WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

His closing words: We're coming very dangerously close to a Cuban Missile Crisis moment... except of course that there is no JFK in the White House.

Obviously, there is no JFK in the White House: there is one in the Kremlin. Conversely and unfortunately, there is no Khrushchev in the White House.

That's a wonderful post!

[Hym]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

His closing words: We're coming very dangerously close to a Cuban Missile Crisis moment... except of course that there is no JFK in the White House.

Obviously, there is no JFK in the White House: there is one in the Kremlin. Conversely and unfortunately, there is no Khrushchev in the White House.

That's a wonderful post!

Yes! It is good fortune, inspiring and a blessing to be able to read the insights shared here. Thank You, Michel, Bill, and so many others!

[Spiral]

Apologies if this has already been posted.

[Rizotto]

I agree with several of the above comments that this latest sabotage is part and parcel of the cabal’s depopulation plans. Of course they’ll blame Russia for destroying their own pipeline, knowing very well that this is completely illogical, but they’ll keep insisting on it and most of their EU counterparts will soon sing the same song. The fact that ordinary people don’t believe any of this nonsense is irrelevant to the cabal, because they control governments, weaponry and the media, so they have the means to make and enforce rules and impose their narrative.

There’s a big question though, how will they be able to control intense rebellions from the European people who will face extreme hardships this winter following this sabotage? So far, the cabal’s mode of operation has been gradual increase of chaos, not outright mass shootings of civilians. But this may change as we near the end game. It really looks like they want most of us dead.

The other question is about Poland’s role in all this. Why is Poland so hostile to Russia and Germany? The Soviet regime is long gone and WW2 ended long ago. Why is Poland blocking the Yamal pipeline to Germany? What do the ordinary Polish citizens think of all this?

Here’s a map of Russian pipelines to Europe. Of course the Ukraine route isn’t feasible right now. There doesn’t seem to be good alternatives now that Nordstream has been destroyed.
https://www.planete-energies.com/en/...a-and-caucasia

[Rizotto]

"New energy protest roils EU country
Tens of thousands accused Prague of serving Brussels and Washington instead of Czechia"

https://www.rt.com/news/563683-czech...rgy-sanctions/

[Tintin]

Maria Zakharova live streaming now here, as she's discussing (obviously) the pipeline sabotage:

https://www.ruptly.tv/en/events/2022...eekly-briefing

A summary will appear on the MFA website later on, as usual.

[wegge]

Posted by Rizotto (here)
I agree with several of the above comments that this latest sabotage is part and parcel of the cabal’s depopulation plans. Of course they’ll blame Russia for destroying their own pipeline, knowing very well that this is completely illogical, but they’ll keep insisting on it and most of their EU counterparts will soon sing the same song. The fact that ordinary people don’t believe any of this nonsense is irrelevant to the cabal, because they control governments, weaponry and the media, so they have the means to make and enforce rules and impose their narrative.

There’s a big question though, how will they be able to control intense rebellions from the European people who will face extreme hardships this winter following this sabotage? So far, the cabal’s mode of operation has been gradual increase of chaos, not outright mass shootings of civilians. But this may change as we near the end game. It really looks like they want most of us dead.

The other question is about Poland’s role in all this. Why is Poland so hostile to Russia and Germany? The Soviet regime is long gone and WW2 ended long ago. Why is Poland blocking the Yamal pipeline to Germany? What do the ordinary Polish citizens think of all this?

Here’s a map of Russian pipelines to Europe. Of course the Ukraine route isn’t feasible right now. There doesn’t seem to be good alternatives now that Nordstream has been destroyed.
https://www.planete-energies.com/en/...a-and-caucasia

I've looked back over articles throughout recent years about North Stream 2 (googling "American quotes North Stream 2 2017 (or whichever year), besides americans being critical of it critical experts from Poland were quoted all the time.

[Gwin Ru]

...

... sabotage... who is NOT named?

Well, anyone remembers anything about a certain USS Liberty?

On the other hand, when undetected Chinese subs are able to launch missiles off the coast of California...

Related:

• Zelensky's parents have bought $8 million property in Israel and obtained Israeli citizenship

[Mike Gorman]

Adrian Boke obviously upset the criminals in their staging of the Bucha event, yet another travesty which deeply characterises the illegitimate forces installed in Ukraine, working for NATO and U.S deep state players-what a brave man, my heart goes out to him. Putin is such a strong man, he is fighting the battle of our age, confronting the established order of shameless barbarians. Hold on, this has a long way to go.

