+ Reply to Thread
Page 309 of 1094 FirstFirst 1 209 259 299 309 319 359 409 809 1094 LastLast
Results 6,161 to 6,180 of 21874

Thread: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

  1. Link to Post #6161
    Honored, Retired Member. Hervé passed on 13 November 2024.
    Join Date
    3rd July 2018
    Posts
    4,694
    Thanks
    46,568
    Thanked 35,380 times in 4,672 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    ...

    ... meanwhile... what/who we don't hear about: Iran:

    10/26/2022 Merritt Medical Hour: Dr. Lee Merritt ft. Anni Cyrus 50:47


    BrighteonTV
    Published 20 hours ago


  2. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Gwin Ru For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), ExomatrixTV (28th October 2022), Johnnycomelately (28th October 2022), Pam (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Richter (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Tigger (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  3. Link to Post #6162
    Netherlands Avalon Member
    Join Date
    9th January 2020
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Language
    Dutch
    Posts
    942
    Thanks
    2,347
    Thanked 5,971 times in 920 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    Meduza
    Banned in Russia, every day Meduza brings you the most important news and feature stories from hundreds of sources in Russia & across the former Soviet Union. Our team includes some of Russia’s top professionals in news & reporting. We value our independence and strive to be a reliable, trusted outlet for verified, unbiased information about Russia & the former Soviet Union, as well as a source for sharp insights about one of the world’s most enigmatic regions.

    https://meduza.io/en
    You Can't Talk and Listen at the Same Time

  4. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Richter For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), David Trd1 (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  5. Link to Post #6163
    Switzerland Avalon Member Helvetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th March 2010
    Posts
    6,000
    Thanks
    640
    Thanked 30,884 times in 5,631 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    Joseph P. Farrell | News and Views from the Nefarium | Oct. 27, 2022

    Source: gizadeathstar.com



    That dirty bomb scenario: a desperate act by some criminally insane people...

    Article:
    Two Ukrainian Firms Caught Building Dirty Bomb – Media Blackout
    "Earth is currently restricted today for normal development of timeline progress. With us telling you everything would change everything."

    Website: Information Machine

  6. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Helvetic For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), David Trd1 (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), lisalu (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), sunflower (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  7. Link to Post #6164
    United States Avalon Member DNA's Avatar
    Join Date
    8th May 2011
    Location
    S.W. Missouri
    Language
    English
    Age
    52
    Posts
    4,816
    Thanks
    36,141
    Thanked 30,204 times in 4,529 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    Wow
    This zero hedge article states that Finland is allowing NATO to arm them with nukes.
    This is unnecessary antagonism if you ask me.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitic...-border-russia

  8. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to DNA For This Post:

    avid (28th October 2022), Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), ExomatrixTV (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Kryztian (28th October 2022), Pam (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022), XelNaga (28th October 2022)

  9. Link to Post #6165
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    38,062
    Thanks
    268,870
    Thanked 508,340 times in 36,605 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    A major speech by Putin, at the Valdai International Discussion Club meeting yesterday. I think it's important to post it in full to ensure that no-one takes any of this out of context, as is so often what happens.

    It's all about the coming (and inevitable, and welcome) multipolar world.

    (One might speculate how Joe Biden might cope with a very long and intricate speech like this [mis-] read from a teleprompter. )
    ~~~

    The theme of this year's forum is A Post-Hegemonic World: Justice and Security for Everyone. The four day-long meeting brought together 111 experts, politicians, diplomats and economists from Russia and 40 foreign countries, including Afghanistan, Brazil, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, South Africa, Turkiye, the United States, and Uzbekistan, to name a few.


    Moderator of the Valdai Club’s plenary session Fyodor Lukyanov: Good afternoon, Mr President,

    We look forward to seeing you every year, but this year, perhaps, we were more impatient than usual, since there are lots of issues to discuss.

    President of Russia Vladimir Putin: I suppose so, yes.

    Fyodor Lukyanov: The forum mainly focused on matters related to the international order, such as how the world is changing and, most importantly, who, in fact, is at the helm of the world, who runs it, and whether the world is amenable to being run at all.

    However, we are discussing this as observers, but you have power, so please share your thoughts with us.

    Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

    Ladies and gentlemen, friends,

    I had a chance to get a sense of what you discussed here during the last few days. It was an interesting and substantive discussion. I hope you do not regret coming to Russia and communicating with each other.

    I am happy to see you all.

    We have used the Valdai Club platform to discuss, more than once, the major and serious shifts that have already taken place and are taking place around the world, the risks posed by the degradation of global institutions, the erosion of collective security principles and the substitution of “rules” for international law. I was tempted to say “we are clear about who came up with these rules,” but, perhaps, that would not be an accurate statement. We have no idea whatsoever who made these rules up, what these rules are based on, or what is contained inside these rules.

    It looks like we are witnessing an attempt to enforce just one rule whereby those in power – we were talking about power, and I am now talking about global power – could live without following any rules at all and could get away with anything. These are the rules that we hear them constantly, as people say, harping on, that is, talking about them incessantly.

    The Valdai discussions are important because a variety of assessments and forecasts can be heard here. Life always shows how accurate they were, since life is the sternest and the most objective teacher. So, life shows how accurate our previous years’ projections were.

    Alas, events continue to follow a negative scenario, which we have discussed more than once during our previous meetings. Moreover, they have morphed into a major system-wide crisis that impacted, in addition to the military-political sphere, the economic and humanitarian spheres as well.

    The so-called West which is, of course, a theoretical construct since it is not united and clearly is a highly complex conglomerate, but I will still say that the West has taken a number of steps in recent years and especially in recent months that are designed to escalate the situation. As a matter of fact, they always seek to aggravate matters, which is nothing new, either. This includes the stoking of war in Ukraine, the provocations around Taiwan, and the destabilisation of the global food and energy markets. To be sure, the latter was, of course, not done on purpose, there is no doubt about it.

    The destabilisation of the energy market resulted from a number of systemic missteps made by the Western authorities that I mentioned above. As we can see now, the situation was further aggravated by the destruction of the pan-European gas pipelines. This is something otherworldly altogether, but we are nevertheless witnessing these sad developments.

    Global power is exactly what the so-called West has at stake in its game. But this game is certainly dangerous, bloody and, I would say, dirty. It denies the sovereignty of countries and peoples, their identity and uniqueness, and tramples upon other states’ interests. In any case, even if denial is the not the word used, they are doing it in real life. No one, except those who create these rules I have mentioned is entitled to retain their identity: everyone else must comply with these rules.

    In this regard, let me remind you of Russia's proposals to our Western partners to build confidence and a collective security system. They were once again tossed in December 2021.

    However, sitting things out can hardly work in the modern world. He who sows the wind will reap the whirlwind, as the saying goes. The crisis has indeed taken on a global dimension and has impacted everyone. There can be no illusions about this.

    Humankind is at a fork in the road: either keep accumulating problems and eventually get crushed under their weight, or work together to find solutions – even imperfect ones, as long as they work – that can make our world a more stable and safer place.

    You know, I have always believed in the power of common sense. Therefore, I am convinced that sooner or later both the new centres of the multipolar international order and the West will have to start a dialogue on an equal footing about a common future for us all, and the sooner the better, of course. In this regard, I will highlight some of the most important aspects for all of us.

    Current developments have overshadowed environmental issues. Strange as it may seem, this is what I would like to speak about first today. Climate change no longer tops the agenda. But that fundamental challenge has not gone away, it is still with us, and it is growing.

    The loss of biodiversity is one of the most dangerous consequences of disrupting the environmental balance. This brings me to the key point all of us have gathered here for. Is it not equally important to maintain cultural, social, political and civilisational diversity?

    At the same time, the smoothing out and erasure of all and any differences is essentially what the modern West is all about. What stands behind this? First of all, it is the decaying creative potential of the West and a desire to restrain and block the free development of other civilisations.

    There is also an openly mercantile interest, of course. By imposing their values, consumption habits and standardisation on others, our opponents – I will be careful with words – are trying to expand markets for their products. The goal on this track is, ultimately, very primitive. It is notable that the West proclaims the universal value of its culture and worldview. Even if they do not say so openly, which they actually often do, they behave as if this is so, that it is a fact of life, and the policy they pursue is designed to show that these values must be unconditionally accepted by all other members of the international community.

    I would like to quote from Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s famous Harvard Commencement Address delivered in 1978. He said that typical of the West is “a continuous blindness of superiority”– and it continues to this day – which “upholds the belief that vast regions everywhere on our planet should develop and mature to the level of present-day Western systems.” He said this in 1978. Nothing has changed.

    Over the nearly 50 years since then, the blindness about which Solzhenitsyn spoke and which is openly racist and neocolonial, has acquired especially distorted forms, in particular, after the emergence of the so-called unipolar world. What am I referring to? Belief in one’s infallibility is very dangerous; it is only one step away from the desire of the infallible to destroy those they do not like, or as they say, to cancel them. Just think about the meaning of this word.

    Even at the very peak of the Cold War, the peak of the confrontation of the two systems, ideologies and military rivalry, it did not occur to anyone to deny the very existence of the culture, art, and science of other peoples, their opponents. It did not even occur to anyone. Yes, certain restrictions were imposed on contacts in education, science, culture, and, unfortunately, sports. But nonetheless, both the Soviet and American leaders understood that it was necessary to treat the humanitarian area tactfully, studying and respecting your rival, and sometimes even borrowing from them in order to retain a foundation for sound, productive relations at least for the future.

