Quote of the Day
Joe Biden‘s administration has allowed Volodymyr Zelensky to launch American-made missiles into Russia, with allies of both Donald Trump and Putin decrying the move as escalation towards World War Three. In his statement, Medvedev took the warnings a dramatic step further, declaring it is “already WWIII”.
In response to the move by the US, Putin has signed a new decree, titled the “Fundamentals of State Police in the Sphere of Nuclear Deterrence”, which, state-run news agency TASS reports relaxes the parameters by which Russia will respond to attacks with nuclear weapons. The document reportedly states: “Nuclear weapons (NW) are an extreme measure to protect the sovereignty of the country.
Liam Doyle
November 19, 2024
Vladimir Putin’s top crony Medvedev warns West and NATO ‘World War 3 is here’ – World News – Mirror Online
Is this just saber rattling? A bluff? Or is this a serious threat that requires I now need to head for the hills of Idaho?
You need to head for the hills whether there is a war or not. If there is a war, most of us are going to be dead sooner or later. Seattle is sooner. The hills are later with the population levels there being unsustainable after the economic collapse caused by nuclear war. Some will survive there though unlike anyone in the cities. Not sure whether the sub pens at Kitsap are underground but if so you need to worry about the fallout plume from a ground burst.
Also a nuclear war doesn’t necessarily mean an all-out barrage. A plausible scenario is that the Russians hit Podunk, Ukraine where our missiles are and we hit some sort of Russian logistic base, perhaps in Ukraine and it stops. There has been a lot of debate but no answers as to whether it is containable at this level.
How many times in the past two years has Putin talked about using nuclear weapons? It’s a bluff. He’s been bluffing for two years. He does it like every month. He knows exactly what would happen if he did it. He would turn into the enemy of the world more than he already is.
The only logical reason I see would be he’s losing soldiers at such a rate he can’t replace them anymore. Losing men, Especially Men at the age where they would serve in the military at the rate Russia is unsustainable. Even with their population size. They are already resorting accusing the elderly, North Koreans and foreign mercenaries en masse. Russia is not the Soviet bear anymore. It’s a slug. A slug crawling on the back of a dead bear.
Another thing to take into account is the state of Russian equipment. Would their nuclear weapons actually work? Nuclear weapons require an insane amount of maintenance to work. Maintenance I suspect has not been happening considering the kind of equipment that you’re seeing on the field from Russia.
Wow… just wow.
you swallowed the whole thing
That’s what I was thinking.
NATO has been huffing their own supply, and a lot of normies believe it.
Pot calling kettle black…
Maybe you have not seen all thee videos and independent commentary about the state of the Russian economy and how the sites that held there equipment has been dwindling. I’d like you to rationalize how losing the amount of men and equipment Russia has been is no big deal.
Here is a question: where do you see Russia as a country in 5 and 10 years?
dunno…
but if it’s anything like the last five, their economy will continue to grow, industry will continue to grow, and their independence will continue to grow.
They have demnostrated themselves to be as inovative and techonologically capable as any other country on earth… kinda like the US used to be once.
Seen those vids… hence my expression of incredulity. Their “arguments” are purely calls to authority, and void of objective measure, and hence classically fallacious. Even their “authorities” have destroyed any vestige of credit they might once have had. To have failed to notice this, implies that you believe truth comes from “authority”, rather than the other way around.
Just like they were 500 years and 1000 years ago. Rus.
Saving an ace in order to play it later, is not bluffing.
If we nuked Moscow you can bet there’d be a commensurate response.
So far, we haven’t quite pushed far enough to get them to do it. So, we should do what…keep pushing? Is that really a smart game to be playing?
“Don’t poke the bear.”
“Play stupid games, win stupid prizes”
FAFO
“Not my circus, not my monkeys.”
Well, Russia just hit Dnipro with an ICBM equipped with conventional explosive MIRVs. As far as if their equipment works, we know that our Minuteman tests keep failing, and the Russians just USED an ICBM on Ukraine.
