Sunday 8th of September 2024

american long-range missiles for germania....

Hosting US long-range missiles will allow Germany the opportunity to develop similar weapons of its own, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has said.

Berlin and Washington announced at the end of the NATO summit in this week that US cruise missiles will be stationed in Germany from 2026. Deployment of such weapons would previously have been banned under the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, but Washington withdrew from the landmark agreement in 2019.

Speaking to the Deutschlandfunk broadcaster on Thursday, Pistorius expressed relief that US long-range missiles would be deployed in Germany, arguing that this would help cover a “serious loophole” in defense. He also expressed confidence that future US administrations would not reverse the decision.

However, since US long-range missiles will “come to Germany only on a rotational basis,” it is “absolutely clear” that Washington expects Berlin to “invest in the development and procurement of such standoff weapons,” the official stressed.

According to Pistorius, the deployment “will give us the time that we need for that,” arguing that this aim is key to ensuring Germany’s national security.

A joint German-US statement released by the White House revealed that among the weapons to be deployed to the European nation are the SM-6 anti-air missile, which has a range of up to 460km (290 miles), as well as the Tomahawk cruise missile, which can reportedly strike targets more than 2,500km away.

In addition, Washington announced plans to station “developmental hypersonic weapons” in Europe, which will presumably boast a “significantly longer range than current land-based fires”on the continent.

Explaining its decision to abandon the INF treaty back in 2019, the Trump administration claimed that Russia had breached the agreement with its cruise missiles. Moscow denied the claims, and Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that the demise of the accord would “have the gravest consequences.”

Russia continued to abide by the treaty for several years after the US withdrawal, although the Kremlin announced earlier this month that the country’s defense industry would resume development of intermediate and shorter range nuclear-capable missiles.

“We now know that the US is not only producing these missile systems, but has also brought them to Europe, Denmark, to use in exercises,” Putin explained at the time.

In a post on Telegram on Thursday, Russian Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov denounced the recently announced deployment of US long-range missiles to Germany as a “direct threat to international security and strategic stability.” The diplomat added that the move could lead to “uncontrolled escalation amid dangerously soaring Russia-NATO tensions.”

https://www.rt.com/news/600862-germany-pistorius-us-long-range-missiles/

 

WHO CREATED THE UKRAINE/RUSSIA CONFLICT? ANSWER: THE USA AND NATO.

 

laughing jackass....

 

By Les Leopold / Substack

 

While we await President Biden’s talk with the Lord Almighty, the Democratic Party lords are planning the coronation of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Is she the best Democratic Party nominee?

Many party leaders are eager to shut down that discussion. For them, it’s game over. They say that Harris should be the nominee and anyone who opposes her will greatly offend key Democratic constituencies, starting with the Black women who have been the backbone of the party in key states.

How would it look, for example, if a white woman like Governor Gretchen Whitmore, were chosen instead? After all, Harris is literally “next in line.” Picking anyone else, therefore, would be like cutting ahead of the line. Not fair and an insult to people of color.

But that argument is a stretch. It’s not automatic that vice presidents get a free ride to the nomination. Sometimes they have to fight for it, as Hubert Humphrey did in 1968. And Biden himself, of course, was pushed aside for Hillary Clinton in 2016, even after serving two terms as Obama’s VP.

Party elites also point to the fact that Harris is well known and therefore has a big edge over newer candidates who have not yet been vetted through the national political grinder. But that also cuts the other way.

While Harris is well known, that’s not necessarily a plus. As of July 5, 51.2 percent disapprove of the job the Veep is doing, with only 37.1 percent approving, according to ABC News’ 538 poll averages. And currently, she is trailing Trump in the latest poll, 47 to 42 percent. Her supporters will correctly point out, however, that the other, lesser-known Democratic hopefuls are currently polling even more poorly against Trump.

Harris also has a stellar electoral record to be considered in California, where she served as Attorney General and then U.S. Senator. And, of course, she won the vice presidency in 2020, but that vote was largely about Biden and Trump.

As a national candidate for president in 2020, however, she did not do well. After one good debate in June 2020, her campaign faltered, as her poll numbers crashed from 15 percent to 3 percent in December. She then withdrew even before the primaries began.

Some will write that off as old news that doesn’t tell us much about the current situation, but really, why exactly doesn’t that history matter? What concrete evidence do we have that she would do better now as a presidential candidate?

What counts most today is who the Democratic rank-and-file really want as their presidential candidate when Biden has his come-to-Jesus moment and stands down. The party’s candidate this year needs to inspire and draw the broadest possible turnout to defeat Donald Trump in the battleground states.

The Democrat mantra is that “democracy is on the line” this fall. That same concern should guide their candidate selection process. Are they willing to open it up, so the base of the party has a say in who is nominated? If so, then the Democrats should seriously consider a reasonable process outlined by Jonathan Alter in the New York Times:

  • Only those with a certain threshold of support in polls may take part in Democratic debates scheduled before the convention.
  • Each qualifying candidate will be granted a half-hour address on the opening night of the convention, with the winner expanding on it in his or her acceptance speech.
  • Delegates should take into consideration—though not be bound by—state and national polls showing the relative strengths of the candidates.
  • The candidates should identify possible running mates.

Representative James Clyburn (D-S.C.), a Biden campaign co-chair no less, is suggesting a mini-primary before the August nominating convention. And James Carville argues for holding four regional town halls for new candidates selected by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, who also would chair the meetings.

It’s possible that Kamala Harris would come out of this process as the strongest contender, igniting and mobilizing many of the key Democratic Party constituencies. But it would be a grave error to use that untested assumption to eliminate rank-and-file Democrats from having a real say in the process.

We need and deserve to see Harris share the debate stage with Governors Newsom (CA), Whitmer (MI), and Shapiro (PA), and other possible candidates. After two debates it should become clear who most inspires the Democratic base and therefore who has the greatest chance to defeat Trump.

An open convention and complete transparency would help sell the eventual candidate to a broad swath of Democrats and a healthy number of independents. It is a major feature of our modern populist era that people want to be heard, not ignored. They don’t want elites making key decisions for them.

We’re in this mess because Biden and party elites refused to listen to the vast majority of Democrats who believe he is too old for a second term. Party leaders would make a similar mistake if they ignore the party’s base yet again.

Yes, popular democracy is messy. There is no guarantee that the most electable candidate will emerge. But Democrats must act as democrats, both to avoid hypocrisy and to improve their chances to protect democracy this fall.

https://scheerpost.com/2024/07/09/les-leopold-the-crowning-of-kamala-harris/

 

READ FROM TOP.

neurological...

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - President Joe Biden said during a press conference after the NATO summit that he would take a neurological exam if his doctors recommended it but so far he has not received such suggestions from his medical team.

"If they think I should have a neurological exam again, I'll do it, [but] no one's suggesting that to me now," Biden said on Thursday.

Earlier in the press conference, Biden referred to Vice President Kamala Harris as former US President, and his likely opponent, Donald Trump.

"I wouldn't have picked Vice President Trump to be vice president [inaudible] if I think she's not qualified to be president," Biden said.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20240712/biden-mixes-up-harris--trump-says-hell-take-neurological-exam-if-his-doctors-suggest-it-1119346312.html

 

READ FROM TOP.