Removing restrictions on Ukraine’s use of Western weapons would directly involve the US and its allies in the conflict with Russia and would be met with an appropriate response, Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned.

The West has sent Ukraine long-range missiles such as Storm Shadows and ATACMS, which Kiev has so far used against Crimea and Donbass. In the past several days, however, the US and UK have suggested they might allow these weapons to be used to strike targets deeper into internationally recognized Russian territory.

“We are not talking about allowing or prohibiting the Kiev regime from striking Russian territory,” Putin said on Thursday. “It is doing so already, with unmanned aerial vehicles and other means.”

Ukraine lacks the capability to use Western long-range systems, Putin added, noting that targeting for such strikes requires intelligence from NATO satellites, while firing solutions can “only be entered by NATO military personnel.”

This will mean that NATO countries, the US, European countries are fighting against Russia. 

“If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the US and European countries, in the conflict in Ukraine,” the Russian president said. “Their direct participation, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict.”

With that in mind, Putin added, Russia will “make the appropriate decisions based on the threats facing us.”

Some limitations on the use of Western-supplied weapons were originally put in place to allow the US and its allies to claim they were not directly involved in the conflict with Russia, while arming Ukraine to the tune of $200 billion. Kiev has been clamoring for the restrictions to be lifted since May. 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy have hinted that the restrictions might be lifted this week, citing the alleged delivery of Iranian ballistic missiles to Russia as the pretext. Iran has denied sending any missiles to Russia, calling the accusations “psychological warfare” by countries heavily involved in arming Ukraine.

Putin has previously warned NATO members to be aware of “what they are playing with” when discussing plans to allow Kiev to strike deep inside Russian territory using weapons provided by the West. Speaking with major news agencies on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) in June, the Russian president said Russia would respond by shooting down the weapons in question and then retaliating against those responsible.

One of the possible responses Putin mentioned at the time was arming Western enemies with long-range precision weapons. 

https://www.rt.com/russia/603934-putin-warning-nato-weapons/

READ FROM TOP

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

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

Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” shares a DM clip of him and special co-host Megyn Kelly talking about how young Swifties going through puberty are put in actual danger of getting unnecessary top surgery and gender-affirming care because of the ignorance of Taylor Swift.

READ FROM TOP

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

Taylor Swift's post-debate endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, appears to have completely backfired. A new post-debate poll from YouGov released Saturday found that while 8% of voters said Swift's endorsement made them "somewhat" or "much more likely" to support the Democratic ticket, a significant 20% said they are "somewhat" or "much less likely" to vote for former President Donald Trump’s opponent after Swift spoke out.

The majority of respondents, however - 66% - said Swift’s high-profile endorsement made no difference in how they will vote in the upcoming November election, according to the NY Post.

The Grammy-winning artist made waves on Instagram to her 283 million followers shortly after Tuesday night’s presidential debate, stating, "I’ve done my research, and I’ve made my choice." She encouraged her followers to do the same, emphasizing that "the choice is yours to make." Swift praised Harris as "a steady-handed, gifted leader" who could lead with "calm and not chaos."

Despite Swift's powerful platform, the endorsement seems to have mixed, and even negative, impacts on voter sentiment. While 32% of those polled believe her endorsement could have a positive effect on Harris’ campaign, 27% said they don’t think it will make a difference either way. A notable 41% - nearly 460 respondents - expressed the view that the "Shake It Off" singer shouldn’t speak publicly about politics at all, reflecting the persistent debate over whether celebrities should wade into political waters. Meanwhile, 38% felt she should make public endorsements, indicating that there remains a split on the role celebrities should play in shaping political discourse.

Most of the poll's participants - 66% - reported not being fans of Swift, while 28% identified as fans and 6% as big fans. Unsurprisingly, the majority of her "big fans" were women and registered Democrats.

Trump, meanwhile, didn't hold back after Swift's endorsement of Harris, writing on Truth Social:

I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT !

Swift’s endorsement may have stirred more than just political conversations; it also sparked a wave of civic action. Reports indicate that her call to action led to a flood of traffic on the voter registration website, vote.gov, well into Wednesday afternoon. A spokesperson for the site noted that 337,826 visitors came to vote.gov after clicking a custom link Swift shared on Instagram, showing that while her endorsement may not have swayed many votes, it certainly mobilized civic engagement.

That said, the YouGov poll reveals a potential disconnect between public celebrity endorsements and actual voting behavior. While 46% of respondents thought Harris won the debate, compared to 19% for Trump, only 6% said the debate caused them to reconsider their vote. A substantial 76% of respondents said it did not impact their decision, reflecting a possible gap between high-profile endorsements and tangible voting shifts.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/sour-note-taylor-swift-harris-endorsement-backfires-more-voters-turn-trump

READ FROM TOP

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.