US officials are denying that it happened, by weasel-wording the definition of ICMB to claim that it wasn’t an ICBM strike. The RS-26 they used has been demonstrated to reach 5800km and seemed to just be stretching its legs. Their MIRVs didn’t seem to have any problems hitting the targets, because Ukraine isn’t boasting about all the misses.
That does prove that Russia can work its way down its inventory until it finds a rocket that works. Their magazine is deep enough, apparently.
Doesn’t say how many rockets they checked before they found one that passed its BIST and the fuel hadn’t been drained and sold by the maintenance officer.
RS-26 is a solid fuel rocket.
Underestimating your enemy is how you not only lose, but lose in a humiliating and dishonorable manner.
Solid fuel kernels have a limited shelf life. If it’s about to go off, you might as well shoot it. That’s how they pick ammo for our pilots’ live fire exercises.
They still had to find the right combination of parts to do something useful rather yhan have an embarrassing malfunction. This kind of weapon is all kinds of wrong for that kind of target with multiple conventional warheads, especially shot singly. My money is on a system test and hey, there’s an approximately legitimate target rather than shooting at a test range, and we don’t care much is we miss what we were really aiming at.
It’s not a test. It’s a message. The message is clearly that it could have been nuclear, and that their nuclear missiles work.
It doesn’t matter if the missiles have another 100 years or 100 days of shelf life if Russia decides to strike with them today.
It was an IRBM, supposedly hypersonic. Think of it as a realistic test launch. Certainly possible that the Russians are fudging on the definitions to get around SALT, if that is still in effect. Russia has put a lot of money into modernizing and maintaining their nuclear forces is recent years. probably at the expense of their conventional forces. Of course, the West has spent little money anywhere.
Cities are easy targets. I wonder if the thing is accurate enough to hit every Western embassy in Kiev, as a thank you to the Chinese. Or every place where NATO contractors are running the missile launchers. Both would be consistent with Putin’s statement.
I wonder when the vatniks are going to show up.
Bluff or not. Who cares. The facts are that whatever they have, we don’t need it tested on us. Or anywhere for that matter.
We started this whole morass. Everyone knows that. From the Kremlin through Europe to DC.
This is our war. And Putin is smart enough to threaten us with what he can use on us. What might get us to back down.
He won’t use nukes in Ukraine. To nasty. And it contaminates large areas that might include Russians.
No, if he were truly worried about Ukraine. He would use thermobaric bombs. He could flatten whole cities with no radiation to deal with afterward.
Once again, this is our war. He’s threatening us with what he can and will use on us.
All nuke doctrine is all or nothing. Don’t expect one here and one there.
When Russia is threatened enough. It will go all in. And western civilization will be no more.
Putin’s problem will be his war-hawks. He’s showed remarkable restraint in all this. And we here in America don’t seem to understand he’s not worried about winning in Ukraine. That war was lost before it started.
He’s looking for Russian security before and after this Ukrainian BS.
Him shooting an ICBM with multiple warheads is demonstrating exactly the very point of why he won’t allow NATO missiles 200 miles from Moscow.
And if he can’t insure that? The whole top half of the world pays the price.
We should pray he has a strong and capable army. Whose equipment is well oiled and working as designed. Cause if all he has left to secure Moscow and Russia is nukes?
Everybody is going to get nuked.
And there has never been a better time to bunker up. Cuban missile crisis x 10, for the next 80-100 days.
We should pray he has a strong and capable army. Whose equipment is well oiled and working as designed. Cause if all he has left to secure Moscow and Russia is nukes?
Everybody is going to get nuked.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
There’s also the CCW/self-defense principle of a “continuum of force” at play here. To whit: if the only defensive tool you have is a firearm, “going to guns” is your only option. It’s better and legally safer to carry several defensive items across the continuum of force, choose appropriately for the situation at hand, and escalate incrementally as needed.
