This week the US approved Ukraine’s use of ATACMS long-range missiles on targets deeper inside Russian territory after Russia launched another massive missile strike against Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure. Putin protested this use of Western weapons and declared that even non-nuclear missile attacks would be considered grounds for a nuclear response. But in this particular case, it is highly unlikely that Russia will start a nuclear exchange given that Russia isn’t in any position to consolidate any military gains after launching nuclear weapons at Ukraine or NATO. If Putin can’t fully invade and occupy the countries he hits with a nuclear weapons, retaliation would be immense by other Western nuclear powers. As I’ve told readers time and again, Russia will strike someday but it won’t happen until China is ready to backup Russia, and they aren’t ready yet—not until 2027 at the earliest, according to Xi jinping. Putin is a hypocrite claiming the need for self defense with nuclear weapons after ordering Russian long-range strikes against another sovereign nation, with civilian casualties. How is Ukraine’s retaliation with US-made ATACMS missiles against Russian military targets any different in principle, especially considering North Korea is supplying Russia with missiles, artillery shells, and troops in this fight? What is different in this latest escalation is the hype, starting with Putin saying this means the US and NATO are at war with Russia, and followed by irrational cries of American conservatives that Biden is bringing on an “imminent WWIII.” This week I’ll explain why neither is true.
The Kremlin re-framed the remarks from saying this crosses another “red line” leading to nuclear war, to merely accusing President Joe Biden of “adding fuel to the fire..” But the alternative media is wringing their hands accusing Biden of trying to provoke WWIII, and it is all coming from conservative leaders and pundits that are opposed to the Ukraine war as if it is an extension of the neocon’s “forever wars” on terror based on the 9/11 false flag attack. But this is not the same as the phony war on terror.
Anti-war conservatives have all uniformly refused to recognize the difference between the attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan, who had nothing to do with 9/11 versus the proxy war on Russia, which faked the demise of Communism, and which is now trying to reconstitute the Soviet military alliance, which still presents an existential danger to the partially free world.
But the hue and cry about Biden initiating WWIII is kind of an “I told you so,” by critics of the Ukraine war to justify their opposition: “See where these is leading?” they say. Here are some of the most outlandish claims:
Alex Jones, who claims he is in “solidarity with Russia” says, “IT’S OFFICIAL: A State of War Between Russia & NATO Countries Now Exists According To Public Wartime Doctrine,” followed by the headline “The Desperate Globalists Are Doing Everything They Can To Escalate The Conflict Into Full World War! Must-Watch/Share Emergency Broadcast!”
He’s wrong on both counts. They are calculated escalations in the continuing quest of the globalists to keep Russia weak in conventional military terms, so Putin can’t make good on his nuclear threats until China is ready to join him.
What Alex Jones and the other anti-war libertarians and conservatives also fail to realize is that this is a fundamental change in globalist strategy —from building up two existential enemies (Russia and China, ever since their inception in 1917 and 1949 respectively), to switching sides and starting to attack them verbally and militarily just prior to the next World War so that no one (except a few like me) will remember who built these two massive enemies through technology transfers and favorable trade agreements!
Russia is no more an innocent party in this war than Israel is in the war against Hamas. Sadly, AJ never admits error when his “emergency broadcast” claims don’t come true.
But the most outlandish hype of all came from Russian-shill, and former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter who said on X,
“The moment the ATACMS is used, Russia will make good on its promised response, and the response will be catastrophic for Ukraine and devastating (emphasis was his) for NATO and the US. When I say catastrophic I mean Kiev will be destroyed! I[t] won’t be a nuclear weapon, but I’ve been told what the weapon probably will be… and it will be a gigantic thermobaric bomb that will level downtown Kiev, killing everybody there.”
Note: a thermobaric bomb is a two-stage bomb that explodes and spreads an explosive aerosol cloud of explosive gas or dust that is then ignited causing a massive explosion and fireball.
Ritter has already been proven wrong. The first ATACMS missile attack on a weapons depot inside Russia proper came on Wednesday, and there was no thermobaric attack on Kiev, let alone completely destroying it and devastating NATO. It proves you shouldn’t trust any claimed insiders that feed you disinformation. Ritter has been consistently wrong on all his “imminent defeat” predictions about Ukraine going back to the first year of the war. I’ve never heard him issue a retraction or apology for his errors.
Russia didn’t have to wait long for Zelensky to take up Biden on his long range use permission. Zelensky issued a stern warning to Russia the day Biden’s decision was announced saying, “Missile will speak louder than words, and they surely will come. Strikes are not carried out with words. Such things are not announced. They will speak for themselves. They certainly will!” The attack on the weapons depot came the next day.
Russia retaliated with multiple rocket launches at the city of Dnipro. Putin claimed in a prepared propaganda video that all these escalations were the fault of the US, and that Russia has always sought for peace and reconciliation (the most blatant lie I’ve ever heard). He also claimed he launched a new hypersonic ICBM missile at Dnipro bragging that these are impossible for Western anti-missile batteries to intercept (probably true). But the video of the attack shows multiple waves of smaller rockets in succession landing with small explosions. Western military experts dispute that it was a long range ICBM.
The Biden administration also announce a reversal on the ban of anti-personnel mines for Ukraine, but they were of the variety that self-deactivate after a set period of time so as to not cause harm to civilians after a war is ended.
Russia retaliated in Europe by cutting off Austria’s natural gas supply. According to the Epoch Times,
Gazprom informed Austria’s largest energy supplier, OMV, on Nov. 15 that all gas supplies were to be stopped. More than 90 percent of Austria’s gas imports came from Russia as of March.
Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer assured citizens of energy availability following the Russian announcement. “What we have been preparing for since the outbreak of war in Ukraine has happened… I can promise: No one will freeze in the winter, no home will remain cold. We are prepared: our gas storage facilities are full and from tomorrow we will receive sufficient gas from other sources.”
The UK and France have supplied Ukraine with long-range Storm Shadow missiles but only France has authorized their use in Russia’s territory. UK PM Keir Starmer has refused permission to use the Storm Shadow missiles except in the occupied Kursk region, and German PM Scholz is still refusing to send Germany’s long range Taurus missile to Ukraine.
In other related war news, the Danish navy has boarded and detained a Chinese cargo vessel, Yi Peng 3, that is accused of dropping its anchor in the Danish sea channel and purposely severing two communications cables. The vessel was captained by a Russian, contributing to the intrigue.
In the final analysis, these missile policy changes are not about goading Russia into WWIII, which it isn’t ready for it yet, but rather Biden handlers simply trying to increase Ukraine’s leverage in negotiations as Trump tries to unwind this war without it becoming a total disaster like the exit from Afghanistan.