    And what is happening now? At one time, the Nazis reached the point of burning books, and now the Western “guardians of liberalism and progress” have reached the point of banning Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky. The so-called “cancel culture” and in reality – as we said many times – the real cancellation of culture is eradicating everything that is alive and creative and stifles free thought in all areas, be it economics, politics or culture.

    Today, liberal ideology itself has changed beyond recognition. If initially, classic liberalism was understood to mean the freedom of every person to do and say as they pleased, in the 20th century the liberals started saying that the so-called open society had enemies and that the freedom of these enemies could and should be restricted if not cancelled. It has reached the absurd point where any alternative opinion is declared subversive propaganda and a threat to democracy.

    Whatever comes from Russia is all branded as “Kremlin intrigues.” But look at yourselves. Are we really so all-powerful? Any criticism of our opponents – any – is perceived as “Kremlin intrigues,” “the hand of the Kremlin.” This is insane. What have you sunk to? Use your brain, at least, say something more interesting, lay out your viewpoint conceptually. You cannot blame everything on the Kremlin’s scheming.

    Fyodor Dostoyevsky prophetically foretold all this back in the 19th century. One of the characters of his novel Demons, the nihilist Shigalev, described the bright future he imagined in the following way: “Emerging from boundless freedom, I conclude with boundless despotism.” This is what our Western opponents have come to. Another character of the novel, Pyotr Verkhovensky echoes him, talking about the need for universal treason, reporting and spying, and claiming that society does not need talents or greater abilities: “Cicero’s tongue is cut out, Copernicus has his eyes gouged out and Shakespeare is stoned.” This is what our Western opponents are arriving at. What is this if not Western cancel culture?

    These were great thinkers and, frankly, I am grateful to my aides for finding these quotes.

    What can one say to this? History will certainly put everything in its place and will know whom to cancel, and it will definitely not be the greatest works of universally recognised geniuses of world culture, but those who have for some reason decided that they have the right to use world culture as they see fit. Their self-regard really knows no bounds. No one will even remember their names in a few years. But Dostoevsky will live on, as will Tchaikovsky, Pushkin, no matter how much they would have liked the opposite.

    Standardisation, financial and technological monopoly, the erasure of all differences is what underlies the Western model of globalisation, which is neocolonial in nature. Their goal was clear – to establish the unconditional dominance of the West in the global economy and politics. To do that, the West put at its service the entire planet’s natural and financial resources, as well as all intellectual, human and economic capabilities, while alleging it was a natural feature of the so-called new global interdependence.

    Here I would like to recall another Russian philosopher, Alexander Zinoviev, whose birth centenary we will celebrate on October 29. More than 20 years ago, he said that Western civilisation needed the entire planet as a medium of existence and all the resources of humanity to survive at the level it had reached. That is what they want, that is exactly how it is.

    Moreover, the West initially secured itself a huge head start in that system because it had developed the principles and mechanisms – the same as today’s rules they keep talking about, which remain an incomprehensible black hole because no one really knows what they are. But as soon as non-western countries began to derive some benefits from globalisation, above all, the large nations in Asia, the West immediately changed or fully abolished many of those rules. And the so-called sacred principles of free trade, economic openness, equal competition, even property rights were suddenly forgotten, completely. They change the rules on the go, on the spot wherever they see an opportunity for themselves.

    Here is another example of the substitution of concepts and meanings. For many years, Western ideologists and politicians have been telling the world there was no alternative to democracy. Admittedly, they meant the Western-style, the so-called liberal model of democracy. They arrogantly rejected all other variants and forms of government by the people and, I want to emphasise this, did so contemptuously and disdainfully. This manner has been taking shape since colonial times, as if everyone were second-rate, while they were exceptional. It has been going on for centuries and continues to this day.

    So currently, an overwhelming majority of the international community is demanding democracy in international affairs and rejecting all forms of authoritarian dictate by individual countries or groups of countries. What is this if not the direct application of democratic principles to international relations?

    What stance has the “civilised” West adopted? If you are democrats, you are supposed to welcome the natural desire for freedom expressed by billions of people, but no. The West is calling it undermining the liberal rules-based order. It is resorting to economic and trade wars, sanctions, boycotts and colour revolutions, and preparing and carrying out all sorts of coups.

    One of them led to tragic consequences in Ukraine in 2014. They supported it and even specified the amount of money they had spent on this coup. They have the cheek to act as they please and have no scruples about anything they do. They killed Soleimani, an Iranian general. You can think whatever you want about Soleimani, but he was a foreign state official. They killed him in a third country and assumed responsibility. What is that supposed to mean, for crying out loud? What kind of world are we living in?

    As is customary, Washington continues to refer to the current international order as liberal American-style, but in fact, this notorious “order” is multiplying chaos every day and, I might even add, is becoming increasingly intolerant even towards the Western countries and their attempts to act independently. Everything is nipped in the bud, and they do not even hesitate to impose sanctions on their allies, who lower their heads in acquiescence.

    For example, the Hungarian MPs’ July proposals to codify the commitment to European Christian values and culture in the Treaty on European Union were taken not even as an affront, but as an outright and hostile act of sabotage. What is that? What does it mean? Indeed, some people may like it, some not.

    Over a thousand years, Russia has developed a unique culture of interaction between all world religions. There is no need to cancel anything, be it Christian values, Islamic values or Jewish values. We have other world religions as well. All you need to do is respect each other. In a number of our regions – I just know this firsthand – people celebrate Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and Jewish holidays together, and they enjoy doing so as they congratulate each other and are happy for each other.

    But not here. Why not? At least, they could discuss it. Amazing.

    Without exaggeration, this is not even a systemic, but a doctrinal crisis of the neoliberal American-style model of international order. They have no ideas for progress and positive development. They simply have nothing to offer the world, except perpetuating their dominance.

    I am convinced that real democracy in a multipolar world is primarily about the ability of any nation – I emphasise – any society or any civilisation to follow its own path and organise its own socio-political system. If the United States or the EU countries enjoy this right, then the countries of Asia, the Islamic states, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf, and countries on other continents certainly have this right as well. Of course, our country, Russia, also has this right, and no one will ever be able to tell our people what kind of society we should be building and what principles should underlie it.

    A direct threat to the political, economic and ideological monopoly of the West lies in the fact that the world can come up with alternative social models that are more effective; I want to emphasise this, more effective today, brighter and more appealing than the ones that currently exist. These models will definitely come about. This is inevitable. By the way, US political scientists and analysts also write about this. Truthfully, their government is not listening to what they say, although it cannot avoid seeing these concepts in political science magazines and mentioned in discussions.

    Development should rely on a dialogue between civilisations and spiritual and moral values. Indeed, understanding what humans and their nature are all about varies across civilisations, but this difference is often superficial, and everyone recognises the ultimate dignity and spiritual essence of people. A common foundation on which we can and must build our future is critically important.

    Here is something I would like to emphasise. Traditional values are not a rigid set of postulates that everyone must adhere to, of course not. The difference from the so-called neo-liberal values is that they are unique in each particular instance, because they stem from the traditions of a particular society, its culture and historical background. This is why traditional values cannot be imposed on anyone. They must simply be respected and everything that every nation has been choosing for itself over centuries must he handled with care.

    This is how we understand traditional values, and the majority of humanity share and accept our approach. This is understandable, because the traditional societies of the East, Latin America, Africa, and Eurasia form the basis of world civilisation.

    Respect for the ways and customs of peoples and civilisations is in everyone’s interest. In fact, this is also in the interest of the “West,” which is quickly becoming a minority in the international arena as it loses its dominance. Of course, the Western minority’s right to its own cultural identity – I want to emphasise this – must be ensured and respected, but, importantly, on an equal footing with the rights of every other nation.

    If the Western elites believe they can have their people and their societies embrace what I believe are strange and trendy ideas like dozens of genders or gay pride parades, so be it. Let them do as they please. But they certainly have no right to tell others to follow in their steps.

    We see the complicated demographic, political and social processes taking place in Western countries. This is, of course, their own business. Russia does not interfere in such matters and has no intention of doing so. Unlike the West, we mind our own business. But we are hoping that pragmatism will triumph and Russia’s dialogue with the genuine, traditional West, as well as with other coequal development centres, will become a major contribution to the construction of a multipolar world order.

    I will add that multipolarity is a real and, actually, the only chance for Europe to restore its political and economic identity. To tell the truth – and this idea is expressed explicitly in Europe today – Europe’s legal capacity is very limited. I tried to put it mildly not to offend anyone.

    The world is diverse by nature and Western attempts to squeeze everyone into the same pattern are clearly doomed. Nothing will come out of them.

    The conceited aspiration to achieve global supremacy and, essentially, to dictate or preserve leadership by dictate is really reducing the international prestige of the leaders of the Western world, including the United States, and increasing mistrust in their ability to negotiate in general. They say one thing today and another tomorrow; they sign documents and renounce them, they do what they want. There is no stability in anything. How documents are signed, what was discussed, what can we hope for – all this is completely unclear.

    Previously, only a few countries dared argue with America and it looked almost sensational, whereas now it has become routine for all manner of states to reject Washington’s unfounded demands despite its continued attempts to exert pressure on everyone. This is a mistaken policy that leads nowhere. But let them, this is also their choice.

