Editors note: This is something to keep our eyes on as well since India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons and have threatened to use them in the past. The red horse of Revelation is riding, taking peace from the earth!
Tensions between India and Pakistan appear to be on the rise again after both countries’ capitals were rocked by deadly blasts just a day apart from each other, fueling fears of another full-blown clash this year.
On Tuesday afternoon, a suicide bomber self-detonated next to a police car outside a court building in Islamabad, killing at least 12 others and wounding at least 27. Many of those killed or injured were passersby or people attending court appointments, according to Islamabad police.
The leader of the Jamaat-ul-Ahrar group, a splinter faction of the Pakistani Taliban or Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), claimed responsibility for the attack, according to the Associated Press, although another commander from the group denied association with the attack. The group has split from and remerged with TTP on a number of occasions, including breaking away in 2022 after its leader was killed in a bombing in Afghanistan. A TTP spokesperson disclaimed involvement in Tuesday’s attack.
But Islamabad has been quick to point fingers at New Delhi, even as it says it is still investigating the attack. The Prime Minister’s Office in Islamabad appeared to blame India for the attack, calling it one of the “worst examples of Indian state-sponsored terrorism in the region.” Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi also claimed the attack was “carried out by Indian-backed elements and Afghan Taliban proxies.”
“We are in a state of war,” Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif said in a post on X that did not name India and blamed the Taliban government in Afghanistan. “Anyone who thinks that the Pakistan Army is fighting this war in the Afghan-Pakistan border region and the remote areas of Balochistan should take today’s suicide attack at the Islamabad district courts as a wake-up call: this is a war for all of Pakistan, in which the Pakistan Army is giving daily sacrifices and making the people feel secure.”
India rejected accusations of its involvement, calling them “baseless and unfounded allegations being made by an obviously delirious Pakistani leadership.”
“It is a predictable tactic by Pakistan to concoct false narratives against India in order to deflect the attention of its own public from the ongoing military-inspired constitutional subversion and power-grab unfolding within the country,” Randhir Jaiswal, a spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, said in a statement. “The international community is well aware of the reality and will not be misled by Pakistan’s desperate diversionary ploys.”
Less than 24 hours earlier, a car explosion in New Delhi on Monday night killed at least 10 people and injured more than 30 others. The car went up in flames near the city’s historic 17th century Red Fort, or Lal Qila, which is a symbol of India’s independence and a popular area for tourists. Indian authorities have said the incident is under investigation and have not publicly identified any suspects. The case is being investigated by India’s counter-terrorism law enforcement agency, the National Investigation Agency, and Indian authorities invoked the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, an anti-terror law which allows security forces to detain suspects without trial. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed that India’s “agencies will go to the root of this conspiracy and will not spare the conspirators behind it.”Even so, some in India have already cast blame on Pakistan. Indian media reported links between the driver, reportedly a Kashmiri resident, and a Pakistani militant group. Meanwhile, social media users and reports have recalled the language of the deadly armed conflict with Pakistan earlier this year, calling the Delhi attack an “act of war.”
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
Lindsay Graham and the other neocon war mongers were making the rounds of the Sunday talk shows where they were absolutely gleeful that Trump wanted to start getting tough with Russia.
“For months, President Trump has tried to entice [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to the peace table. He’s put tariffs against countries that allow fentanyl to come in our country, other bad behavior — he’s left the door open regarding Russia. That door is about to close,” Graham said on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
Graham outlined that he and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat who also appeared Sunday on “Face the Nation,” are leading 85 cosponsors on a sanctions bill that he said would make a “sledgehammer available to President Trump to go after Putin’s economy and all those countries who prop up the Putin war machine.”
The South Carolina Republican explained that countries like China, India and Brazil buy oil and other goods from Russia, saying “that’s the money Putin uses to prosecute the war.” Graham said the sanctions package would give the president the ability to impose 500% tariffs on any country that helps Russia. And he noted that the president would have the discretion to dial the tariffs up or down, giving him “maximum flexibility.”
