cooling or warming up?

Neither Russian nor American authorities say anything about the missile attack on Ukraine's Lviv region that took place on March 9. However, the consequences of this attack can be seen in the evolution of NATO policy.

Reports of the Kinzhal missile attack on a NATO bunker were published on Ukrainian Telegram channels and in a little-known Greek publication. Neither the Russian Ministry of Defense nor the Pentagon has commented on the event.

by Peter Yermilin

Kinzhal hypersonic missiles could only hit the target, as they are invulnerable to all air defenses. It's a fact that even the Pentagon admits.

Second, Kinzhal missiles were used to hit a very important target deep underground. It would be a bunker of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, where NATO specialists also worked. The bunker would be 120 meters underground.

The Kremlin must have had good reason to carry out such an attack. One of these reasons was an attack terrorist perpetrated in the Russian region of Bryansk on March 2, in which a civilian was killed and a boy injured.

It was a terrorist act, because the mission of a group of Ukrainian militants under the cover of the “Russian Liberation Army” had no military significance. It is highly likely that Ukrainian, American and possibly British secret services were involved in the operation. But what is more important is that it was the first terrorist attack on the “former” territories of Russia. This was already an existential threat, and Russia had to respond.

The answer came in the form of the Kinzhal missile attack, during which as many as 160 NATO officers were reportedly wiped out in the bunker.

NATO has only one adequate answer left, a nuclear answer

If NATO recognizes these losses, it will have to take adequate measures in response. NATO could hit a Russian control center, for example in the Kherson region. However, this would be a tactical nuclear strike from Europe, as NATO does not have an elusive hypersonic weapon like Russia's.

Tests of such a missile ended in failure in March. It so happens that Moscow has long had a wide range of hypersonic weapons and is working on its new generation, while the Pentagon is only striving to achieve stable flights at supersonic speeds.

After March 9, Washington faced a dilemma:

either raise the level of conflict with Russia to a nuclear level
or seek another way out and freeze the conflict.

As the events that followed show, the second option was chosen, because the objective of the war for the Americans is not to defeat the Russian Federation, but to allow their bankers to invest and reap enormous profits from the restoration of Ukraine. Of course, Russia should leave Ukraine with a pro-Western government for this purpose.

Apparently, US military officials feared that some members of the US Congress would insist on a nuclear strike against Russia. This is an additional reason for the American media to ignore the consequences of the Kinzhal missile strike.

How will the conflict in Ukraine be frozen?

Other events follow logically.

In March and April, the Western media tripled the number of articles about the bad situation in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. People in red shorts leaked intelligence data describing the collapse of Ukraine's armed forces.

They also spoke of the need for negotiations between kyiv and Moscow, with territorial concessions at stake.

French President Emmanuel Macron visited China (because Xi Jinping does not want to meet Anthony Blinken and does not take calls from Joe Biden) where he joined Beijing's peace plan.

The "solidarity corridors" for the export of Ukrainian cereals across Europe have been urgently abolished, which deprived Kyiv of budget revenue. Note that it was Warsaw that initiated this restriction when Poland was burning to create a confederation with Ukraine. This idea was abandoned.

There was even talk of the physical elimination of Zelensky.

Jens Stoltenberg's visit to kyiv was the icing on the cake. While Stoltenberg was in kyiv, the Washington Post published an article blaming Zelensky for the situation in Bakhmout. The United States would have warned him, but he can only blame himself. It seems that Stoltenberg gave the last warning to Zelensky: to negotiate with Moscow.

Western bankers should be allowed to make profits

In the near future, probably with a different direction in kyiv, Washington will accept all Moscow's demands on the Ukraine issue in terms of territorial concessions. In return, the United States will participate in the economic restoration of Ukraine. Of course, this plan may not materialize and Washington may find itself empty-handed. In this case, it will be difficult to explain to American taxpayers what really happened in the Ukraine crisis.

One may wonder why the Russian Ministry of Defense does not say a word about the destruction of the NATO bunker in Lviv. It seems that the reason is the same: Russia does not need an escalation of the conflict with the United States either.

source: France Pravda

NOTE SOME OF THE NUMBERS OF PERSONNEL KILLED AND THE DEPTH AT WHICH THE "BUNKER" WAS VARY FROM SOURCES. BUT IT LIKELY THAT SOMETHING "MASSIVE" HAPPENED. IT A BIT LIKE SY HERSH DISCLOSURE OF WHO BLEW UP THE NORD SEA PIPELINES.

MEANWHILE,THE ARTICLE ABOVE INDICATE A COOLING OF WESTERN HOSTILITIES.... THE VIDEO LINK BELOW DOES THE OPPOSITE... THE ARGUMENTS ARE POISED....:

BREAKING! The UNTHINKABLE is About to Happen: A 2023 Timeline of Nuclear War

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7Tp6cpeq1E

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

By Gus Leonisky at 23 Apr 2023 - 5:51am
Gus Leonisky's blog
Login or register to post comments

on the china front.....

Wong’s two card trick on Australians By Mike Gilligan

Minister Wong’s speech to the National Press Club demonstrates that when she lays her cards on the table they do not present truly. A mathematician would advise to multiply her claims by minus one. Australia is well along on a path to make, not avert, war with China. Peace holds no weight with this government. Australians must count on failed leadership from our leaders, henceforth.