    I am convinced that the nations of the world will not shut their eyes to a policy of coercion that has discredited itself. Every time the West will have to pay a higher price for its attempts to preserve its hegemony. If I were a Western elite, I would seriously ponder this prospect. As I said, some political scientists and politicians in the United States are already thinking about it.

    In the current conditions of intense conflict, I will be direct about certain things. As an independent and distinctive civilization, Russia has never considered and does not consider itself an enemy of the West. Americophobia, Anglophobia, Francophobia, and Germanophobia are the same forms of racism as Russophobia or anti-Semitism, and, incidentally, xenophobia in all its guises.

    It is simply necessary to understand clearly that, as I have already said before, two Wests – at least two and maybe more but two at least – the West of traditional, primarily Christian values, freedom, patriotism, great culture and now Islamic values as well – a substantial part of the population in many Western countries follows Islam. This West is close to us in something. We share with it common, even ancient roots. But there is also a different West – aggressive, cosmopolitan, and neocolonial. It is acting as a tool of neoliberal elites. Naturally, Russia will never reconcile itself to the dictates of this West.

    In 2000, after I was elected President, I will always remember what I faced: I will remember the price we paid for destroying the den of terrorism in the North Caucasus, which the West almost openly supported at the time. We are all adults here; most of you present in this hall understand what I am talking about. We know that this is exactly what happened in practice: financial, political and information support. We have all lived through it.

    What is more, not only did the West actively support terrorists on Russian territory, but in many ways it nurtured this threat. We know this. Nevertheless, after the situation had stabilised, when the main terrorist gangs had been defeated, including thanks to the bravery of the Chechen people, we decided not to turn back, not to play the offended, but to move forward, to build relations even with those who actually acted against us, to establish and develop relations with all who wanted them, based on mutual benefit and respect for one another.

    We thought it was in everyone’s interest. Russia, thank God, had survived all the difficulties of that time, stood firm, grew stronger, was able to cope with internal and external terrorism, its economy was preserved, it began to develop, and its defence capability began to improve. We tried to build up relations with the leading countries of the West and with NATO. The message was the same: let us stop being enemies, let us live together as friends, let us engage in dialogue, let us build trust, and, hence, peace. We were absolutely sincere, I want to emphasise that. We clearly understood the complexity of this rapprochement, but we agreed to it.

    What did we get in response? In short, we got a ”no“ in all the main areas of possible cooperation. We received an ever-increasing pressure on us and hotbeds of tension near our borders. And what, may I ask, is the purpose of this pressure? What is it? Is it just to practice? Of course not. The goal was to make Russia more vulnerable. The purpose is to turn Russia into a tool to achieve their own geopolitical goals.

    As a matter of fact, this is a universal rule: they try to turn everyone into a tool, in order to use these tools for their own purposes. And those who do not yield to this pressure, who do not want to be such a tool are sanctioned: all sorts of economic restrictions are carried out against them and in relation of them, coups are prepared or where possible carried out and so on. And in the end, if nothing at all can be done, the aim is the same: to destroy them, to wipe them off the political map. But it has not and will never be possible to draft and implement such a scenario with respect to Russia.

    What else can I add? Russia is not challenging the Western elites. Russia is simply upholding its right to exist and to develop freely. Importantly, we will not become a new hegemon ourselves. Russia is not suggesting replacing a unipolar world with a bipolar, tripolar or other dominating order, or replacing Western domination with domination from the East, North or South. This would inevitably lead to another impasse.

    At this point, I would like to cite the words of the great Russian philosopher Nikolai Danilevsky. He believed that progress did not consist of everyone going in the same direction, as some of our opponents seem to want. This would only result in progress coming to a halt, Danilevsky said. Progress lies in “walking the field that represents humanity’s historical activity, walking in all directions,” he said, adding that no civilisation can take pride in being the height of development.

    I am convinced that dictatorship can only be countered through free development of countries and peoples; the degradation of the individual can be set off by the love of a person as a creator; primitive simplification and prohibition can be replaced with the flourishing complexity of culture and tradition.

    The significance of today’s historical moment lies in the opportunities for everyone’s democratic and distinct development path, which is opening up before all civilisations, states and integration associations. We believe above all that the new world order must be based on law and right, and must be free, distinctive and fair.

    The world economy and trade also need to become fairer and more open. Russia considers the creation of new international financial platforms inevitable; this includes international transactions. These platforms should be above national jurisdictions. They should be secure, depoliticized and automated and should not depend on any single control centre. Is it possible to do this or not? Of course it is possible. This will require a lot of effort. Many countries will have to pool their efforts, but it is possible.

    This rules out the possibility of abuse in a new global financial infrastructure. It would make it possible to conduct effective, beneficial and secure international transactions without the dollar or any of the so-called reserve currencies. This is all the more important, now that the dollar is being used as a weapon; the United States, and the West in general, have discredited the institution of international financial reserves. First, they devalued it with inflation in the dollar and euro zones and then they took our gold-and-currency reserves.

    The transition to transactions in national currencies will quickly gain momentum. This is inevitable. Of course, it depends on the status of the issuers of these currencies and the state of their economies, but they will be growing stronger, and these transactions are bound to gradually prevail over the others. Such is the logic of a sovereign economic and financial policy in a multipolar world.

    Furthermore, new global development centres are already using unmatched technology and research in various fields and can successfully compete with Western transnational companies in many areas.

    Clearly, we have a common and very pragmatic interest in free and open scientific and technological exchange. United, we stand to win more than if we act separately. The majority should benefit from these exchanges, not individual super-rich corporations.

    How are things going today? If the West is selling medicines or crop seeds to other countries, it tells them to kill their national pharmaceutical industries and selection. In fact, it all comes down to this: its machine tool and equipment supplies destroy the local engineering industry. I realised this back when I served as Prime Minister. Once you open your market to a certain product group, the local manufacturer instantly goes belly up and it is almost impossible for him to raise his head. That’s how they build relationships. That’s how they take over markets and resources, and countries lose their technological and scientific potential. This is not progress; it is enslavement and reducing economies to primitive levels.

    Technological development should not increase global inequality, but rather reduce it. This is how Russia has traditionally implemented its foreign technology policy. For example, when we build nuclear power plants in other countries, we create competence centres and train local personnel. We create an industry. We don’t just build a plant, we create an entire industry. In fact, we give other countries a chance to break new ground in their scientific and technological development, reduce inequality, and bring their energy sector to new levels of efficiency and environmental friendliness.

    Let me emphasise again that sovereignty and a unique path of development in no way mean isolation or autarky. On the contrary, they are about energetic and mutually beneficial cooperation based on the principles of fairness and equality.

    If liberal globalisation is about depersonalising and imposing the Western model on the entire world, integration is, in contrast, about tapping the potential of each civilisation for everyone to benefit. If globalism is dictate – which is what it comes down to eventually, – integration is a team effort to develop common strategies that everyone can benefit from.

    In this regard, Russia believes it is important to make wider use of mechanisms for creating large spaces that rely on interaction between neighbouring countries, whose economies and social systems, as well as resource bases and infrastructure, complement each other. In fact, these large spaces form the economic basis of a multipolar world order. Their dialogue gives rise to genuine unity in humanity, which is much more complex, unique and multidimensional than the simplistic ideas professed by some Western masterminds.

    Unity among humankind cannot be created by issuing commands such as “do as I do” or “be like us.” It is created with consideration for everyone’s opinion and with a careful approach to the identity of every society and every nation. This is the principle that can underlie long-term cooperation in a multipolar world.

    In this regard, it may be worth revising the structure of the United Nations, including its Security Council, to better reflect the world’s diversity. After all, much more will depend on Asia, Africa, and Latin America in tomorrow’s world than is commonly believed today, and this increase in their influence is undoubtedly a positive development.

    Let me recall that the Western civilisation is not the only one even in our common Eurasian space. Moreover, the majority of the population is concentrated in the east of Eurasia, where the centres of the oldest human civilisations emerged.

    The value and importance of Eurasia lies in the fact that it represents a self-sufficient complex possessing huge resources of all kinds and tremendous opportunities. The more we work on increasing the connectivity of Eurasia and creating new ways and forms of cooperation, the more impressive achievements we make.

    The successful performance of the Eurasian Economic Union, the fast growth of the authority and prestige of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the large-scale One Belt, One Road initiatives, plans for multilateral cooperation in building the North-South transport corridor and many other projects, are the beginning of a new era, new stage in the development of Eurasia. I am confident of this. Integration projects there do not contradict but supplement each other – of course, if they are carried out by neighbouring countries in their own interests rather than introduced by outside forces with the aim of splitting the Eurasian space and turning it into a zone of bloc confrontation.

    Europe, the Western extremity of the Greater Eurasia could also become its natural part. But many of its leaders are hampered by the conviction that the Europeans are superior to others, that it is beneath them to take part as equals in undertakings with others. This arrogance prevents them from seeing that they have themselves become a foreign periphery and actually turned into vassals, often without the right to vote.

    Colleagues,

    The collapse of the Soviet Union upset the equilibrium of the geopolitical forces. The West felt as a winner and declared a unipolar world arrangement, in which only its will, culture and interests had the right to exist.