[Bob_2011]

Hi Bill,

Yes Forced in a way to stop many key parts of Europe from an all out Nuclear attack from Russia , i see no point in Russia just Nuking Ukraine , as they must expect the US to respond in kind, if the US makes it clear that they will respond in kind then we may avoid this end game of mutually destroyed destruction , now if there is ANY doubt about how the US would respond then Russia may take the risk , i would think the OK to launch a Nuke attack would get out within minutes , that then is the point where the US will be forced to act first to save millions of lives , but if they cant take out the subs which can sit just off shore of their own land then its going to be very messy, i remember as a school kid getting involved in a playground fight , there we stood facing each other with clenched fists raised with the baying crowed of kids shouting hit him , the next thing i new i was on the floor with a bloody nose, i would have won if i hit him first lol .So be second and you may not get up again. So the US may indeed be Forced to act first.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Bob_2011 (here)
Hi Bill,

Yes Forced in a way to stop many key parts of Europe from an all out Nuclear attack from Russia , i see no point in Russia just Nuking Ukraine , as they must expect the US to respond in kind, if the US makes it clear that they will respond in kind then we may avoid this end game of mutually destroyed destruction , now if there is ANY doubt about how the US would respond then Russia may take the risk , i would think the OK to launch a Nuke attack would get out within minutes , that then is the point where the US will be forced to act first to save millions of lives , but if they cant take out the subs which can sit just off shore of their own land then its going to be very messy, i remember as a school kid getting involved in a playground fight , there we stood facing each other with clenched fists raised with the baying crowed of kids shouting hit him , the next thing i new i was on the floor with a bloody nose, i would have won if i hit him first lol .So be second and you may not get up again. So the US may indeed be Forced to act first.

Russia won't use nukes of any kind unless the integrity of their country is seriously threatened.

[Bob_2011]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Bob_2011 (here)
Hi Bill,

Yes Forced in a way to stop many key parts of Europe from an all out Nuclear attack from Russia , i see no point in Russia just Nuking Ukraine , as they must expect the US to respond in kind, if the US makes it clear that they will respond in kind then we may avoid this end game of mutually destroyed destruction , now if there is ANY doubt about how the US would respond then Russia may take the risk , i would think the OK to launch a Nuke attack would get out within minutes , that then is the point where the US will be forced to act first to save millions of lives , but if they cant take out the subs which can sit just off shore of their own land then its going to be very messy, i remember as a school kid getting involved in a playground fight , there we stood facing each other with clenched fists raised with the baying crowed of kids shouting hit him , the next thing i new i was on the floor with a bloody nose, i would have won if i hit him first lol .So be second and you may not get up again. So the US may indeed be Forced to act first.

Russia won't use nukes of any kind unless the integrity of their country is seriously threatened.

Maybe, but then will this new annexed state of affairs be classed as "their" country , im pretty sure Ukraine will threaten that status quo , I just hope Putin is Bluffing

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Bob_2011 (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Bob_2011 (here)
Hi Bill,

Yes Forced in a way to stop many key parts of Europe from an all out Nuclear attack from Russia , i see no point in Russia just Nuking Ukraine , as they must expect the US to respond in kind, if the US makes it clear that they will respond in kind then we may avoid this end game of mutually destroyed destruction , now if there is ANY doubt about how the US would respond then Russia may take the risk , i would think the OK to launch a Nuke attack would get out within minutes , that then is the point where the US will be forced to act first to save millions of lives , but if they cant take out the subs which can sit just off shore of their own land then its going to be very messy, i remember as a school kid getting involved in a playground fight , there we stood facing each other with clenched fists raised with the baying crowed of kids shouting hit him , the next thing i new i was on the floor with a bloody nose, i would have won if i hit him first lol .So be second and you may not get up again. So the US may indeed be Forced to act first.

Russia won't use nukes of any kind unless the integrity of their country is seriously threatened.

Maybe, but then will this new annexed state of affairs be classed as "their" country , im pretty sure Ukraine will threaten that status quo , I just hope Putin is Bluffing

(If I may say!) It seems you may not 100% understand the entire complex situation.

Putin is not bluffing. He will absolutely retaliate with nukes if NATO deploys them first. That's what he promised to do.

You may have been reading or hearing the very wild western media distortions, not what Putin actually said on public record. There's a full transcript earlier on this thread.

