Iran’s Su-35 Aircraft Procurement Is More Dangerous Than You Think
Related:
The Difficulty of Disrupting Iranian Drones
Russia and Iran Are Building a Trade Route That Defies Sanctions
In all of this, some analysts see echoes of an idea that dates back more than a century and is reckoned to be the foundation of geopolitical thinking. It focused on the struggle between an oceangoing world power—the UK then, the US today—and the land giants of Eurasia. [Heartland Theory]
In fits of, what might well be termed, masochism, some of us now-and-then tune in to the legacy media. When doing so, one is likely to hear western-aligned politicians rhetorize ad nauseam about the linguistically vogue rules-based order. Now and then, the word “international” is also inserted: the rules-based international order.
What is the Rules-Based Order?
H/T: THE NEW DARK AGE
Deputy Secretary Wendy Sherman just reaffirmed that Washington would maintain first use to protect ‘our allies.’
When the US threatens to use nuclear weapons
H/T: Unorthodox Truth
It’s okay when we do it, because we’re the good guys! /s
Revelations further underscore mendacity behind Biden administration claim that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was unprovoked
NATO Had Plans for a Preemptive Strike on Russia Using the Cover of a French-Led Naval Exercise in the Mediterranean
Alexander Mercouris headlined on October 29th, “Biden quietly moves world closer towards armageddon. Finland ready to host nukes”, and discussed the U.S. plan to trap Russia by positioning its nuclear missiles about 500 miles or 7 minutes of missile-flying distance from The Kremlin, a “checkmate” (a beheading of Russia’s central command so that Russia won’t have enough time to launch its retaliatory missiles) and demand Russia’s surrender (since there is no way that Russia’s central command would be able to assess the situation within only 7 minutes and get its missiles launched). There is a history to this plan, and the U.S. Government decision to do this seems to have been made in or around 2006, when America’s two most prestigious national security academic journals, Foreign Affairs and National Security, both recommended (though ever so tactfully) replacing the idea (actually meta-strategy) of “Mutually Assured Destruction” or “M.A.D.” (that nuclear weapons exist only in order to prevent a WW III), by the new U.S. meta-strategy, of “Nuclear Primacy” — that America will use them so as to win a nuclear war, WW III, against Russia. Positioning those missiles in Ukraine was supposed to be the way to do this, but, since that is looking increasingly unlikely now, it is to be Finland (the second-nearest nation to The Kremlin) which is taking on this function (if Turkiye’s President Tayyip Erdogan will allow it into NATO, which will be his most fateful decision ever).
Evidence That U.S. Intends Blitz-Nuclear Strike At The Kremlin
According to Newsweek, on October 26th, “Finland Will Allow NATO to Place Nuclear Weapons on Border With Russia”. They cite Finnish media reports. Allegedly, a condition that NATO had placed on Finland to join NATO was to allow America’s nuclear missiles to be positioned on Finland’s Russian border, which is closer to Moscow than any other except Ukraine’s. Whereas Ukraine’s would be 5 minutes from blitz-nuking Moscow so as to preemptively decapitate Russia’s retaliatory command, Finland’s would be 7 minutes — only around 120 seconds longer for Russia to be able to launch its retaliatory strikes. Finland now is to vote on the bill joining NATO, on that basis (i.e., to become America’s spearhead to defeat Russia in WW III). Obviously (assuming that NATO had, indeed, given Finland’s leaders to believe that saying yes to this would increase NATO’s likelihood of expediting Finland’s application to join), NATO is set upon checkmating Russia into capitulation if Finland does join.
NATO Wants To Place Nuclear Missiles On Finland’s Russian Border — Finland Says Yes
Related:
Finland, Sweden Promise to Join NATO Together in United Front to Türkiye
“This Nuclear Posture Review continues decades of nuclear overkill, doubles down on needless weapons programs, and fails to advance overdue reforms.”
‘A Terrifying Document’: Critics Say Biden Nuclear Policy Makes the World More Dangerous
Now is the time for Biden to clarify U.S. nuclear doctrine. But he remains silent.
by Scott Ritter
On Monday, Oct. 17, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization kicked off Operation STEADFAST NOON, its annual exercise of its ability to wage nuclear conflict. Given that NATO’s nuclear umbrella extends exclusively over Europe, the indisputable fact is that STEADFAST NOON is nothing more than NATO training to wage nuclear war against Russia.
Nuclear High Noon in Europe
Related:
Video via Judge Napolitano
After the text about the President of the ROK at the NATO summit was published, part of the audience questioned whether the ROK, despite its loyalist statements, was in fact in no particular hurry to do Washington’s bidding. This question is best answered by a combination of words and facts.
…
In another important development, on July 20 Minister of Science and ICT Lee Jong-ho openly stated that South Korea should be cautious when deciding whether to join the US Chip 4 or Fab 4 technology alliance initiative, as the potential implications could affect not only the country’s semiconductor industry, but also the economy as a whole. The framework, which in addition to the US and the ROK also includes Taiwan and Japan, is designed to counter China’s growing influence in global supply chains for advanced high-tech products, as well as to increase American production capacity and capabilities in this area.
ROK and the US – Words and Facts
H/T: THE NEW DARK AGE
Previously:
South Korea’s new president playing dangerous game with Pyongyang
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 