    Now this historical period of boundless Western domination in world affairs is coming to an end. The unipolar world is being relegated into the past. We are at a historical crossroads. We are in for probably the most dangerous, unpredictable and at the same time most important decade since the end of World War II. The West is unable to rule humanity single-handedly and the majority of nations no longer want to put up with this. This is the main contradiction of the new era. To cite a classic, this is a revolutionary situation to some extent – the elites cannot and the people do not want to live like that any longer.

    This state of affairs is fraught with global conflicts or a whole chain of conflicts, which poses a threat to humanity, including the West itself. Today’s main historical task is to resolve this contradiction in a way that is constructive and positive.

    The change of eras is a painful albeit natural and inevitable process. A future world arrangement is taking shape before our eyes. In this world arrangement, we must listen to everyone, consider every opinion, every nation, society, culture and every system of world outlooks, ideas and religious concepts, without imposing a single truth on anyone. Only on this foundation, understanding our responsibility for the destinies of nations and our planet, shall we create a symphony of human civilisation.

    At this point, I would like to finish my remarks with expressing gratitude for the patience that you displayed while listening to them.

    Thank you very much.
    Last edited by Bill Ryan; 28th October 2022 at 10:55.

  10. The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Alecs (28th October 2022), atman (28th October 2022), avid (28th October 2022), Catseye (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Harmony (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), kudzy (28th October 2022), leavesoftrees (29th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), RunningDeer (2nd November 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022), Vince (28th October 2022), Yoda (28th October 2022)

  11. Link to Post #6166
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    38,062
    Thanks
    268,870
    Thanked 508,340 times in 36,605 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    Interesting (and probably fairly accurate) comments in the western media about Putin's speech above.

    https://t.me/intelslava/40180


  12. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Alecs (28th October 2022), atman (28th October 2022), avid (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), kudzy (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022), Yoda (28th October 2022)

  13. Link to Post #6167
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    55
    Posts
    7,469
    Thanks
    84,473
    Thanked 65,875 times in 7,436 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    A new report from Maria Dubovikova and colleagues recently published.

    Source: IMEMO

    Link to PDF: https://www.imemo.ru/files/File/en/n...ng26102022.pdf

    Nuclear Factor in the Ukrainian Conflict (IMEMO Analytical Report)

    Speculation about the likelihood of Russia using tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) in Ukraine has been going on since the start of a special military operation (SMO) in February 2022. As of late October 2022, the intensity of such speculation has been steadily increasing in both the Western and Russian media. There is a possibility that American, European and Ukrainian officials, politicians and experts accuse the Russian Federation of preparing to use TNWs not only for anti-Russian propaganda purposes, but also as part of information and psychological preparation for provocations, including the use of fissile materials[1].

    Public judgments about even the hypothetical possibility of the use of TNWs in Ukraine are periodically heard even in Russian mass media and social media. The nature and content of such statements indicate, at a minimum, the irresponsibility and unprofessionalism of those who make them, or may indicate deliberate attempts to discredit the Russian armed forces, state authorities, and the principles of strategic planning in the field of national security of the Russian Federation.

    The IMEMO specialists believe it is necessary to present a realistic assessment of such a scenario in the face of the Ukrainian conflict, based on an analysis of Russian military doctrine regarding the conditions and principles of nuclear weapons use.

    1. On the Public Declaration of Nuclear Intentions

    Open strategic planning documents and statements by top officials are not the only, but an important part of nuclear deterrence policy, designed to influence the behavior of potential adversaries by communicating to them the state's views on nuclear weapons (NWs). In recent years the Russian leadership has promulgated fairly detailed definitions of the possible circumstances in which NWs might be used.

    Western politicians, experts, and the media constantly accuse Russian officials of "playing the nuclear card," including in connection with the Ukrainian crisis. However, the actual statements by the President of Russia, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defense, and other representatives of state authorities over the past few years have demonstrated a desire to clearly define the conditions for the use of nuclear weapons and to make the Russian position on this issue crystal clear. In their comments on the issue, the Russian leadership has repeatedly made it clear that Russia's use of nuclear weapons implies primarily not a first, but a reciprocal action on its part. At the same time, the rhetoric of Western countries constantly shifts accents and distorts meanings when interpreting the speeches of Russian officials. The basic doctrinal principles of nuclear deterrence, formulated in relation to unfriendly nuclear powers and possible threats from their side, primarily nuclear, are transferred to the conflict in Ukraine, where these countries are not directly militarily involved, providing only military assistance to the Ukrainian armed forces.

    Russian President Vladimir V. Putin's October 18, 2018 speech at the Valdai Discussion Club made a strong impression on a broad Western and Russian audience: "We as martyrs would go to paradise while they will simply perish". But much more significant for professionals was the President's explanation made at the same time concerning the basic approach to the use of nuclear weapons: "There is no provision for a pre-emptive strike in our nuclear weapons doctrine. Our concept is based on a reciprocal counter strike... this means that we are prepared and will use nuclear weapons only when we know for certain that some potential aggressor is attacking Russia, our territory… Of course, this amounts to a global catastrophe but I would like to repeat that we cannot be the initiators of such a catastrophe because we have no provision for a pre-emptive strike" [2]

    The statements of Russian President V.V. Putin after the start of the SMO do not go beyond this repeatedly confirmed logic. Speaking on September 21, 2022 in connection with the announcement of partial mobilization, the President, referring to the threat of the use of conventional and nuclear weapons against Russia, said: "In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us"[3]. In his speech on September 30, he once again stressed that "We will defend our land with all the forces and resources we have"[4].

    Defense Minister S.K. Shoigu noted on August 16, 2022: "From a military point of view, there is no need to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine to achieve the stated objectives. The main purpose of Russian nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack"[5]. Earlier S.K. Shoigu had suggested that in the future high-precision weapons would be able to replace nuclear weapons as a deterrent, which would reduce international tensions and strengthen trust between countries[6].

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also made unequivocal statements on this matter: "Russia is not considering the possibility of using nuclear weapons in Ukraine, only conventional weapons are involved"[7]. This position is a constant in the speeches of all representatives of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov characterized the Russian position on the use of nuclear weapons in a regional theater of war as follows: "We have always been and continue to be strongly opposed to the idea of a limited nuclear war. We are firmly committed to the postulate that there can be no winners in a nuclear war and it must never be unleashed. At last year's meeting in Geneva, Russian President Vladimir V. Putin made such a statement jointly with the President of the United States. On January 3, 2022, already in the format of the "nuclear five" the leaders confirmed this postulate. It is sad and alarming that despite all these steps, the US continues its games in this sphere and at the same time continues to attribute non-existent concepts and intentions to Russia..."[8]. Russian diplomats consistently repeat this position on all international platforms. For example, K.V. Vorontsov, deputy head of the Russian delegation to the UN, during the thematic discussion of the "Nuclear Arms" section in the First Committee of the 77th session of the UNGA on October 18, 2022, emphasized: "Under the [Budapest] Memorandum, Russia confirmed with respect to Ukraine its commitment not to use nuclear weapons and not to threaten to use them against non-nuclear states. This commitment has always been fulfilled in full. Russia has not and does not threaten Ukraine with nuclear weapons"[9].

    At the same time, it must be recognized that Western interpretations of the Russian official rhetoric give rise to intense discussion of nuclear strikes in political and expert circles abroad and also receive some response in Russia. Most of these interpretations are built around one of the provisions of President V.V. Putin’s speech on February 24, 2022: "I would now like to say something very important for those who may be tempted to interfere in these developments from the outside. No matter who tries to stand in our way or all the more so create threats for our country and our people, they must know that Russia will respond immediately, and the consequences will be such as you have never seen in your entire history.

    No matter how the events unfold, we are ready. All the necessary decisions in this regard have been taken. I hope that my words will be heard"[10]. These words were perceived abroad as a threat of using nuclear weapons although neither then nor later were nuclear weapons mentioned explicitly, as well as the types of interference of foreign states in the conflict that could cause the use of Russian nuclear weapons. One can assume that the warning of the Russian president was addressed primarily to NATO countries and referred to their possible direct military involvement in the conflict in Ukraine.

    2. Nuclear Doctrine of the Russian Federation

    The key public document of the legal and regulatory framework in the field of nuclear deterrence in the Russian Federation is the "Basic Principles of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence"[11] (hereinafter, “the Basic Principles"). The Fundamentals is a strategic planning document issued in accordance with clause 3 "c" of Article 11 of the Federal Law "On Strategic Planning in the Russian Federation" of 28.06.2014 No. 172-FZ (clause 1), which forms the basis for the activities of all bodies and organizations involved in the field of nuclear deterrence.

    According to the Basic Principles (paragraph 19), the use of nuclear weapons can be considered a response option under one of four possible conditions. They include, first. aggression with the use of weapons of mass destruction against Russia itself or its allies (p. 19 (b)), second, aggression with the help of conventional armed forces, which threatens the very existence of the state (p. 19 (d)). Besides, the use of NWs is possible in case of receiving reliable information about a massive launch of ballistic missiles towards Russia (p. 19 (a)), without mentioning their payload type, which may be due to the threat of the appearance of the U.S. non-nuclear intermediate-range precision-guided missiles in Europe and the Pacific Asia. The fourth condition is the possibility of affecting the systems that ensure the use of nuclear weapons (p. 19 (c)).

    Obviously, this refers to attempts to disrupt the functioning of the communication and command and control systems of the nuclear forces, the strikes on the decision-making centers, the corresponding satellite constellations and ground infrastructure, which can "undermine nuclear forces response actions" (ibid.).