Russia can easily deal with any Ukrainian incursions into Donbass, Kherson or Zaporizhia. That's how come they mobilized 300,000 reservists, to strengthen their ability to defend their borders and take the pressure off the [sometimes] slightly less professional Donbass militia, who, very creditably indeed, have been doing most of the ground infantry fighting.

As long as NATO stays out of Ukraine (formally, publicly and visibly) there's no risk of escalation. But it's still possible — especially after the Nord Stream sabotage — that NATO may not stay out of Ukraine, in which all bets are off and the global situation will become more dangerous than at any other point in our lifetimes.

In summary:

It won't be Putin who escalates anything at all. He's smarter and wiser than that. Any major escalation would come from the US and/or NATO. And if that happens, Putin will respond.

[Mashika]

I didn't know Russia had such futuristic advanced tech, good to know! Imagine being able to pass between the US navy in "invisible mode" and do all that stuff unnoticed, by "the most advance army of the world". Then i suppose we should go land on Washington tomorrow?


Welp...

[Mashika]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Russia can easily deal with any Ukrainian incursions into Donbass, Kherson or Zaporizhia. That's how come they mobilized 300,000 reservists, to strengthen their ability to defend their borders and take the pressure off the [sometimes] slightly less professional Donbass militia, who, very creditably indeed, have been doing most of the ground infantry fighting.

This is something that because of the disinformation and constant distortion of reality that the west media has been doing the past months, most people don't get

They assume and don't get that this entire operation has been since almost 9 years ago, a war between Ukraine and Donbass militias, and that Russia is doing a supporting role but is not the one at the front in most cases, and that Ukraine is having a hard time dealing with the Donbass militias, and not the real Russian army.

There is also the case that most of the real Russian army is still in Russia, just sitting there, and only a small part of it was sent to support Donbass.

[ExomatrixTV]

• No, Russia Didn’t Blow Up Their Own Pipeline:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NwHH1RJxx1g

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Bob_2011 (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Bob_2011 (here)
Hi Bill,

Yes Forced in a way to stop many key parts of Europe from an all out Nuclear attack from Russia , i see no point in Russia just Nuking Ukraine , as they must expect the US to respond in kind, if the US makes it clear that they will respond in kind then we may avoid this end game of mutually destroyed destruction , now if there is ANY doubt about how the US would respond then Russia may take the risk , i would think the OK to launch a Nuke attack would get out within minutes , that then is the point where the US will be forced to act first to save millions of lives , but if they cant take out the subs which can sit just off shore of their own land then its going to be very messy, i remember as a school kid getting involved in a playground fight , there we stood facing each other with clenched fists raised with the baying crowed of kids shouting hit him , the next thing i new i was on the floor with a bloody nose, i would have won if i hit him first lol .So be second and you may not get up again. So the US may indeed be Forced to act first.

Russia won't use nukes of any kind unless the integrity of their country is seriously threatened.

Maybe, but then will this new annexed state of affairs be classed as "their" country , im pretty sure Ukraine will threaten that status quo , I just hope Putin is Bluffing

(If I may say!) It seems you may not 100% understand the entire complex situation.

Putin is not bluffing. He will absolutely retaliate with nukes if NATO deploys them first. That's what he promised to do.

You may have been reading or hearing the very wild western media distortions, not what Putin actually said on public record. There's a full transcript earlier on this thread.

Russia can easily deal with any Ukrainian incursions into Donbass, Kherson or Zaporizhia. That's how come they mobilized 300,000 reservists, to strengthen their ability to defend their borders and take the pressure off the [sometimes] slightly less professional Donbass militia, who, very creditably indeed, have been doing most of the ground infantry fighting.

As long as NATO stays out of Ukraine (formally, publicly and visibly) there's no risk of escalation. But it's still possible — especially after the Nord Stream sabotage — that NATO may not stay out of Ukraine, in which all bets are off and the global situation will become more dangerous than at any other point in our lifetimes.