“We’re going after the people who keep Putin in business, and additional sanctions on Russia itself,” Graham said. “This is truly a sledgehammer available to President Trump to end this war.”
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
Also in today’s video: A chilling 2019 study had predicted a nuclear war between Pakistan and India in 2025 and what could happen and none of it is good! Billions would starve because of the nuclear winter that would happen and that’s in addition to the 50-125 million that would perish from the blasts in India and Pakistan.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
This missile struck a mosque in Bahawalpur belonging to Maulana Masood Azhar
He’s the founder & leader of the Islamist terrorist organization Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) which is mainly focused on attacks in Indian Kashmir pic.twitter.com/IC7iJTXHEq
India and Pakistan are on the brink of conflict following a deadly attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir, with India announcing a raft of punitive measures against Pakistan. India has suspended the Indus Water Treaty, a key water-sharing agreement, and closed the main border crossing, while Pakistan has canceled visas for Indian nationals and suspended all trade with India. Both countries have accused each other of supporting violence and have a history of mutual distrust and hostility over the disputed region of Kashmir.
Key Developments:
April 24, 2025: India downgraded ties with Pakistan, including suspending the Indus Water Treaty and closing the main border crossing. Pakistan responded by canceling visas for Indian nationals and suspending all trade with India.
April 22, 2025: At least 26 people were killed and 17 injured in an attack on tourists in Pahalgam, Kashmir. India accused Pakistan of involvement, though Pakistan denied any role.
Historical Context: India and Pakistan have fought two of their three wars over Kashmir, which is claimed in full by both but controlled in parts. Tensions have been exacerbated by mutual accusations of supporting violence and terrorism in the region.
The recent attack has escalated tensions, with both countries taking aggressive diplomatic and economic actions against each other. India has also reduced its diplomatic staff in Pakistan and declared Pakistani diplomats persona non grata. Pakistan, in turn, has closed its airspace to Indian aircraft and canceled visas for Indian nationals. The situation remains volatile, with both countries maintaining significant military and nuclear capabilities.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
US nuclear Subs are on high alert, the Russian ambassador is sounding the warning but no one in the west is listening, just escalating. Time is short! Prayed up and prepped up!
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
He wants to deter the even greater provocations that the West might now be plotting, such as destabilizing and then invading Belarus, with the intent of coercing him into freezing the existing LOC and then possibly accepting the deployment of Western/NATO peacekeepers there.
Putin surprised the world on Thursday when he addressed the nation to inform them that Russia had tested a new hypersonic medium-range missile earlier that morning in an attack against a famous Soviet-era industrial complex in the Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk. He explained that this was a response to the US and UK recently allowing Ukraine to use their long-range missiles inside of Russia. Their decision resulted in the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine “assuming elements of a global nature” in his words.
As was explained here with regards to the “moment of truth” that this latest phase of the conflict led to, he was faced with the choice of either escalating or continuing his policy of strategic patience, the first of which could foil attempts by Trump to reach a peace deal while the second could invite more aggression. Putin chose the former and did so in a creative way that few foresaw. The Oreshnik missile system whose existence he disclosed on Thursday has Multiple Independently-targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs).
It’s essentially the same sort of weapon that Russia could use in the event of a nuclear conflict with the West since the aforesaid feature coupled with its hypersonic speed means that it’s impossible to intercept. In other words, Putin rattled Russia’s nuclear saber in the most convincing way possible short of testing a nuclear weapon, which his government previously confirmed that it wouldn’t do for the reasons that were explained here. He’s therefore finally climbing the escalation ladder.
Putin hitherto declined to escalate in response to the over 1,000 days’ worth of NATO-backed Ukrainian provocations that included bombing the Kremlin, early warning systems, strategic airfields, nuclear power plants, and the Crimean Bridge, among many other sensitive targets, so as to avoid World War III. He also prioritized political goals over military ones up until this point, but that’s all changing now since he realized that his strategic patience was interpreted as weakness and only invited more aggression.
