were destroyed through Washington’s fault.
Washington has long crossed all the red lines set by Russia.
Under the current conditions, a return to the previous form of relations between Russia and the West is impossible.
For ideological reasons, the United States intends to create alliances to oppose the Russian Federation and China in various fields.
The United States should abandon irresponsible nuclear rhetoric, there can be no winners in a nuclear conflict.
The countries (USA and Russia), despite the difficulties, are not yet(!) on the verge of a nuclear conflict”. Johnny’s note: I’m glad he’s able to get one diplomatic statement in here but the movements on the ground say otherwise.
Minister of Defense of Belarus: Poland is preparing forces
The political course followed by Poland shows clear signs of war and not defense, said the Minister of Defense of Belarus, Lt. Gen. Khrenin.
The Belarusian minister noted that the militarization of the neighboring states is progressing at an accelerated pace.
“First of all, Poland, whose political course shows Warsaw’s preparation for a war that is not at all defensive.
Preparations have begun for not one, as reported, but two additional mechanized divisions of the ground forces.
At the same time, an additional section will also be located in the eastern part of the country near the city of Bialystok.
“The structure of the Polish territorial defense forces is also changing.
Ten battalions of territorial troops will appear on the border with the Republic of Belarus,” he continued.
He added that in order to expand the military formations of the NATO forces, the military infrastructure is being developed at an accelerated pace on the territory of neighboring states.
Modernization of most airports in Poland is almost complete, ports are actively being improved to receive landing ships of the alliance , Khrenin noted.
“In Poland, Lithuania and Latvia, training centers and fields are being reconstructed to support the activities of NATO military forces.
New modular mobile camps are being built at an accelerating pace, capable of housing many thousands of military personnel.
An infrastructure has been established to ensure the rapid deployment and movement of US continental troops numbering up to an air force division and squadron. That is, more than 20 thousand people.
The deployment of the US missile defense base on Polish soil will significantly upset the balance of power in the region.
Offensive missile weapons can also be installed on its launchers, covering the entire territory of Belarus and most of the territory of Russia,”Khrenin concluded.
For this reason her plagues will come ein a single day,
This isn’t good and it happens right after Russia announced the annexation of the 4 territories from Ukraine. Now how will Russia handle military defeat? The mobilization in Russia has begun in earnest and hundreds of tanks and thousands of troops are now being rushed to the Donbas region. Here is more in my video report and also from warnews 247. Translated from Greek for your convenience. All of the links are below.
One day after Russia signed a union with Donetsk and Lugansk, Ukrainians invaded Russian territory and captured the first Russian city, Krasny Liman. This is exactly what happened today and this is what Moscow will emphasize in the coming days by announcing a large-scale counterattack.
It is an attack and occupation of Russian territory in accordance with the ratification of the referendums and the decree of B. Putin.
The Russian Ministry of Defense announced a while ago that Russian forces managed to open a corridor and withdraw from the city. This fact is considered a great success given the situation.
The Russian forces withdrew amid heavy shelling and heavy Ukrainian fire, and of course not without bloodshed. There are losses.
The fall of the city of Krasny Liman opens the gate to Lugansk and now the Russians are urgently called to regroup, reinforce and stabilize the front because they risk losing what they had won months ago in Donbass.
The Ukrainians will now reach the border with Lugansk and hit Lysihansk. Unless the Russians manage to keep them in Kremina, an area where they are setting up the last line of defense.
The responsibilities are enormous and new purges in the Russian Army should be expected.
Already the Ukrainian forces after the occupation of Krasny Liman are pressing on the axes
The Ukrainians are moving additional reserves to the Estuary-Zarechnoye, Torskoye-Kremennaya, Torskoye-Svatovo axes.
Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Retreat Ordered – “Ukrainians had the upper hand”
According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the troops were forced to leave the city due to the threat of encirclement.
In particular, the Russian Ministry of Defense reports that Russian troops and Donbas militias were forced to withdraw from their defensive positions, as Kyiv launched a large-scale attack targeting the region.
“Due to the looming threat of encirclement, allied troops withdrew from the settlement of Krasni Liman and deployed to more advantageous positions ,” the ministry said in a statement.
Earlier, the head of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Denis Pushilin, described the situation in the city as “alarming” as he said the city has been “half-encircled” by Ukrainian troops.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so we have PayPal and Cash App left to us below. We have also added a new monthly support option through the website. That link is below as well. Thank you again and God bless!
This is a guest post from Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
The usage of weapons of mass destruction in a conflict hasn’t happened since August 9, 1945, when the United States of America dropped the second atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Nagasaki (the first one destroyed Hiroshima just three days prior), killing tens of thousands of civilians in seconds. With well over a thousand tests, the US is also infamous for detonating the largest number of atomic and thermonuclear weapons in history.
And yet, the belligerent thalassocracy is also known for using weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) as a pretext to launch wars of aggression and invasions against dozens of sovereign countries, supposedly to prevent the usage of such weapons in war. The most prominent example of this must be Iraq, which the US and its numerous satellite states have attacked multiple times under this pretext. Iraqi WMDs were never found, although the US still insists that the destruction of the Middle Eastern country was supposedly justified.
Even though virtually the entire world knows that the US accusations against Iraq were based on false claims, America seems determined to continue using this pretext when attacking others. It has been accusing Syria of using chemical weapons for over a decade now, all without solid proof and has even directly attacked the country and its security forces under this pretext.