In summary:

It won't be Putin who escalates anything at all. He's smarter and wiser than that. Any major escalation would come from the US and/or NATO. And if that happens, Putin will respond.

~~~

More here, to totally 100% clarify Russia's position on nukes. This is an article by Anatoly Antonov, the Russian ambassador to the US, most certainly stating the Kremlin's position clearly.

• https://nationalinterest.org/feature...ukraine-205077

Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 Over Ukraine?

It is safe to assume that any use of nuclear weapons could quickly lead to an escalation of a local or regional conflict into a global one.

As Henry Kissinger wrote in 2014, “The demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.”

I have commenced my work on this article for two reasons. Firstly, this October will mark sixty years since the Cuban Missile Crisis when the USSR and the United States were on the verge of a nuclear conflict. This is an occasion to look closer at the foreign policy lessons that the two great powers have learned from that dramatic time.

I believe that any American will see eye-to-eye with me that we must not allow the explosive situation of the 1960s to repeat. It is important that not only Russia and the United States, but also other nuclear states, confirmed in a common statement that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.

Secondly, we are witnessing a surge of concern from the international community and U.S. experts about the possibility of a nuclear conflict between Moscow and Washington. This issue has become even more acute in recent days when senior officials of the U.S. administration began sending us direct signals warning against the use of nuclear weapons in the Russian special military operation in Ukraine.

Moreover, threats against us have started to be heard from the official establishment.

Princeton University has even made predictions that millions of Americans and Russians would perish in the exchange of nuclear strikes.

Sometimes it feels like we are returning to the years of McCarthyism in this issue. One hardly can forget former U.S. secretary of defense James Forrestal who jumped out of the window yelling “the Russians are coming.”

The U.S. media is abounding in publications by pseudo-experts who are ignorant of history and misinterpret the current state of affairs. They erroneously compare today’s situation with the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The statements by certain politicians and the media that U.S.-Russian relations are living through an unprecedented crisis may well be accepted. Let me remind you that just a couple of years ago we talked about a difficult stage in the bilateral dialogue. However, no one could have even imagined that it would come to such a perilous point.

Everything created over many years of hard work, including political, economic, cultural, scientific, and educational ties, has been written off to the dustbin of history.

We see a deplorable, deserted picture in arms control. The ABM and INF treaties have sunk into oblivion. The Open Skies Treaty has virtually ceased to exist.

The New START Treaty is approaching the end of its duration and, as we have repeatedly said, is not fully implemented by the American side. The NPT is experiencing serious shocks. No one can foretell what will happen next.

I have to remind readers that all of this is a result of U.S. policy. Let me elaborate on my point. Washington withdrew from the treaties in order to gain security advantages, especially in confronting Russia. It is in a constant search for opportunities to achieve global military dominance.

Over previous decades, the NATO military machine has approached Russia’s borders in several “waves”—where a powerful striking fist was raised over my Motherland. How should we have reacted? We warned our colleagues that such steps were counterproductive, increased the risk of an arms race, and we could not ignore the aggravating threats along the perimeter of the Russian boundaries, especially our western boundaries.

I remember long-hour gatherings at NATO headquarters where I had to participate repeatedly in discussions on the harmfulness of global missile defense, the importance of respecting international commitments on strategic stability, and the danger of deploying shorter- and intermediate-range missiles in Europe. Russian exhortations turned out to be in vain.

The last straw that broke the camel’s back was NATO’s attempt to launch the military-technical exploitation of Ukraine and cultivate in Kiev a regime desiring to wage a bloody war against Russia.

Today our country is accused of all sins. They claim that we have unleashed an armed conflict in Europe. I have to wonder: what did the United States do to ensure the implementation of the Minsk agreements? Why did Washington keep silent for eight years and not pull Kiev up when Ukrainians and Russians were killed in Donbas?!

How could it ignore the terrible tragedy in Odessa when several dozen people were burned alive?! Where were the international humanitarian institutions?! Why did the administration prioritizing human rights allow such crimes?! We have repeatedly asked American politicians these questions. Nothing but beautiful slogans were the answer. Ukraine has continued to be pitted against Russia.

Today it is obvious that the United States is directly involved in the military actions of the Kiev regime. Washington is openly building up the supply of lethal weapons to Ukraine and provides it with intelligence. They jointly plan military operations against the Russian Armed Forces. Ukrainians are being trained to use NATO military hardware in a fight.

It feels like Russia is being tested to see how long it will remain patient and refrain from responding to blatantly adversarial actions and attacks. In fact, Washington is pushing the situation towards a direct confrontation of the major nuclear powers fraught with unpredictable consequences.

U.S. officials continue to escalate the situation, intimidating the American and international public with sham Russian “nuclear threats.” Such rhetoric twists the statements of the Russian leadership.

