Tag: Nuclear Primacy

The Anglo-American War on Russia – Part Nine (Preparing a Nuclear Attack)

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

The United States spent over a trillion dollars the past two decades to prepare for a surprise nuclear strike on Russia. The United States withdrew from major arms control treaties and built newer and more accurate nuclear missiles. It built missile bases in Poland and Romania and hundreds of new submarines and destroyers to launch cruise missiles or long-range anti-missile missiles.The United States Army and Navy developed, tested, and deployed mobile missile launchers to Europe while Generals insist they have the right to deploy such systems on Russia’s borders, to include inside Ukraine and Finland. This was barely reported in America’s corporate media, which spews constant propaganda about Russian threats to prepare the public for nuclear war.

The Anglo-American War on Russia – Part Nine (Preparing a Nuclear Attack) via Tales of the American Empire
Read More »

Evidence That U.S. Intends Blitz-Nuclear Strike At The Kremlin

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

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

NATO Wants To Place Nuclear Missiles On Finland’s Russian Border — Finland Says Yes

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

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