    The decision to use nuclear weapons is made by the President of the Russian Federation (p. 18). In addition, he may inform other states and international organizations of the readiness to use such weapons, of the decision to use them, or of the fact of their use (p. 20).

    Additionally, it should be noted that the Basic Principles do not divide nuclear weapons into "tactical" ("non-strategic") and "strategic". This emphasizes the unity of the deterrence function performed by all types of NWs.

    The Basic Principles list in detail the "military risks" that may evolve into "military threats" that nuclear deterrence is designed to counter. Of particular importance are references to the possible deployment of certain weapons systems of a potential adversary on the territory of neighboring states and in the adjacent sea areas (paragraph 12 (a) and (f)), as well as their deployment "by states that consider the Russian Federation to be a potential adversary" (p. 2 (b) and (d)).

    3. On the Effectiveness of Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons

    In the context given above, not only the question about the political and doctrinal conditions of Russia's use of NWs, but also the problem of military effectiveness and appropriateness of the hypothetical use of TNWs in Ukraine deserves special attention. The analysis of possible scenarios for the use of nuclear weapons in major local conflicts with the participation of nuclear powers (the U.S. Vietnam campaign in 1964-73, the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and in a number of others) leads to the following conclusions.

    1.In no case was the ratio of the military effect to the potential costs of using nuclear weapons in a local conflict satisfactory, so that no such use was ordered, even though such a step was discussed in the military and political leadership of a number of states.
    2.There are reasonable doubts about the military effectiveness of the small-scale use of nuclear weapons as a means of local battle space. The large-scale use of nuclear weapons does not meet the target framework of a local conflict, especially against a non-nuclear state, and is fraught with potential non-combat losses for the using side even more than the single use of TNWs.
    3.In the case of the Vietnam War, the political consequences of the use of nuclear weapons were deemed disproportionate to the hypothetical achievable military outcome of such a step. At the same time, the key factor in the consequences of the use of nuclear weapons was their unpredictability, fraught with much greater damage than that which could have been prevented by the use of nuclear weapons.
    4.During the conflict in the Persian Gulf, warnings of a possible "overwhelming and destructive response" by the United States were made solely to deter the possible use of chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein's regime[12].
    5.Even a single use of TNWs is associated with subsequent substantial government expenditures and numerous difficulties for civilians and the restoration of economic activity not only in the affected area, but also in adjacent territories, as well as with environmental, political and economic risks of a systemic nature. Even the experience of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which were rebuilt a few years after the American nuclear bombings with bombs that were close in power to today's TNWs, is not exemplary. The negative impact of radiation on the health of citizens at that time was underestimated, and the level of radiophobia was several times lower than now - the psychological consequences for the economy were not taken into account at all.
    U.S. research during the 1967 Vietnam War showed that the use of TNWs against dispersed targets on the battlefield and for theater of war isolation did not offer advantages over the intensive use of conventional weapons[13]. A key negative consequence was considered to be the removal of the "nuclear threshold," which would lead to the inevitable spread of nuclear weapons throughout the world[14] and the sharply increasing risk of their usage against American forces both in Vietnam and in other regions. The high vulnerability of large U.S. bases to such attacks and the practical impossibility of reliable protection against them were noted. The inevitability of escalation in U.S. relations with the USSR and the PRC and the unpredictability of their response, even if there is no immediate nuclear response, were also emphasized.

    It is indicative that the Pentagon's planning to use nuclear weapons, begun in 1968 in the midst of heavy defensive battles against the Viet Cong ("Tet Offensive"), was stopped by U.S. President L. Johnson even before practical preparations began. Leaks also played their part, making this issue a factor in the internal political struggle in the run-up to the presidential election, as well as the likely fierce international reaction. This episode highlighted the fundamental differences between nuclear weapons and conventional weapons and the importance of maintaining political control over the possible use of nuclear weapons[15].

    Similarly, the situation with the possible use of TNWs unfolded around the Falklands crisis of 1982. The British ships involved there had nuclear depth charges on board - conventional weapons against Soviet submarines that had not been unloaded before entering the South Atlantic. They could have been used against the Argentine submarines[16]. But Britain was deterred by the international political and military consequences of the use of nuclear weapons by a nuclear-weapon state against a non-nuclear state and the reaction of other nuclear-weapon states. British military commanders subsequently denied that nuclear weapons could have been used against Argentina in that war[17].

    During the Operation Desert Storm (1991), the US administration's discussion of the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield as a means of destroying Iraq's military potential, according to the testimony of C. Powell (in 1991 the head of the Joint Staff), was intended to demonstrate its military and strategic senselessness and political harmfulness to the political leadership[18].

    The issue of unilateral use of TNWs was also studied in the context of the Indo-Pakistani confrontation, where the "cold start" scenario - a large-scale invasion of Pakistan by Indian general-purpose forces without the use of nuclear weapons - was considered the most probable. Pakistan's existing research on the issue has shown that using TNWs to defeat India's mechanized forces in a hypothetical invasion scenario would have military effect only if substantial (up to several hundred) quantities of warheads were used[19]. Therefore, Pakistan's use of TNWs on the battlefield is viewed by experts not as a way of gaining operational advantage, but only as a means of politico-military deterrence against further escalation to an exchange of strikes against Indian and Pakistani cities using long-range and high-yield nuclear systems.

    The evolution of the vision of the role of nuclear weapons in warfare also took place in Russia. For example, the Military History textbook for students of the Russian Federation Armed Forces Combined Arms Academy [20], published in 2007, states that from the late 1970s there was a transition in practice of training troops for combat operations conducted primarily without the use of nuclear weapons. According to Colonel General A.A. Danilevich, a leading Soviet military strategist and theorist, by 1981 the Soviet Union had already adopted the doctrine of waging even a major war against NATO without using nuclear weapons[21]. One of the reasons, as noted by another prominent Soviet and Russian military theorist and historian, Army General M.A. Gareev, were the results of in-depth studies of the use of TNWs as a battlefield tool in Europe conducted in the 1970s. The results concluded that such a conflict was unmanageable and had no militarily significant effect[22].

    The military way out of the "nuclear stalemate" arising from the insufficient effectiveness of TNWs on the battlefield was largely found through the development and spread of long-range precision-guided non-nuclear weapons, reconnaissance strike systems and the corresponding information and communication infrastructure, including space-based ones. Consequently, it became possible to solve effectively a number of "tactical" tasks for nuclear weapons by non-nuclear means. According to estimates by Western experts, by the early 2000s it had become possible to attack up to one-third of the targets using non-nuclear high-precision weapons, which in the 1980s were expected to be hit on the battlefield solely with nuclear weapons.

    The cost and consequences of using nuclear weapons on the battlefield in a local conflict can be assessed on the basis of three components.

    1.To what extent can its use ensure military victory or prevent defeat?
    2.How much more effective is the use of nuclear weapons under specific conditions against a particular target than conventional weapons?
    3.What are the immediate and long-term consequences of the possible use of nuclear weapons?
    It can be concluded that in the overwhelming majority of cases of local conflicts between a nuclear power and a non-nuclear weapon state there are no targets in the theater of war or on the battlefield, the destruction of which by a single or a limited group strike can produce a significant military result. At the same time, the massive use of nuclear weapons or their use against strategic targets with inevitably heavy civilian casualties and radioactive contamination of terrain is unacceptable, since it leads to political, environmental, socio-economic, and moral and psychological consequences that are difficult to predict.

    Thus, the most realistic form of the use of nuclear weapons in a local conflict is their possible retaliatory use in two cases. First, if the adversary is the first to use nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction. Second, if they launch an attack that calls into question the other side's nuclear deterrent capability. In a conflict between a nuclear power and a non-nuclear power, both scenarios are virtually impossible. In the case of third-party intervention - by another nuclear power - the risks of escalation to full-scale nuclear war are uncontrollable. In this case, the proportionality of the consequences will be crucial. In all other cases the negative political consequences of the use of nuclear weapons will obviously outweigh the positive military effect - which with proper consistency and competence of leadership can be achieved even without the use of nuclear weapons.

    4. Military developments on the territory of Ukraine and the global context

    As for the conditions of the SMO of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine, it can be noted that in the theater of military operations there are no targets that would be impossible to hit with conventional weapons. Nor are there any tasks that would be unattainable without the use of nuclear weapons. At the moment there is no threat of a nuclear attack from the territory of Ukraine, which could entail preemptive use of nuclear weapons by Russia. The use of long-range precision-guided non-nuclear weapons against Ukrainian infrastructure demonstrates that the Russian armed forces have sufficient options at their disposal without crossing the "nuclear threshold".

    Therefore, it can be assumed with a high degree of certainty that nuclear weapons will not be used provided that the conflict remains within the current borders and without direct involvement of other participating states on the side of Ukraine. Recently, the geographical framework has been blurred as the Armed Forces of Ukraine have attempted to attack territories that became part of the Russian Federation in 2014 and 2022 and to strike at these areas and even at entities in the Russian Federation adjacent to the former borders. As Foreign Minister S. V. Lavrov noted on September 24, 2022, "the entire territory of the Russian Federation, which is fixed and can be further fixed in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, is certainly under the full protection of the state, it is absolutely natural. All laws, doctrines, concepts, strategies of the Russian Federation apply to its entire territory" [23].