In addressing the National Press Club on 17 April, Australia’s Foreign Minister Penny Wong began with “today I want to talk to you about how we avert war and maintain peace”. Ah, at last, I thought, reality is about to surface – this Labor government is about to come clean that the United States has been tilling the ground for war with China, into which previous LNP governments have implanted Australia. And Penny is about to talk about how Australia will be extricated. And, I recall thinking, my publisher John Menadue would no longer want a piece on why the Australian government should be upfront with its people, and say we will not be part of such war.

Instead, the audience was mocked. War would be averted, it was explained, when “All countries exercise our agency to avert war, and maintain peace”. Duh. That wisdom flowed from a trail of undergrad banalities sprinkled with the word “agency”.

Paul Keating was way too kind in his response to this speech, its evasive half- truths and empty abstractions borrowed from respectable applications and slyly fashioned phrases. The ABC cameraman panning the audience caught the baffled brains brilliantly. Earnest professional men and women being ridiculed while dining finely.

Australians concerned about being swept into a superpower war of America’s making were dismissed as lacking focus –“viewing the future of the region simply in terms of great powers competing for primacy means countries’ own national interests can fall out of focus. It diminishes the power of each country to engage other than through the prism of a great power.” Others would say the reverse applies –little else will matter if we are part of a war between these two; that is where our national interest is most at risk, with overwhelming consequence. Comprehending the path of that rivalry and acting in our own interest has to be our top priority. Simple. Duh, again.

Indeed, Wong appears to be saying that also:

America has often been talked of as the indispensable power. It remains so. But the nature of that indispensability has changed.

As we seek a strategic equilibrium, with all countries exercising their agency to achieve peace and prosperity, America is central to balancing a multipolar region.

Strategic equilibrium? Infinite equilibria are possible, depending on how component states exert influence or agency.

America has long been clear which equilibrium it demands. Dominance over all other system states. China has a different equilibrium in mind. It will do things its way. So, the two appear mutually exclusive; daily becoming more so, assisted by Australia’s actions of the last decade. Wong’s ascribing the “central” role to the US is just a euphemism for dominance. So Wong is seeking a US-centric Asia-Pacific. No progress from Scomo.

But, ever the optimist, perhaps there is nuance, hope yet, by “lowering heat”?

So I will say it now to the National Press Club – to avoid any possible misunderstanding: our job is to lower the heat on any potential conflict, while increasing pressure on others to do the same.

Entirely admirable. Wong put her cards on the table. So this is how Wong sees her job, the way to achieving strategic equilibrium. Perhaps, even, ”avert war and maintain peace”.

Alas, the facts say the opposite. Australia has been fuelling the fire of conflict for years, through a war preparation mechanism, by intergovernmental agreement, tabled quietly in Parliament in 2014 – enabling the United States to build the machinery to wage war with China from our territory, utilising our forces and resources – at its pleasure. While it should be called the “Pathway to War with China Agreement”, it goes by the debate-deadening moniker of “Force Posture Agreement” (FPA).

In a paper recently published by the Carnegie Institute for Peace, Ashley Townshend from the United States Study Centre, explains that “a tectonic shift is underway as Canberra positions itself as a critical node in supporting high-end U.S. military operations to preserve a stable balance of power in an increasingly contested Indo-Pacific region…”

“The posture arrangements are intended to reinforce the United States’ military position in the Indo-Pacific by leveraging Australia’s strategic geography, geopolitical alignment, and capacity for high-end military integration..developing the airfields, fuel depots, prepositioned weapons stores, and habits of interoperability required to operate U.S. Bomber Task Forces out of northern Australia. Elsewhere, through the annual rotation of around 2,500 U.S. Marines to Darwin, the ADF is honing its ability to support and deploy with Marine expeditionary units as they implement new operational concepts to rapidly deploy precision strike capabilities in contested littoral environments. Both aim to enhance collective deterrence in the near-term by dispersing U.S. forces, integrating U.S. and Australian personnel, and creating new attack vectors and targeting problems for Chinese planners.”

No cooling going on here. Wong knows that the heat on China has intensified implacably. And she acknowledges that it will be given incendiary assistance by Australia’s unparalleled future defence spending growth, without end, to be crowned with the fiscal travesty of nuclear submarines.

And Minister Wong knows that the equilibrium she espouses has already shifted profoundly – with Australia’s direct security capacity heavily diminished in order to enhance America’s dominance. It’s evident that our government will divert our taxes much more for America’s aims.

That’s more than enough for now. Wong’s sickening regurgitation of the Morrison-era defence flame throwing, and the intellectually barren rot about Australia projecting force forward, is for another time. As is the America-on-the beg, its financial programs showing it prefers not to pay for its war. Guess who will?

Except to say how dismal it was of Penny Wong not to find the grace to acknowledge Paul Keating’s contribution to Australians’ understanding how we are being misled on the grave risks our nation faces. Or his sacrifice, of major disagreement with the party of his lifetime. He has nothing to gain. Unlike his detractors.

The Labor Party is sadly and badly diminished.

https://johnmenadue.com/wongs-two-card-trick-on-australians/

Primary links

Search

Recent comments

Democracy Links

Member's Off-site Blogs

cooling or warming up?

on the china front.....

User login