Seeing as how Ukraine’s latest use of Western weapons inside of Russia’s pre-2014 territory isn’t unprecedented due to the HIMARS already having been used in Belgorod and Kursk Regions, the latter of which Ukraine invaded with NATO’s support over the summer, the question arises of why it took over three months for his views to change. It should also be noted that Russia didn’t significantly respond to Ukraine fielding the F-16s despite Lavrov previously warning that they could be nuclear-equipped.
Russia might have therefore received intelligence that the West is plotting an even greater provocation in the future. Belarusian media just aired a documentary exposing a Western plot to destabilize and invade their country, which readers can learn more about by reviewing the seven analyses that were listed in this one here. Correspondingly, it was assessed that “Russia’s Updated Nuke Doctrine Aims To Deter Unacceptable Provocations From NATO”, and the aforesaid would certainly constitute such.
Putin’s strategic patience would have finally reached its limits if he caught wind that anything of the sort was afoot, which would explain why he’d order the Oreshnik to be used against that Soviet-era industrial complex in Central Ukraine in order to send an unmistakable message to the West to reconsider its plans. Recalling how concerned he is about avoiding World War III, it also makes sense why his spokesman confirmed that Russia informed the US about this approximately half an hour ahead of time.
After all, launching an intermediate-range hypersonic missile westward without any advance notification could have prompted the US to panic by interpreting this as the start of a potential nuclear first strike by Russia, thus setting into motion the exact same scenario that he’s worked so hard to avoid. His motive was to deter the West from carrying out unacceptable provocations that cross Russia’s most sensitive redlines, which the West might be plotting out of desperation to “escalate to de-escalate” on its terms.
It was written here, here, and here that Trump might resort to that, but the latest ATACMS escalation – which can be regarded as a provocation due to these missiles having a much longer range than the HIMARS – suggests that the “Collective Biden” decided to do so first out of fear that whatever deal he might reach with Putin would compromise on too many of the US’ interests. Accordingly, Putin might now have decided to beat the US to the punch by “escalating to de-escalate” on Russia’s terms instead.
Thursday morning was the first time that a MIRV was used in combat, which is much more significant than the US “boiling the frog” by expanding the range of the missiles that Ukraine has already been able to use inside of Russia’s pre-2014 borders after once again signaling its escalatory plans long in advance, especially since few saw it coming and the US only had around a 30-minute notice. Putin also warned that Russia’s new doctrine allows it to use such weapons against those who arm Ukraine.
It’s unlikely that he’ll throw caution to the wind by launching Oreshniks against military targets in NATO countries at the risk of sparking World War III, but it can’t be ruled out that the next escalation that he’s considering in response to more aggression could be bombing Moldova instead. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zakharova said earlier in the week that the Western-backed government there is “turning the country at a rapid pace into a logistics hub used to supply the Ukrainian armed forces.”
It’s not a NATO member though so Russia could bomb it without crossing the West’s red lines while still signaling that he’s not the pushover that they convinced themselves that he was after misreading the reasons for his strategic patience if they still keep provoking him even after Thursday’s escalation. They want him to accept Western/NATO peacekeepers along the Line of Contact (LOC), Ukraine’s continued militarization, its future membership in NATO, and no change in its anti-Russian legislation.
By contrast, Putin wants to expel Ukraine from the four regions that voted to join Russia in September 2022, no Western/NATO peacekeepers along the LOC, Ukraine’s demilitarization, the restoration of its constitutional neutrality, and the rescinding of its anti-Russian legislation. Beating the West to the punch by “escalating to de-escalate”, or at least finally climbing the escalation ladder in response to their provocations, is therefore aimed at achieving as many of these maximum goals as he can.
If he sticks to his guns and doesn’t waver from his newfound approach, which is arguably long-overdue since some believe that he should have begun applying it after the failure of spring 2022’s peace talks, then he stands a much greater chance of achieving at least part of the most important ones. NATO can always conventionally intervene in Ukraine west of the Dnieper to salvage some of its geopolitical project so Russia should assume that it won’t be able to demilitarize or denazify that part of the country.