    It should be remembered that the Russian Military Doctrine states that nuclear weapons can be used not just in case of "aggression with the use of conventional weapons" against the Russian Federation, but only in the case when this aggression would threaten "the very existence of the state". Such threats to the Russian Federation in connection with the conflict in Ukraine are currently not visible, in case NATO countries continue to adhere to their position - to provide military assistance to Kiev, but without their direct military involvement in the conflict.

    Escalation dynamics depend on many unpredictable factors. Further expansion of the range and scale of arms and military equipment supplies from the United States and other Alliance countries to Kiev, as well as an increase in the number of foreign advisers and mercenaries in the Ukrainian forces, potentially create the danger of an uncontrolled escalation of the conflict.

    Kiev's revanchist sentiments and the Ukrainian leadership's refusal to negotiate with the Russian side, motivated by domestic political reasons, combined with the desire of the United States and its allies to use the Ukrainian crisis for military and economic exhaustion of Russia, could lead to the gravest consequences. Should hostilities in Ukraine continue and increase in intensity, and even more so should NATO countries become directly involved in the conflict, the use of nuclear weapons cannot be completely ruled out. This danger can only be eliminated by seeking a political and diplomatic end to the conflict in Ukraine, the need for which has been repeatedly stated by the Russian leadership.

    -----------------------------

    References:
    [1] Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s answers to media questions following his meeting with members of the Valdai International Discussion Club, Moscow, October 24, 2022 // Foreign Ministry of Russian Federation. URL: https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1834886/.
    [2] Meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club // Kremlin.ru, 18.10.2018. URL:. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/58848.
    [3] Address by the President of the Russian Federation // Kremlin.ru, 21.09.2022. URL: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/69390.
    [4] Signing of treaties on accession of Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics and Zaporozhye and Kherson regions to Russia // Kremlin.ru, 30.09.2022. URL: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/69465.
    [5] Shoigu: No need to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine (in Rus) // Interfax, 16.08.2022. URL: https://www.interfax.ru/world/856813.
    [6] Shoigu told he would replace nuclear weapons as a deterrent (in Rus) // RIA, 12.01.2017. URL: https://ria.ru/20170112/1485559254.html.
    [7] Lavrov: Russia is not considering the possibility of using nuclear weapons in Ukraine (in Rus) // Vedomosti, 19.04.2022. URL: https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/ne...rnogo-oruzhiya.
    [8] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov Interview to “International Affairs” Magazine (in Rus) // Foreign Ministry of Russian Federation. 15.09.2022. URL: https://www.mid.ru/ru/detail-material-page/1829905/.
    [9] K.V. Vorontsov’s, deputy head of the Russian delegation to the UN, answer during the thematic discussion of the "Nuclear Arms" section in the First Committee of the 77th session of the UNGA. October 18, 2022 (in Rus) // Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, 18.10.2022. URL: https://russiaun.ru/ru/news/181022v.
    [10] Address by the President of the Russian Federation // Kremlin.ru, 24.02.2022. URL: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843.
    [11] On Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence. Russian President’s Decree № 355. (in Rus) // Kremlin.ru, 02.06.2020. URL: http://static.kremlin.ru/media/event...q3bcl7AXd7.pdf.
    [12] Pike J. Nuclear Threats During the Gulf War // Federation of American Scientists, 19.02.1998. URL: https://irp.fas.org/eprint/ds-threats.htm.
    [13] Dyson F., Gomer R., Weinberg S., Wright S. Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Southeast Asia // Institute for Defense Analyses, Jason Division, March 1967.
    [14] An earlier CIA memorandum of 1966 on the possible consequences of the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam emphasized that even the most limited use of nuclear weapons would have profound political consequences, one of which would be their accelerated spread throughout the world. At the time, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty had not yet been concluded. Use of Nuclear Weapons in the Vietnam War. CIA Memo, 18.03.1966. // URL: http://memory.loc.gov/pow/pdf/Vietna..._18-MAR-66.pdf.
    [15] Milonopoulos T. How Close Did the United States Actually Get to Using Nuclear Weapons in Vietnam in 1968? // War on the Rocks, 24.10.2018. URL: https://warontherocks.com/2018/10/ho...etnam-in-1968/.
    [16] Norton-Taylor R. UK Deployed 31 Nuclear Weapons During Falklands War // Declassified UK, 03.01.2022. URL: https://declassifieduk.org/uk-deploy...falklands-war/.
    [17] Freedman L. The South Atlantic Crisis of 1982: Implications for Nuclear Crisis Management. Santa-Monica, CA: RAND/UCLA Center for the Study of Soviet International Behavior, 1989.
    [18] Powell C. My American Journey. New York: Random House, 1995, p. 486.
    [19] Tellis A. India’s Emerging Nuclear Posture: Between Recessed Deterrent and Ready Arsenal. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2001, p. 133;Nayyar A., Mian Z. The Limited Military Utility of Pakistan’s Battle-field Use of Nuclear Weapons in Response to Large-scale Indian Conventional Attack, Brief no. 61, Pakistan Security Research Unit, Peace Studies Department, Bradford University, November 2010, pp. 6–10.
    [20] Military History (in Rus) / Ed. A.Yu.Potapov. – Мoscow. Russian Federation Armed Forces Combined Arms Academy of the Russian Federation, 2007.
    [21] Hines J. Soviet Strategic Intentions 1965–1985. An Analytical Comparison of the U.S. Cold-War Interpretations With Soviet Post-Cold-War Testimonial Evidence. Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh, 1995, p. 141.
    [22] Ibid, pp. 208, 293.
    [23] Lavrov stated that Russian doctrines, including nuclear doctrines, will be extended to possible new territories. (in Rus) // Interfax, 24.09.2022. URL: https://www.interfax.ru/russia/864788.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  14. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Operator (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Vince (28th October 2022), Yoda (28th October 2022)

  15. Link to Post #6168
    France Avalon Member
    Join Date
    11th February 2011
    Age
    52
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 90 times in 14 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    Hello Bill and thanks.

    What an incredibly great speech. Putin is undoubtly the best political leader in office in the world right now, a man with a positive vision for the whole human collective.
    This has to be shared as much as possible, particularly in the west, we have to wake up for god's sake !

    Thanks again for the transcription .

    Vincent

  16. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Vince For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Docim369 (31st October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  17. Link to Post #6169
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    55
    Posts
    7,469
    Thanks
    84,473
    Thanked 65,875 times in 7,436 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia



    Source:
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  18. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022)

  19. Link to Post #6170
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/rybar_en/status/1585981064102936578





    https://twitter.com/rybar_en/status/1585981067416174592




    https://twitter.com/rybar_en/status/1585981070977089536

    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  20. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  21. Link to Post #6171
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...97544101470209



    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...03744952061952
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  22. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  23. Link to Post #6172
    New Zealand Avalon Member pounamuknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th December 2018
    Posts
    128
    Thanks
    44,486
    Thanked 1,196 times in 127 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    Quote Posted by Richter (here)
    Meduza
    Banned in Russia, every day Meduza brings you the most important news and feature stories from hundreds of sources in Russia & across the former Soviet Union. Our team includes some of Russia’s top professionals in news & reporting. We value our independence and strive to be a reliable, trusted outlet for verified, unbiased information about Russia & the former Soviet Union, as well as a source for sharp insights about one of the world’s most enigmatic regions.

    https://meduza.io/en
    Friendly reminder: Meduza (along with US-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) was banned in Russia after RT & Sputnik were banned in the empire. A diplomatic tit for tat

    Following the money trail...
    Click image for larger version

Name:	meduza $hillings.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	101.4 KB
ID:	49808

    * RT investigation of Meduza's NED, Soros' Open Society Foundation, British billionaire Alan Parker's Oak Foundation funding
    * The Grayzone's investigation of Meduza's Swedish & UK governments funding
    * Unz Reviews report of Meduza's CIA connections
    * Khodorkovsky's funding of Meduza

    With that in mind, Meduza is a good read
    Last edited by pounamuknight; 29th October 2022 at 02:02.

  24. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to pounamuknight For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), chrifri (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Ravenlocke (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  25. Link to Post #6173
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...04182938558470



    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...89522390761472



    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...15718385557505

    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  26. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  27. Link to Post #6174
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...36342294401025





    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...97155185348609




    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...02844926504960
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  28. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  29. Link to Post #6175
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...13293012553728



    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...94584873648128


    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...95120109051904


    https://twitter.com/AZgeopolitics/st...95126664441857
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  30. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tintin (28th October 2022)

  31. Link to Post #6176
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/author_himself/s...17606573350914


    https://www.scottritterextra.com/p/bucha-revisited

    Bucha, Revisited

    "60 Minutes" regurgitates disinformation about who committed war crimes

    The Ukrainian narrative constructed by the west is built on a bodyguard of lies. And there is no lie greater than that which blames Russia for the deaths of hundreds of Ukrainian civilians in Bucha who were slaughtered by Ukrainian security forces.

    Sometime during the period between 1-3 April 2022, Ukrainian security forces entered the northern Kiev suburb of Bucha. Russian forces who had occupied the town had evacuated on March 30, part of a general realignment of forces announced by the Russian Ministry of Defense on March 25. Bucha had been on the frontlines and was the scene of heavy fighting between the Russians and Ukrainians; hundreds of civilians caught up in this fighting were killed and wounded.

