War in CEE
Most of the info I came across suggests that an open conflict between Russia and NATO will break out soon (like now). I
Ha. Reminds me ofPowell (sober pre 9/11 press conference) : "Saddam has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.Also Powell (flashlight under his chin at a U.N. campfire) : Those might look like ice cream trucks, but according to this paper written by a very precocious
I agree with this and there is another layer on top of all the pretexts and rationale to justify the means. It's that the entire media world is essentially paid through chasing clicks and attracting an audience with no negative consequences for being wrong.
Once the analytics show that the most sensationalized angle gets paid the most, everyone else follows suit and everyone watching becomes a hysteric mess as result. Trump has been such a lucrative product for ten years, it would only make sense to make as many as you can.
I agree with this and there is another layer on top of all the pretexts and rationale to justify the means. It's that the entire media world is essentially paid through chasing clicks and attracting an audience with no negative consequences for being wrong. Once the analytics show that the most sensationalized angle gets paid the most, everyone else follows suit and everyone
I agree in a lot of cases. but as for the mainstream, they are just straight up told what to report. or paid by the CIA or whatever dark money front. the Iraq War cheerleaders at Wapo and NYT were not chasing clicks. they were serving their overlords and chasing promotions. same as the genocide supporters the last 2 years.
That's a really cool looking "world news" logo. I can't find it or that quote from Putin anywhere on the interweb, though. Do you have a source?
Anyway, no one in NATO wants to invade Russia, so it's probably not directed at us. More likely he's talking to China:
Maps Show Russian Territory China Could Annex Amid FSB ‘Suspicion’
Russia fears China could annex part of its Far East region, including the port city of Vladivostok, and beyond, according to a leaked document from Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB).
The eight-page internal FSB document, obtained by The New York Times, reveals that despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's outward projection of warm ties with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, he fears Beijing is "trying to encroach" on Russian territory....
A previously undisclosed unit of the FSB referred to China in the document as "the enemy" and as posing a serious threat to Russian national security.
Makes sense China is running out of water. The country has very limited freshwater per capita, its northern groundwater reserves are being heavily depleted, and many of its aquifers and rivers are badly polluted or contaminated. It’s a crisis that explains why Siberia’s water looks so quenching to Beijing.
And we know how China is with their old maps, as well.
Alright, I think we are at about 99.5% Russian mouthpiece **** stain territory but on the off chance that you just happen to be on Team, "Russia is big and scary" their nuke equivalency does not matter once you reach a certain point.
Your world news europe links was a pretty big slip up. I'd tell the Kremlin to stick to twitter or youtube. You've got good stuff there.
It kind of reminds me of the penny stock pushers of BFI about a decade ago and while it was already clear that all the effort was intended for the pump and dump, it just kept on going like the energizer bunny.
Qtang, you are well versed in Russia's military, in your own words, what are you predicting in the next 12 months?
World News „Europe” covers its real identity pretty well as they also publish lots info in favor of Ukraine. Regardless of if Putin said it or not, which I personally believe he might have, assuming that world news is a Kremlin tube and publishing this kind of “quote”, made up or not, also says something. You have to be subtle here guys, it’s not black and white, it isn’t 1917 propaganda for the working masses, you have to interpolate
If it would’ve been so easy as you already ruled upon, not intel agencies would be needed at all
World News „Europe” covers its real identity pretty well as they also publish lots info in favor of Ukraine. Regardless of if Putin said it or not, which I personally believe he might have, assuming that world news is a Kremlin tube and publishing this kind of “quote”, made up or not, also says something. You have to be subtle here guys, it’s not black and white, it isn’t 1917
Interpolating that articles quickly gets you to realizing that the UN doesn't even have nukes. So the author is either really dumb, or just doing click bait.
Either way, Russia and the US has had similar levels of nukes for 50 years and both Russia and the US have far less nukes than before because nukes are dumb. Just like that article.
their nuke equivalency does not matter once you reach a certain point.
Your world news europe links was a pretty big slip up. I'd tell the Kremlin to stick to twitter or youtube. You've got good stuff there.