As applied here, if Russia lacks a functional military at relatively low levels of force, Putin could escalate until he gets to a level of force he can use.
I for one hope he has something in between “barely-running surplus tanks” (as seen in Ukraine) and “turn it to an irradiated parking lot”.
Given how he’s been systematically grinding up all teh NATO gear the UKR roll against him, and giving them a kill ratio of something higher than 5:1 in RUS favor, I’d say he’s got a firm grip on the available continuum of force, much better than NATO and the US does. He’s been proving that NATO is a paper tiger. The fact that Houties drove off the US Navy carrier group should show we are no longer the serious military we once were.
Quantity has a quality all of its own.
And the quantity is drying up.
I guess all those videos made by people that have satellite imaging showing how all those Russian yards they store equipment at showing how much they have dwindled is propaganda. And losing 1,000 men a day is sustainable.
Where do you see Russia in 5-10 years?
Looks like the vatniks showed up. Or at least the people that think Putin is the greatest leader alive and how the Russian military is so powerful that even now they would be able to take on a full deployment of NATO as well as the full deployment of the entire United States military and still win. And it did not disappoint. How is NATO a paper tiger? Also where is you source that Russia is destroying more equipment at a 5:1 ratio? Also how is losing over 1,000 soldiers a day not unsustainable. Or is that wrong. If that is wrong what do you think the numbers are. I would really like to get where you see Russia being in 5-10 years.
Vatnik, really? Because someone disagrees with you?
And truly, what do you think the Chinese people would be told if China started a war with us using Mexico?
Would we want to take over Mexico?
Not only no, HELL NO.
Ukraine is more corrupt than Mexico is. But would we allow Chinese hypersonic, nuke-tipped missiles on the Mexican border? (Don’t answer that till after Biden and handlers are long gone.)
No, we would be fighting. And I’m sure China would be more than happy to fight to the last Mexican.
As for stockpiles of weapons. How does one counter satellite and drone infiltration?
Constantly moving your stuff. Here one day. Somewhere else the next.
All timed to stay under the enemies perceived OODA loop.
No matter what is going on in Russia, Ukraine is out of troops.
We know that because trying to get Russia to give in by firing missiles into Russia is shear desperation.
And since Ukraine doesn’t have the ability to prosecute a ground war anymore. Why not put in the second or third string? You can even let the Norks come play.
All this might make me a Vatnik in your esteem.
But I sure as hell know not one word of truth comes out of this clown-world junk media.
And I know who started and paid for this whole mess.
You might want to check your own sources again.
As for Russia in 5-10 years? Who cares?
Where are we going to be? Probably a lot worse than them.
Were already broke, high on fentanyl, and full of murderous, thieving traitors to the point Joe wants to hide in a bunker in Idaho.
F–k’in Russia is a distraction at this point.
We’ve already been nuked in clown-worlds war on humanity.
Where do you see Ukraine in 5-10 years??
… or the US for that matter…
You have no *reason* to believe that russia is losing 1000/day. You heard it somewhere you believe to be authorative, and made no attempt to verify against objective measures, such as gravestones, etc. It’s not true, and if you cared about truth, you would know that. It’s not that hard to do. Do your homework.
You are using the popular mainstream media caricature of the right. No, virtually nobody who thinks that RUS is winning and in the right thinks that Putin is the second coming or anything like that. We recognize that he is smart, he understand his opponents (us) far batter than US/NATO leadership understands him, and he is staunchly in support of HIS OWN PEOPLE. This compares favorably to the leaders in most western countries, who are observably and obviously not doing things that are good for the actual people of their respective countries (gutting real jobs, mass immigration, the crushing costs of the so-called “green agenda” things, stripping rights of native citizens in favor of foreigners, multiculturalism that makes it a crime to celebrate your own heritage, etc). Recognizing he’s affective and actually supports his own people vs the globalists of ClownWorld should be be the subject of your derision.