What it can do, however, is employ military and diplomatic means (both individually and in combination through its abovementioned newfound approach) to obtain control over all the territory that it claims as its own east of the Dnieper, possibly including Zaporozhye’s eponymous city of over 700,000 people. The new LOC could then be patrolled by purely non-Western forces deployed as part of a UN mandate while Ukraine might be coerced to demilitarize everything that remains under its control east of the Dnieper.
All heavy weapons would have to be withdrawn westward as part of a massive demilitarized zone (DMZ), while the possibility also exists that this “Transdnieper” region might also receive political autonomy or at least cultural autonomy to protect the rights of ethnic Russians and those who speak that language. This scenario was first tabled here in March and could take the form shown below, with the western part of the country in blue possibly hosting NATO troops as part of the arrangement that’ll then be described:
Ukraine could be deterred from breaking the ceasefire due to the DMZ placing it at a disadvantage, while Russia would be deterred by the “security guarantees” that Ukraine clinched with a bunch of NATO countries this year, which amount to de facto Article 5 support. While Russia could storm into the DMZ, NATO could also storm into Western Ukraine or possibly even cross the Dnieper, whether due to a swift intervention or having already deployed its troops west of the river per tacit agreement with Russia.
What was detailed in the three preceding paragraphs is the maximum that Russia can realistically achieve given the new military-strategic circumstances in which it finds itself over 1,000 days since the specialoperation began. Putin finally started climbing the escalation ladder in order to deter the even greater provocations that the West might now be plotting with the intent of coercing him into freezing the existing LOC and then possibly accepting the deployment of Western/NATO peacekeepers there.
Such a scenario would be completely unacceptable for him from the perspective of Russia’s national security interests and his own reputational ones after promising to check NATO’s expansion in Ukraine. Keeping that bloc west of the Dnieper while demilitarizing everything east of it and north of the administrative borders of the four former Ukrainian regions that joined Russia in September 2022, tentatively known as the “Transdnieper” region, would be a tolerable compromise though.
Trump might deem this to be pragmatic enough of a deal for him to go along with since it could still be spun by all relevant parties to the conflict as a victory (e.g. Russia gained land and created a DMZ deep inside Ukraine; Ukraine continued to exist as a state; and the US de facto incorporated Western Ukraine into NATO). It could even enter into force prior to that if either side “escalates to de-escalate” before his inauguration and this is the “mutually face-saving” compromise that they reach to avoid World War III.
Of course, it would be better if they agree to this without sparking a Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis that risks spiraling out of control, hence why their diplomats should begin discussing it now or a third country’s ones like India’s should propose it behind the scenes to get the ball rolling. Putin’s newfound (and arguably long-overdue) approach signals that he won’t accept freezing the existing LOC, nor especially the deployment of NATO/Western peacekeepers there, and will escalate to avert that.
He might even go as far as using tactical nukes in Ukraine (and/or NATO’s logistics hub in Moldova) if he feels that he’s being cornered by the evolving circumstances in which the West might soon place him through its possibly forthcoming greater provocations (e.g. destabilizing and invading Belarus). The West must therefore start taking Putin seriously after he finally began climbing the escalation ladder otherwise the worst-case scenario of World War III might become unavoidable if they push him too far.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
Last weekend, Iran covered Israel with 330 drones and missiles. These were sent from various points inside Iran, some 1,000-2,500 km away from Israel, depending on each location. Iran immediately threatened to make a 10 times larger attack – that would be around 3,500 missiles against Israel – if Israel made even a hiccup to hit back at Iran.
Israel simply hasn’t got an air force capable of fighting Iran over these long distances.
Israel hasn’t got B-52 strategic bombers like the US has.
Israel hasn’t got a long range missile force even nearly comparable to Iran’s.