One is enough, ie to be detonated somewhere over Ukrainian steps but it’s not about how many will be detonated yet, but how many each side declares they’d like to detonate proactively now. Sir I’ve read Russia’s war doctrine like two years ago, it’s a very short document, 30 or so pages from what I remember. Their current actions folllow it 1:1, they want to lure NATO into counterattack based on some crimea-alike intrusion provocation, then the conflict - according to their doctrine - would move from “regional” to “global”, justifying using nukes, and then blow 1-2 of them (even the less deadly, tactical ones) over Ukraine to force them to capitulate like the US did to JP.
Interpolating that articles quickly gets you to realizing that the UN doesn't even have nukes. So the author is either really dumb, or just doing click bait.
Either way, Russia and the US has had similar levels of nukes for 50 years and both Russia and the US have far less nukes than before because nukes are dumb. Just like that article.
What if Russia didn’t comply with the 1986 dismantling treaty, and just faked doing so? Who is even able to verify that?
One is enough, ie to be detonated somewhere over Ukrainian steps but it’s not about how many will be detonated yet, but how many each side declares they’d like to detonate proactively now. Sir I’ve read Russia’s war doctrine like two years ago, it’s a very short document, 30 or so pages from what I remember. Their current actions folllow it 1:1, they want to lure NATO into coun
That's good stuff. Post it where it says what you're claiming. THis should be possible without the help of the world news euro bros
That's good stuff. Post it where it says what you're claiming. THis should be possible without the help of the world news euro bros
I’ve just talked to Kremlin and they compressed it into 20 pages to not override your attention span https://rusmilsec.blog/wp-content/upload...
What if Russia didn’t comply with the 1986 dismantling treaty, and just faked doing so? Who is even able to verify that?
I'd imagine that the World News Europe would be best for both verifying and convincing folks what actually happened.
Thanks.
But I might have missed it, can you circle with a red pen or post the sentences that back what you claimed?
Thanks.
But I might have missed it, can you circle with a red pen or post the sentences that back what you claimed?
They come from the doctrine posted one link earlier. I’ve read it around 2 years ago. The changes were implemented later, but they’re even in favor of my thesis so wrong tactic comrade
They come from the doctrine posted one link earlier. I’ve read it around 2 years ago. The changes were implemented later, but they’re even in favor of my thesis so wrong tactic comrade
Okay, cool. So you will be showing the parts from that one?
Yes, but first I’ll show even from the one you incorrectly looked through:
No i read that part. That part that sounded similar to Nato's treaty saying an attack on one is an attack on all.
It was literally on the 2nd page but of course it’s easier to assume that I’m in a GRU lone-wolf diversion unit and infiltrated 2+2 under a false mtt wannabe grinder losing donk coverup lol
Since you’re fast reader and obviously read very fast, at the expense of understanding, here’s an excerpt for you: ”A large-scale war may result from an escalation of an armed conflict or a local or regional war and involve a significant number of states from different regions of the world.” and that’s exactly what they are aiming for. NATO will counterattack after a provocation and as they consider Ukraine a NATO’s ное, they’ll attack its territory with baby nukes in response and this will cause an impasse cause NATO might freeze then cause an attack on Ukraine is not an attack on NATO, which is a defense alliance
Lol you underlined large scale war and physical resources and quoted sentences that are almost identical to what the US deems a threat to help build your idiotic fantasy scenario.
Maybe you were better off with the world news euro
Since you’re fast reader and obviously read very fast, at the expense of understanding, here’s an excerpt for you: ”A large-scale war may result from an escalation of an armed conflict or a local or regional war and involve a significant number of states from different regions of the world.” and that’s exactly what they are aiming for. NATO will counterattack after a provocatio
Your boy Vlad is not going to risk using nuclear weapons in Ukraine. He wants us to think he might (like his ludicrous threat to submerge Britain by exploding a nuke in the North Sea), but we know he won't. And apart from anything else, his nukes and their delivery systems haven't had a lot of the required maintenance lately.