    Russian troops were civil to the Ukrainian civilians who remained in Bucha, handing out humanitarian supplies to those in need and bartering dry goods with local vendors for fresh eggs and dairy products. When the Russians withdrew, pro-Russian civilians were encouraged to depart with them. This underscored the Russian understanding of the potential for Ukrainian reprisals against any civilian deemed to have been “cooperating/collaborating” with their forces during the period in which Russian troops occupied Bucha.

    Many Ukrainians who had interacted with the Russian troops did not leave, assuming that their normal interactions with Russian soldiers, including limited commerce and the acceptance of humanitarian supplies in order to survive, did not constitute treason against the Ukrainian state.

    They were wrong.

    Scott Ritter will discuss this article and answer audience questions live on tonight’s episode (Oct. 21).

    Shortly after Russian troops departed Bucha, Ukrainian security forces made their way into the town. Announcements were made on social media and public broadcasting warning the citizens of Bucha about “cleansing” operations targeting collaborators. In light of these announcements, many of the Ukrainians who had remained in Bucha became concerned about their fate, and began to flee toward Russian lines. They wore the white arm band, indicating that they were not a threat to the Russian troops. Many also brought with them Russian-provided rations to sustain them on their journey.

    But it was too late.

    Ukrainian security forces, in particular the “Safari” unit staffed by veterans of the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment, caught up with scores of these refugees while they made their way north and, in the vernacular of the Ukrainians, “cleansed” them, gunning them down on the spot, or binding their hands behind their backs before executing them in the alleyways and streets of Bucha.

    The evidence of this crime was overwhelming. But the “collective West,” led by a coterie of erstwhile journalists whose function had transformed from reporters of fact-based truth to stenographers of fictional propaganda, was engaged in a larger information operation, designed to shift public opinion away from the need to seek a negotiated settlement to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, toward the sustainment of a long-term war of attrition designed to weaken Russia in the long term.

    To accomplish this task, the “collective West” needed to construct an unambiguous “good versus evil” narrative which portrayed the Ukrainians as the brave defenders of democratic values such as freedom and liberty, and the Russians as rapacious thugs marauding across the Ukrainian landscape, brutalizing an innocent civilian population. This kind of unambiguous differentiation of roles was necessary in order to gain popular support for what was to come—a multi-billion-dollar infusion of financial and military aid designed to transform the Russian-Ukraine conflict into a de facto existential struggle between “good” (NATO) and “evil” (Russia).

    It worked.

    Bucha became the symbol around which the citizens of the “collective West” rallied, supporting not only the intervention of their leaders to undermine a viable diplomatic off-ramp from the conflict being negotiated in Istanbul between Russian and Ukrainian authorities, but also blinding them to the devastating economic consequences of the failed effort to deter and defeat Russia through sanctions. Instead of demanding that their respective leaders work to restore a semblance of economic stability at home, the citizens of the “collective West” applauded while their governments transferred tens of billions of dollars of their hard-earned treasure to sustain a government which more closely mirrored the fictional Russian thug manufactured in the imaginations of western mainstream media.

    Seven months later, the “collective West” finds itself at a new inflection point. After building up over the course of the summer months a reserve corps of fresh forces trained and equipped to NATO standards, Ukraine, with the assistance of NATO intelligence, communications, logistics, and operational planning support, carried out a much-ballyhooed offensive in the direction of Kharkov and Kherson.

    Share

    By sacrificing this new NATO army (tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers were killed and wounded, and hundreds of tanks and armored vehicles lost), Ukraine was able to achieve impressive territorial gains without inflicting any meaningful damage to the Russian military. This pyrrhic “victory” led to Ukraine destroying its strategic reserve without accomplishing any meaningful military objectives. Moreover, the Russian response—consolidation of defense lines, partial mobilization of 300,000 troops, and the initiation of a strategic air campaign designed to paralyze Ukraine—has radically shifted the narrative away from “Ukraine is winning, a Russian collapse is imminent” to “a Russian victory is a defeat for NATO.”

    Russia is winning.

    NATO is being defeated on the battlefields of Ukraine.

    Rather than accept this new reality and seek a negotiated settlement to the conflict, the “collective West” once again turns to its time-tested playbook of generating a false “good versus evil” narrative capable of motivating nations who have long ago emptied their arsenals and treasuries in support of Ukraine, and who are currently staring economic and social disaster in the face as winter approaches and the reality of the consequences of sanctioning Russian energy hits home, to once again invest good money after bad and double down on the losing bet that was, is, and forever will be Ukraine.

    One of the main problems facing the so-called “journalists” who populate the western mainstream media is that even fiction writers as capable as themselves could not craft a believable narrative based upon the emerging reality that Ukraine is the living manifestation of the sickening ideology of Stepan Bandera, whose murderous ethos has infected every aspect of Ukraine’s government, military, and security services.

    The other problem was that the Ukrainians were, simply put, liars.

    Exhibit number one: Ukraine’s former ombudswoman for human rights, Lyudmyla Denisova.

    In the aftermath of the “Bucha massacre” narrative manufactured by Ukraine and disseminated by their compliant co-conspirators in the mainstream western media, Denisova sought to sustain the moral outrage the original stories generated by releasing even more tales from the dark side. Typical of her modus operendi was the story she told to BBC, and which was picked up, unquestioningly, by other western news outlets, including Newsweek and the Washington Post, about alleged sexual violent crimes committed by Russian soldiers in Ukraine.

    “About 25 girls and women aged 14-24 were systematically raped during the occupation in the basement of one house in Bucha,” Denisova told the BBC. “Nine of them are pregnant. Russian soldiers told them they would rape them to the point where they wouldn't want sexual contact with any man, to prevent them from having Ukrainian children.”

    None of this was true, and the problem with telling a lie of such magnitude is eventually someone—even a thoroughly compromised western “journalist”—is going to want to speak directly with the victims.

    There were none.

    Denisova afterwards explained the reason behind her lies. “I talked about terrible things,” she told a Ukrainian newspaper, “in order to somehow push them [the west] to make the decisions that Ukraine and the Ukrainian people need.” In one particular case, Denisova noted that the Italians were “against the provision of weapons to us,” but after hearing her speak, decided “they will support Ukraine, including by the provision of weapons.”

    In the aftermath of the Ukrainian reconquest of Kharkov, the Ukrainian authorities tried to create a “new Bucha” narrative, this time around the existence of mass graves in the vicinity of Izium. But this storyline soon fell apart amid growing direct evidence of Ukrainian atrocities against anyone deemed to be a “collaborator.”

    Flushed with victory, the Ukrainian supporters of Stepan Bandera openly bragged about their crimes. One Ukrainian volunteer detachment commander, a member of the “Right Sector” political party, admitted his crimes to a Ukrainian journalist, who expressed no emotion upon learning about the deaths of so many of her fellow citizens. “We haven’t got time to put them in jail,” the Right Sector thug said, noting that those accused of collaborating with the Russians “just disappear…Ukraine will have to conduct a census,” he bragged, “because so many people have disappeared.”

    Videos of freshly dug graves filled with the bodies of freshly executed men and women, all in civilian clothing, their hands bound behind their backs, backed up the commander’s words.

    Unable to craft a narrative capable of overcoming this brutish reality, the mainstream media resorted to the age-old trick of breathing fresh life into an old story—they repackaged the lie of the original Russian sin—the alleged “massacre” of Bucha.

    On October 16, CBS’s flagship news program, “60 Minutes,” broadcast a story entitled “The Lost Souls of Bucha.” Scott Pelley, the correspondent given the task of resurrecting this story, narrated a script designed to pull at the heartstrings of anyone listening.

    “The town of Bucha,” he intoned, “lived in relative obscurity on the international stage until early spring when Russian occupying forces retreated from the town and left behind devastation and death that shocked the entire world. Over 27 days, Russian troops killed more than 400 civilians in the Kiev suburb. Some of the victims were discovered bound and tortured. Many were left to rot in the place where they were killed.”

    Pelley had visited Bucha shortly after it was recaptured by Ukrainian security forces, and played a major role in parroting the Ukrainian narrative of “Russia bad” when it came to attributing the cause of death to hundreds of Ukrainian civilians whose bodies littered the landscape. According to “60 Minutes,” Pelley “saw the devastation firsthand and witnessed a mass grave dug behind a church in the town center,” and “vowed to return to learn more about the people who were killed and buried in that mass grave.”

    Pelley’s story did just that.

    There is no doubting that there were victims whose bodies were buried in Bucha.

    But they weren’t killed by Russians.

    They were murdered by Ukrainians.

    Hopefully, this time the western audience has wised up about the truth of what is going on inside Ukraine today:

    The reality of a Ukrainian government which has wrapped itself in the red and black banner of the Right Sector, replicating the murderous history of Stepan Bandera and his followers in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia in every village, town, and city recaptured from the Russians.

    The reality of Ukrainian paratroopers who sing the praises of Stepan Bandera upon completing their training.

    The reality of Swastikas openly painted on the tanks and armored vehicles of the “Kraken Battalion” and other neo-Nazi military formations within the Ukrainian military.

    The reality of the criminal nature of the Ukrainian government.

    “60 Minutes” and the western media can revisit the Bucha tragedy all they want;

    nothing they report will change the fact that the bodies seen lying in the street were killed by the Bandera-worshipping murderers of the “Safari” battalion, on the

    orders of Ukrainian government officials. Nothing can change the fact that these same Ukrainian officials, from President Zelensky on down, deliberately lied about Bucha for the sole purpose of generating western outrage sufficient to fuel the Ukrainian economy and military with tens of billions of dollars’ worth of aid.