Very short version: RUS has a massive amount of its economy involved in actual basic mining, manufacturing, and production; it’s currently thriving and growing, wages are up, per capita income in inflation-adjusted terms is up. Their arty shell production outstrips all of NATO combine, their starting stockpile was deeper, they have millions of NorK shells being shipped in, and it’s largely an arty war. The war is going well enough for them that they have no problem getting volunteers, whereas UKR is inducting ~30k soldiers a month but their army isn’t growing because of casualties and desertions, and the only thing the UKR military is growing is their graveyards (expanded by >400k in the last 3 years). In fact, the average age of soldier in the UKR military is over 42 last reported, and they are press-ganging men up to age 58 last I heard; that’s not something a winning side does. Meanwhile, NATO trained and equipped troops in the UKR army might make splashy advances occasionally, but they are being systematically pushed back. NATO stockpiles are depleted, and many of our wonder-weapons have not proven effective, and we are struggling greatly to try and ramp up production. Tanks are too big and easy to hit (but RUS has many more they can expend than we do, while also producing them faster than we are), and precision-guided items like HIMARS are greatly reduced in effectiveness since RUS has gotten better at jamming the GPS signals they depend on (now only about 10% hit their targets). They have hypersonics we can’t stop, which they have demonstrated are operational, accurate, and effective. To give a single example of our condition, we are primarily a naval power, and yet our shipbuilding capacity is down to a mere 0.05% of world shipbuilding capacity by tonnage, and have just a single shipyard that can handle the nuclear reactors of all our most important ships (carriers and subs), and we can’t even replace our aging fleet with conventional designs at a reasonable rate.
All that said, hard, verifiable numbers for either side are impossible to find; bottom line from my reading is that UKR is losing vast more men, and don’t have nearly the population base to draw from. They are on the wrong side of a brutal attrition war.
I assume the mainstream media lies, because they are shown to do so constantly. I take in a lot of sources, most of which often link to a variety of other sources; to list a few of the more regular initial sources:
https://simplicius76.substack.com/
https://bigserge.substack.com/
https://treeofwoe.substack.com/
https://voxday.net/
https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/
Col Douglas Macgregor (where ever he pops up at).
https://www.youtube.com/@WeebUnionWU
https://www.youtube.com/@Theti
https://www.youtube.com/@DefensePoliticsAsia
https://www.youtube.com/@historylegends
In short: the US and NATO have a critical recruiting crisis, RUS doesn’t. US and NATO have a huge military production crisis, RUS doesn’t. US has long supply lines to help UKR, RUS has short supply lines. RUS military pay and morale are high, in the US / NATO it isn’t. RUS systems have proven more effective than expected, NATO equipment and doctrine have not adapted to the fast-changing battlefield well at all, especially drone warfare.
At the current rate, in ten years RUS will still be proudly Russian and have a strong economy. OTOH, without major course corrections, the US will likely be involved in a civil war (though it’s unlikely to be nearly as nice and neat as the first one, likely more like an urban/rural Spanish CW redux).
If the Russians are doing so well, why haven’t they been able to push the Ukrainians out of Russia? Why are they accepting the North Korean troops?
There’s literally nothing but propaganda from two CIA linked western outlets to support the NorK assertion.
If it’s true, then these must be mythically skilled troops, since we haven’t seen a single Korean corpse anywhere. I mean, the Ukranians are stacking 1000+ a day, gotta have at least one, right?
Here’s step one — realizing that they are lying to you about the Korean troops. Russia denies it, North Korea denies it, and no one has any evidence other than an unsourced news “leak.”
Step two is realizing that is has all been lies from the start — the euromaiden, MH17, the Ghost of Kiev, the “empty” Russian depots, the lack of ammunition, the Russian casualties, the Russian morale, the “sinking” Russian economy, “cope” cages, the 1000+ casualties a day — it’s all lies, top to bottom, because we run social media wars now, not mechanized wars.
It’s the old Soviet joke. Two Russian tank commanders are having breakfast in a Paris cafe. The first one asks the second one, “so who won the air war?” Now, it’s “who won the social media war?”