What Israel has got is a large air force of medium-range multi-role aircraft like F-35I, F-16I, and F-15I all of which have limited range and comparably small payload, necessitating many-many missions in order to achieve sizeable results.
The Israeli air force is perfectly designed to kill endless numbers of people in nearby Beirut or kill a few people in a consulate in Damascus – but next to useless if talking about a massive air campaign against Tehran or any big number of other targets in Iran.
Israel can attack Iran by using aerial refueling for its mid-range aircraft like the über-expensive F-35I when they are underway to Iran (or back).
Where should Israel be able to carry out such an aerial refueling its attack aircraft en route to or from Iran?
It can’t be over Syria or Iraq, because Iranian militias and allies have received the capable Russian air defense which can shoot them down. It may be, that US and Israel believe that F-35 is “invisible” (stealth) on radar, but big aircraft tankers are slow and inviting targets, and definitely not visible. The only route which Israeli waves of air attacks on Iran could take which would enable aerial refueling would be via Saudi Arabia.
That would bring Saudi Arabia directly in war on Israel’s side against Iran, and there is next to no chance that Saudi Arabia will allow that.
Israel’s problem is limited capabilities to strike Iran have been studied for decades and are well-documented.
Israel’s need for aerial refueling is even recently confirmed by one of Israel’s top air force commanders:
Brig. General (ret) Relik Shafir – former IAF commander, took down Iraq’s Osirak reactor. Gen. Shafir says:
Israel’s air force cannot attack Iran without aerial refueling
What he doesn’t say, but means, is that aerial tankers will get shot down, and the attack bombers will not return
he result is that Israel is lost.
Once again: The result is that Israel is lost. Israel’s conventional options are limited – useless.
Another Israeli top military describes how limited Israel’s options are – in essence, Israel has NO relevant military options to counter Iran’s capability to destroy Israel with massive and long-time waves of missiles attacks:
Brig. General (ret) Dr. Amnon Sofrin – former Mossad Intelligence Directorate chief, Gen. Sofrin says:
Israel and Iran are now fighting each other directly, in the open. If Israel strikes Iran very hard, Iran is going to pay back, and it will be an ongoing “dispute” (read: escalation) that will get us to another area (read: nuclear) where we don’t want to go.
Israel cannot altogether fight Gaza, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran. Israel has to calibrate (= diminish) its response.
Still, the former intelligence general opines that Israel “has to pay back” – but what small options are left for Israel?
Option 1 – undercover activities, Israel terror action which “doesn’t leave a sign” and without huge damage.
Option 2 – Israel can use the air force (which it hasn’t got for the purpose) which in the end, if Israel doesn’t calculate very well, will drag the whole area into a huge conflict. As we saw above, using Israel’s air force is a very limited or even impossible option.
Option 3 – Israel can retaliate on some of Iran’s friends (so-called “proxies”) outside Iran’s territory. Also here, Iran has made it clear, that Iran will strike Israel again, if Israel retaliates on Iran’s friends and allies.
After Iran’s massive drone-missile assault on Israel last weekend, Israel has already decided to hit back at Iran. And Iran has made it clear, that ANY Israeli attack on Iran, no matter how small, will trigger a much larger Iranian response. So Israel might as well decide to go all-in against Iran – right from the beginning. Israel’s far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich has pressed for an enormous Israeli attack on Iran, one which Iran “will never forget”. In the twisted sense of the situation, what Bezalel Smotrich says makes… well, in its own logic, sense. See this.
Nuclear Only Option for Israel
But there is a catch: And that is, that Israel does simply not possess the capability, the air power to hit back hard at Iran – EXCEPT if Israel goes nuclear.
But while Israel hasn’t got the thousands of drones and missiles for a long-range air campaign which Iran has, Israel does possess a smaller number of long range of nuclear capable missiles (some on submarines) which can hit anywhere.
And that is undoubtedly what Bezalel Smotrich wants – an Israeli nuclear attacks all over Iran.
The Middle East is about to become the nuclear focus of the world.
Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The new buy me a coffee link is below.