I would like to stress that there has been no change in the conditions when our country would use nuclear weapons. In this regard, we continue to strictly adhere to the 2014 Military Doctrine and 2020 Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence. Moscow has never mentioned an expansive interpretation of these documents which can be found in the public domain.

We are not threatening anyone. But we confirm that, as President Vladimir Putin said on September 21, Russia is ready to defend its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and our people with all weapon systems we have. What is so aggressive about this statement? What is unacceptable? Would the United States not do the same if faced with an existential threat?

I would like to add that certain American politicians are under a delusion if they think that our readiness to defend our territory does not apply to Crimea or to territories that may become part of Russia on the basis of a free expression of popular will.

I would like to warn American military planners about the fallacy of their assumptions that a limited nuclear conflict is possible. They apparently hope that the United States would be able to take cover behind the ocean if such a conflict happens in Europe with British and French nuclear weapons. I would stress that this is an extremely dangerous “experiment.” It is safe to assume that any use of nuclear weapons could quickly lead to an escalation of a local or regional conflict into a global one.

I want to believe that, despite all the difficulties, we and the Americans have not yet approached a dangerous threshold of falling into the abyss of nuclear conflict. It is important to stop threatening us.

Today, it is difficult to predict how far Washington is ready to go in exacerbating relations with Russia. Will the U.S. ruling circles be able to give up their plans aimed at wearing out our country with the prospect of its dismemberment?

The recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit and the high-level week of the 77th UN General Assembly session have proved that a considerable part of the planet is not satisfied with the world order that was created after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

We are witnessing the majority of the global community trying to find ways to establish an equitable system of international relations which would have neither first- nor second-tier states. We firmly support such a world order based on international law, the UN Charter, and the principle of the indivisibility of security.

[Bill Ryan]

This is only a minute in duration, Col Doug Macgregor talking to Judge Napolitano about who sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines. It takes him just that long to conclude it had to be the US.

(Note: I'd love to hear the full interview, as this is clearly just one small extract. But I don't yet have a link for the rest.)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=EwwZLXSh0BE

Edit to add:

Gwin Ru posted the full 22-minute interview in post #5381 at the top of the next page. Col. Macgregor goes into much more thought and detail, and my one-sentence summary above that he concludes in a minute flat that it had to be the US wasn't exactly correct. There are many aspects to consider that he very correctly points out. The one-minute summary was just the way Napolitano (or his team) edited it.

[Michel Leclerc]

Russia’s policy is clear. Nuclear weapons, even tactical ones, are not necessary to push back the offensive “defensive” systems Nato has established all over Europe. They can use quite sophisticated non-nuclear weapons to achieve that.

There could suddenly appear leaks in the Norway-Poland pipeline for instance, which the Poles could then blame on the Norwegians.

[Ravenlocke]

https://www.rt.com/russia/563762-put...-independence/

Putin recognizes independence of Zaporozhye and Kherson


Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday signed two decrees recognizing the former Ukrainian regions, Kherson and Zaporozhye, as independent sovereign states. The decrees come into force immediately.

“Recognize the state sovereignty and independence” of the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions “effective from the day of signing,” say the two decrees dated and signed September 29. In the documents, the head of state refers to the universally recognized principles and norms of international law, the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, enshrined in the UN Charter.

The move comes on the eve of the official ceremony where the Russian president is expected to sign the treaties on incorporating Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as well as the two Donbass republics, into Russia.

Referendums on joining Russia were held in Zaporozhye and Kherson, as well as in the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) and Lugansk People's Republic (LPR), between September 23 and 27.

In the Kherson region, 87.05% voted in favor of declaring independence and joining the Russian Federation. Zaporozhye Region also supported the idea of splitting from Ukraine and joining Russia, with 93,23% of voters backing it. In the DPR, 99.23% of those who voted were in favor, while LPR showed a slightly lower figure of 98.42%.

Kremlin reveals next step for former Ukrainian regions READ MORE: Kremlin reveals next step for former Ukrainian regions
After Putin signs the treaties on the accession of new regions into Russia, the documents will be submitted to Russia’s Constitutional Court. After that, the State Duma – the lower house of the Russian parliament – will have to ratify the agreements, which will then be sent to the Federal Council, its upper house, for the same procedure.

The Donbass republics as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye may become a part of Russia no sooner than the lawmakers pass a new legislation on their incorporation, and the correspoding law is signed by Putin.