(only being able to reply 4 deep is a pain)
Two things; typo, should have said “should NOT be the object of your derision.”
Second: RUS is going low and slow to conserve its own troops and keep costs in men, material, PR, and economics manageable; defense is easier /cheaper in all of those than offense. Meanwhile, he’s grinding down a LOT of western money and material, rotating his troops to give them combat experience and adjusting tactics while not wearing them out with continuous deployment. He’s (successfully) bleeding the West white. A report a while back said that Germany had less than 2000 rounds of 155 mm arty ammo left in inventory, including inert training shells. Not “two million,” but two thousand. Moving fast would cost Putin more men, and awaken western leaders from their delusion bubble.
At about 40min in, here, Scott Ritter explains the newly deployed RUS missile system we saw video of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHdmVnfihss
Russia has been backed into a corner by ClownWorld. They are Christian nation facing a largely hostile world bent on destroying them and their unwillingness to bend the knee to the satanist / jewish / globalist / communist / Clown World / New World Order. They are willing to use whatever allies they can get, and if NorK wants to send troops to get some practical field training, he’s happy to get them. Sort of like the Wagner troops using prison volunteers to reduce their sentence for six months as assault troops on the front lines. Did he -have- to do that? No, but it made sense: save non-criminal lives, and reduce the prison population, while re-habbing some of the survivors.
War is always brutal, and the tradeoffs are often between “sucks a lot” and “sucks even more.”
Exactly except there has been a long running debate ever since the Soviets got nukes about whether it is possible to have a nuclear war without blowing up the whole world. I guess there is only one way to find out and I don’t want to. There are certainly scenarios that would
not seem to blow up the world like Indo-Pakistani or Israel-Iran though it would mess up the regions. Or Japan and the Norks. Or perhaps EU-Israel. A sufficient level of threat could make Israel implement the Sampson option. The UK is even more bonkers than the US and might initiate an exchange with Russia. Russia would then obliterate them and since Article 5 is supposed to be defensive only, the US would have no treaty obligation to respond.
MOABs are certainly an option. I have always wondered why the Russians haven’t used one on Davos. Not only the direct effects but the Mother of All Avalanches too.
What Putin is saying is “I wanted to invade and conquer a neighboring country but I failed. Since you wouldn’t allow it and insist on an effective resistance and counter attacks in response I’m going to up the ante and threaten to use Nukes.” If you have noticed Putin has stated he is amenable to “peace talks”….IF Trump is involved AND if he is allowed to keep the land he illegally and illegitimately acquired by force AND if Ukraine is not allowed to join NATO. In other words he doesn’t want to lose and wants the West to give up. Bow to him on this and Russia WILL BE BACK to try and conquer more of Europe in a few years after they rebuild and rearm.
Europe is currently being conquered by the Caliphate. Russia would be a major improvement but why they would want the mess is beyond me.
Force is the only legitimacy needed.
We started the war back in 2013 with the Euromaidan uprising.
We started the war when we encouraged Ukraine to shell Russian cities for eight years, murdering over 40,000 Russian citizens.
We started the war when we encouraged Ukraine to ethnically cleanse Russians.
We started the war when we encouraged Zelenskyy to ban the Orthodox Church.
We started the war when we let the Eastern European countries join NATO, in violation of agreements made with the Soviet Union and Russia. Taking NATO to the doorstep of Russia was by no means a friendly act.
You know you’re on the side of Democratcy when you outlaw thousand year old Christian churches, disappear priests, cancel all elections, ban opposition parties, arrest opposition leaders, murder journalists, torture and execute prisoners, and liquidate entire villages of your own people. All of which Zelenskyy and his regime has not merely done, but bragged about.
I would rate this as a more accurate representation of the situation and how it developed than “Dan” presentation of MSM talking points. He has long-term Russian security interests in mind, and he’s pursuing them effectively at this point.