In addition to Syria, the US-led political West is making the same allegations against Russia. Since February 24, the US and its numerous vassals have been accusing Moscow of using chemical weapons during its special military operation against the Neo-Nazi junta in Kiev. Western state and corporate-run mainstream media have been spinning this narrative for months, especially in April and May. However, US President Joe Biden has upped the ante and effectively accused Russia of planning to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
On Sunday, September 18, during a “60 Minutes” interview, Joe Biden “issued a warning” to his Russian counterpart, President Vladimir Putin, to “not change the face of war” by supposedly “using either tactical nuclear or chemical weapons” against the Kiev regime forces. “Don’t. Don’t. Don’t. You will change the face of war unlike anything since World War II,” the US president stated while speaking to CBS interviewer Scott Pelley.
The question was most likely staged as a way to portray Russia in the worst possible light while presenting the US as the supposed “voice of reason,” which is quite hypocritical given the US history of using WMDs. Biden didn’t specify what the US would do in case Russia decided to use such weapons, but he claimed that it would be “consequential” and that the end result would be: “They’ll become more of a pariah in the world than they ever have been.” Without going into specifics, he stated that the US reaction would “depend on the extent of what they do.”
It’s quite clear these warnings and empty threats are primarily designed for domestic use, given the unflattering state of America’s economy and the severe inflation which is hurting the American people’s purchasing power. In addition, there have been no indicators that Russia is planning to use any sort of WMDs, especially given the fact that the Eurasian giant hasn’t declared war or national mobilization. Russia’s strategic forces have been put on high alert in previous months, but this was in response to US and NATO actions.
The Kiev regime has regularly been accusing Russia of alleged chemical weapons usage, but none of these claims were ever supported by any evidence and were mostly used for war propaganda purposes. More recently, the Kiev regime officials have also been claiming that Russia is now using the Soviet-era Zaporozhye nuclear power plant for “nuclear blackmail” and to “unleash nuclear terror”. These allegations are quite strange and even ironic, given the fact that the Neo-Nazi junta forces have been shelling the nuclear power plant for months, risking a potential nuclear catastrophe, possibly orders of magnitude worse than the 1986 Chernobyl or 2011 Fukushima disasters.
In early August, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres stated that the world was “one miscalculation away from nuclear annihilation.” At the time, Guterres added that “we have been extraordinarily lucky so far” and called for a broader stand-down of all nuclear-armed powers’ arsenals, but also stressed that the “luck” the world had enjoyed so far in avoiding a nuclear catastrophe “may not last” and urged the world to “renew a push towards eliminating all such weapons.”
“Luck is not a strategy. Nor is it a shield from geopolitical tensions boiling over into nuclear conflict,” he concluded.
Moscow has also voiced its own concern for the potential of nuclear escalation, but these warnings were directed at the political West, particularly its military wing in the form of NATO, which has been conducting a crawling expansion toward Russia’s borders for over three decades now, despite promises not to do so.
In April, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov vowed that Moscow would do everything in its power to avoid using nuclear weapons. However, he also stressed the danger of underestimating how fast things could spiral out of control in Ukraine if the political West continued its belligerent policies towards Russia. Lavrov’s comments were specifically directed at NATO and its destabilizing role in Ukraine as the aggressive military alliance has been effectively engaged in a proxy war against Russia by supplying billions of dollars’ worth of weapons to the Neo-Nazi junta in Kiev.
MOSCOW (AP) — A senior Russian diplomat sternly warned Washington Friday against supplying long-range weapons to Ukraine, noting that the U.S. is balancing on the edge of direct involvement in the conflict.
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov also pointed to the country’s military doctrine that envisages the use of nuclear weapons in case of a threat to the existence of the Russian state.
“We have repeatedly warned the U.S. about the consequences that may follow if the U.S. continues to flood Ukraine with weapons,” Ryabkov said. “It effectively puts itself in a state close to what can be described as a party to the conflict.”
Speaking on state television, Ryabkov warned that ”a very narrow margin that separates the U.S. from becoming a party to the conflict mustn’t create an illusion for rabid anti-Russian forces that everything will remain as it is if they cross it.”
He emphasized that Russia will push its offensive in Ukraine until it reaches its aims.
“Russia is capable of fully defending its interests, and the goals of the special military operation will be fully achieved,” Ryabkov said.
He pointed out that Russia’s military doctrine stipulates that it could use nuclear weapons in case of aggression against Russia and its allies involving mass destruction weapons, or an aggression involving conventional weapons that threatens the very existence of the Russian state.
Supplies of the U.S. HIMARS multiple rocket launchers strengthened the strike capability of the Ukrainian army, which has used them to hit key infrastructure facilities and other targets. The truck-mounted systems fire GPS-guided missiles capable of reaching targets up to 80 kilometers (50 miles) away.
U.S. authorities so far have refrained from providing Ukraine with longer range missiles for HIMARS launchers that can reach targets up to 300 kilometers (186 miles) and could potentially allow the Ukrainian military to hit areas deep inside Russia.
“We are warning the U.S. against making provocative steps, such as deliveries of longer-range and more devastating weapons,” Ryabkov said. “It’s a road to nowhere fraught with grave consequences, the responsibility for which will lie entirely with Washington.” Source AP
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so we have PayPal and Cash App left to us below. We have also added a new monthly support option through the website. That link is below as well. Thank you again and God bless!