In February 2022, the Kremlin recognized the Donbass republics as independent states, accusing Kiev of failing to implement the Minsk agreements, which were supposed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within Ukraine. Brokered by Germany and France, the protocols were first signed in 2014.

Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing the need to protect Donbass. It also demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join any Western military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked.

During the conflict, Russian forces seized the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. Since then, the local authorities repeatedly mulled the idea of joining Russia, before eventually holding the referendums in September.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

https://www.rt.com/news/563714-erdog...nbass-ukraine/

Erdogan speaks about referendums on joining Russia

Recent referendums in the Donbass republics and two Ukrainian regions on joining Russia are of great concern, and it would be better to “solve this problem diplomatically,” Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told local media on Wednesday.

In an interview with CNN Türk on Wednesday, Erdogan sounded the alarm over the public vote, adding that dialogue would be a preferable option in tackling this issue.

“The decision to hold referendums in some occupied regions of Ukraine is quite worrying... There may be an annexation here,” he said, adding that “if Putin, whom I know, has put something in his head, he will do it.”

Erdogan said that Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky had asked for Türkiye’s diplomatic support on the issue of the referendums. “[He] wants us to convince Putin. I intend to discuss these issues in detail with Putin tomorrow [on Thursday],” he said.

Putin considering talks with Kiev – Turkish FM
Putin considering talks with Kiev – Turkish FM
He also noted that another major issue on the agenda would be the UN- Türkiye-brokered deal which unblocked Ukrainian grain exports via the Black Sea. According to Erdogan, 80% of grain shipments from Ukrainian ports “unfortunately went to rich countries.”

“This has been a serious concern for Putin. We hope that we will be able to send it to poor countries and achieve the result,” he added.

However, on Wednesday, Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov noted that the Russian leader has no talks scheduled with Erdogan.

During the interview, Türkiye's president also stressed that a possible nuclear war would be "catastrophic." "One should not even think about this, let alone talk about it. Solving this issue through diplomacy would be the most appropriate step," he said.

This was an apparent reference to the warning the Russian leader issued to the West last week, saying that those who use nuclear blackmail against Moscow “should know that the wind can turn around.”

Last week, Erdogan claimed that Ukraine and Russia may reach a peace settlement only if Moscow returns to Kiev all the lands that it has captured since the beginning of the military operation in late February.

During the referendums that were held between September 23 and 27, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics along with Kherson Region and part of Zaporozhye Region overwhelmingly voted to join Russia.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

https://www.rt.com/news/563754-us-ru...uction-treaty/

Russia and US seeking to revive key nuclear deal – Moscow

Moscow and Washington are “engaged in a dialogue” with a view to reviving the New START agreement, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told a briefing on Thursday. New START is a key nuclear arms reduction treaty that puts a cap on the number of deployed nuclear warheads, as well as their delivery vehicles.

The two powers are considering the resumption of mutual inspections of deployed nuclear arsenals in particular, which were suspended back in 2020 because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

“The topic of resuming them is being considered,” Zakharova told journalists, adding that the sides are now discussing ways that would allow them to “return to the full implementation of the treaty in this regard.”

Russia and the US might also hold an in-person meeting of the bilateral advisory commission, the spokeswoman said, adding that such possibilities are “being studied.” The commission is currently holding a remote session as its members discuss “organizational and technical issues that need to be addressed,” she added.

Russia tells US to ‘back off’ its ‘aggressive’ course
Russia tells US to ‘back off’ its ‘aggressive’ course
According to Zakharova, “anti-Russian” actions by the US and its allies have made even some “routine” procedures envisioned by the treaty difficult. The spokeswoman denounced Washington’s stance on some issues as “unconstructive” and said that Moscow would seek to “resolve all the issues of concern” on an equal footing and in line with Russian national interests.

The 2010 New START treaty remains virtually the only active arms-control deal between the two nuclear powers since America’s unilateral withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in 2019.

The deal was due to expire in early 2021 and was almost on the brink of collapse when Russian President Vladimir Putin and the US President Joe Biden agreed to extend it for five years in January 2021. The agreement was salvaged at the last minute after previous talks stalled between Moscow and Washington under Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump.

The deal limits the number of nuclear warheads that the US and Russia can possess to 1,550 each. It also says that each side must have no more than 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and nuclear bombers. The total number of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles must not exceed 800.

The news comes as relations between Moscow and Washington have sunk to historic lows amid Russia’s ongoing military action in Ukraine, which has seen the US support Kiev with military and financial aid.