    And nothing can change the reality that all this investment has been in a losing cause.

    Russia is winning.

    Russia will win.

    And repeating the lies of Bucha will not change that reality.










    https://twitter.com/GeromanAT/status...88427224436737
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  32. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (28th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (29th October 2022)

  33. Link to Post #6177
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/author_himself/s...32418132819968


    https://consortiumnews.com/2022/10/1...pelines-v-usa/

    SCOTT RITTER: Pipelines v. USA

    Intent, motive and means: People serving life sentences in U.S. prisons have been convicted on weaker grounds than the circumstantial evidence against Washington for the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines.

    Circumstantial evidence, just like direct proof, can be used to prove the elements of a crime, the existence or completion of certain acts and the intent or mental state of a defendant. Generally speaking, a prosecutor, to obtain a conviction, needs to show beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant committed a certain act and that the defendant acted with specific intent.

    Nord Stream 1 is a multi-national project operated by Swiss-based Nord Stream AG intended to supply some 55 billion cubic meters (bcm) of Russian natural gas annually to Europe by directly transporting it from Russia, through twin 1,224 kilometer-long pipelines laid beneath the Baltic Sea, to a German hub, from which the gas would be distributed to other European consumers.

    The first of the twin pipelines was completed in June 2011 and began supplying gas in November 2011. The second was completed in April 2012 and began supplying gas in October 2012. Gazprom, the Russian gas giant, owns 51 percent interest in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline project.

    Nord Stream 2 is a near clone of the Nord Stream 1 project, consisting of twin 1,220-kilometer pipelines laid beneath the Baltic Sea connecting Russia to Germany. Started in 2018, it was completed in September 2021. Like Nord Stream 1, the Nord Stream 2 is designed to deliver approximately 55 bcm of natural gas from Russia to Europe through Germany. Nord Stream 2, like Nord Stream 1, is operated by a multinational company in which Gazprom has 51 percent ownership.

    Unlike Nord Stream 1, Nord Stream 2 was never allowed to begin supplying gas.

    The rest is here,

    https://consortiumnews.com/2022/10/1...pelines-v-usa/
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  34. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (29th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (29th October 2022)

  35. Link to Post #6178
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/SprinterMonitor/...98885574840320



    https://twitter.com/SprinterMonitor/...98750505644032


    ¤=[Post Update]=¤



    https://www.rt.com/news/565529-polan...r-calculation/

    Warsaw to demand WWII reparations from Russia

    Warsaw intends to calculate damages caused to the country by the USSR during World War II in a process similar to that which preceded a demand for compensation from Germany, the Polish Foreign Ministry has said.

    The research effort was mentioned in a statement on Friday, which provided a breakdown of Polish claims formally sent to Berlin earlier this month.

    Senior officials in the country had previously argued that both Russia and Germany should pay compensation to Poland, with President Andrzej Duda making a case for this in an interview last month.

    “Germany started World War II and attacked Poland. Of course, Russia joined this war later on and so, in my view, we should demand reparations also from Russia,” he said. “I don’t see any reasons why we shouldn’t demand this.”

    The idea is hardly new for Polish conservative politicians. Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the leader of the ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party, told German tabloid Bild in 2020 that “Russia will also have to pay” compensation when discussing Polish claims against Berlin. He said he didn’t expect money from Moscow anytime soon, but stressed that Warsaw’s grudge had “no expiration date.”

    Germany shuts down Greek reparations request READ MORE: Germany shuts down Greek reparations request
    Poland insists that it was never properly reimbursed for damage suffered at the hands of Nazi Germany and only agreed to waive reparation claims in the 1950s due to pressure by Moscow.

    It also says Moscow is liable because the Soviet leadership sent troops into Poland shortly after the Nazis did in September 1945. Russia argues that the order was given after the Polish government fell, before the Nazi onslaught, and that the decision helped save lives in eastern Poland. The USSR also invested heavily in rebuilding Poland after the war and otherwise helped the country.

    The German government reiterated this week that it considered the “question of reparations” for Poland closed, after Warsaw said last month that it wanted €1.3 trillion from Berlin.

    The note issued on Friday outlined other things that Warsaw is seeking from Berlin as compensation, such as official status as a national minority for Germany’s ethnic Polish community, complete with certain benefits.

    The Russian stance is likewise uncompromising. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov joked that if Moscow adopted the same approach as Warsaw, it could look into the Polish invasion of Russia during its Time of Troubles in the late 16th and early 17th century as a ground for claims of its own.
    Last edited by Ravenlocke; 28th October 2022 at 15:25.
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  36. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (29th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (29th October 2022)

  37. Link to Post #6179
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1586009900886302720


    https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1586009495079366656



    https://www.rt.com/russia/565520-uss-governor-us-italy/

    Russia puts governor’s son arrested in EU on wanted list

    A Moscow court has ordered the arrest of Artem Uss, the son of Alexander Uss the governor of the Russian region of Krasnoyarsk. According to court files, the ruling was made in absentia, and he was placed on a wanted list.

    Uss was detained in Italy last week at the request of the US for alleged involvement in helping Moscow evade Western sanctions.

    Artem Uss was charged with large-scale money laundering as part of an organized criminal group. The maximum penalty for such an offense is seven years in prison.

    Uss has also been added to the database of wanted people on the Russian interior ministry’s website.

    Moscow can now demand his extradition from Italy as the 40-year-old had refused to be transferred to the US.

    Russian governor’s son detained in EU after US request READ MORE: Russian governor’s son detained in EU after US request
    US authorities earlier announced that charges had been brought against Uss and four other Russian nationals. It’s claimed they were part of a group that purchased “advanced semiconductors and microprocessors used in fighter aircraft, missile systems, smart munitions, radar, and satellites” and then sold them to sanctioned Russian entities via a German-based shell company.

    According to the US, the equipment had made it into the hands of the Russian defense industry and was allegedly later found in Russian hardware that had been abandoned in Ukraine.

    Uss and his associates have also been accused of smuggling hundreds of millions of barrels of sanctioned oil from Venezuela to customers in China and Russia, including to an aluminum tycoon blacklisted by Washington.

    Reacting to his son’s arrest and the charges, governor Alexander Uss said that “political overtones are obvious in these accusations.” He pointed out that the goods were freely bought and sold all over the world, and the US had problems with it “simply because it is being done for the benefit of Russia.”
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  38. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (29th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (29th October 2022)

  39. Link to Post #6180
    Avalon Member Ravenlocke's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th September 2011
    Posts
    21,875
    Thanks
    12,882
    Thanked 191,999 times in 21,874 posts

    Default Re: WW3? Ukraine/US vs. Donbass/Russia

    https://twitter.com/thesiriusreport/...72973345079297


    ¤=[Post Update]=¤

    https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1586018574883233792


    https://www.rt.com/russia/565534-key...ation-numbers/

    Russia reveals key mobilization numbers

    Russia’s partial mobilization has been completed, with 300,000 reservists drafted as planned, Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said at a meeting with President Vladimir Putin on Friday, providing new details about the effort. The draft was announced in September amid Moscow’s ongoing military operation in Ukraine.

    “The dispatch of citizens conscripted for mobilization was completed today,” Shoigu told Putin. “Citizen notification has been discontinued. The task set by you – 300,000 people – has been fulfilled.

    “No additional tasks are planned. Military commissariats within the framework of the special military operation will continue to replenish the troops only by accepting volunteers and candidates for military service under the contract,” he said.

    “13,000 citizens, without waiting for summonses, expressed a desire to fulfill their duty and were sent to join the troops as volunteers,” the minister added.

    Shoigu noted that more than 1,300 representatives of executive authorities at various levels, as well as more than 27,000 entrepreneurs, were drafted into the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

    Sergey Poletaev: As winter approaches, both Russia and Ukraine bulk up their forces in preparation for decisive battles
    Sergey Poletaev: As winter approaches, both Russia and Ukraine bulk up their forces in preparation for decisive battles
    According to the defense minister, 82,000 mobilized troops were sent to the conflict zone. Another 218,000 draftees are getting ready for combat duty at training centers and at training grounds.

    The average age of the reservists called up as part of the mobilization was 35, he revealed.

    Shoigu also acknowledged problems with the equipment for conscripts, however, explaining that these were experienced only at the initial stage and have already been resolved. Putin, in turn, noted that difficulties were inevitable, since mobilization had not occurred for a long time.

    Partial mobilization in Russia was announced on September 21. In the disclosed part of the presidential decree, no data was provided on how many people were planned to be drafted. Shoigu said that 300,000 would be conscripted. The partial mobilization will officially end when Putin signs the relevant decree.

    https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1585999603299647489
    Last edited by Ravenlocke; 28th October 2022 at 15:49.
    "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul and sings the tune without the words and never stops at all."
    - - - - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson. 🪶💜

  40. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Ravenlocke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (28th October 2022), Gwin Ru (28th October 2022), Ivanhoe (28th October 2022), Michel Leclerc (28th October 2022), pounamuknight (29th October 2022), Reinhard (28th October 2022), Rizotto (29th October 2022), Snoweagle (28th October 2022), Tigger (29th October 2022), Tintin (29th October 2022)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 309 of 1094 FirstFirst 1 209 259 299 309 319 359 409 809 1094 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts