NUCLEAR BLACKMAIL PERMALINK
Israel's nuclear deterrent method exposed. This information was discovered as part of my fukushima report
Israel is keeping a dirty little secret . . . . .
Jim Stone, Freelance Journalist, Jan 8 2012
There is a reason why the U.S. government is waging war all over the world, even obviously against the good of the nation.
There is a reason why the U.S. government rapidly rolled over and did the banker bailout without question, in an amount which exceeded the value of every mortgage in the country by more than 3x, and every mortgage in default by over 15x; an amount which will destroy America once the ripple effect is finished.
Many of you are no doubt scratching your heads, wondering why every elected president turns back on his campaign promises the second the inaguration is complete. Believe me, the corruption of American elected officials is not that deep. You cannot elect several presidents in sequence, and have them all perfectly screw the country, ESPECIALLY the way Bush and Obama did; they had their reason, and it is called NUCLEAR BLACKMAIL.
What if they never wanted to renig (at least not so completely)? What about Obama? And what about the other countries, which also screwed their people the same way? Why is it seemingly a universal truth, that all governments around the world are simultaneously going against the will of their people, in favor of the Jewish bankers and Israel?
I believe I have figured it out, and I have documented it.
I am going to tell you the hows and whys of Israel's dirty little secret - how they got their nuclear offensive capability in place, why they decided on the chosen method, and how they ended up using it.
Israel had a serious launch dilemma Israel is in a unique predicament. It's small land mass and hostile neighborhood have made developing a space program and ballistic missile defense system all but impossible.
Geography matters. Most nations are priviledged to have vast tracts of land suitible for space launches, or friendly neighbors who will permit the use of their airspace during a space launch. Israel is not one of them.
If a rocket is to be put to its most practical use, it must launch toward the rising sun to make use of earth's rotational velocity and add it to the speed of the rocket. If a rocket is launched towards the setting sun, it must first accelerate to the speed of the earth's rotation, and then an additional 1,000 mph just to get to where zero would have been with an eastward launch. Though it can be done, it wastes fuel and after launch another problem then presents itself - your payload will be traveling opposite to all the many thousands of other satellites and space debris in orbit and an eventual catastrophic collision is virtually assured. This has made westward launches both taboo and difficult. Westward launches are considered unacceptable, though Israel has done it.
Israel has been stifled in space of because of these difficulties. The prime Eastward launch direction will violate both Jordani and Saudi airspace, because a rocket has to reach an altitude of 60 miles to be formally above, and not trespassing on a nation. Though a straight up launch which then turns East after an acceptable altitude is reached is possible, it will waste so much fuel and require such a large rocket that it will be too impractical to be considered an option. This has spelled doom for a land based ballistic missile defense system in Israel because only a small east to west launch corridor is available over the mediterannean. So while the Israelis have launched satellites into orbit through this window, a ballistic defense system which needs a full 360 degree launch direction to be fully effective is not possible. Israel was forced to both explore and implement other methods of delivering an effective nuclear deterrent.
Sadly, their only affordable option allowed them to screw the world What if Israel came up with a way to smuggle nuclear weapons into the most sensitive areas of all the developed nations - areas where if anything big goes BOOM all is lost? Could there be a clandestine reason for the supposed shortage of Helium 3, which is needed in the type of radiation detectors required to detect a nuclear weapon? You can block protons, but neutrons are difficult to shield entirely, and you can forget about neutrinos - you can't hide a nuke from the right detector, one which uses helium 3 in it's detector element. Why did America and all other nations somehow run out of Helium 3 a few years ago, which simultaneously left their borders open to nuclear weapons smuggling? Coincidence? I think not. The picture to the left appears to be a legitimate camera in a body that could also hold a nuke. It does not appear to actually be a nuke. HOWEVER
This particular one in the above picture appears to be a bona fide nuke camera. Note the differences - At the top of the gun barrel, there is a reinforced area to survive the ignition of the projectile propellant. The "cameras" look superficial and appear to be mounted to the surface of the barrel with very little intruding depth. Think about the webcam in your laptop or the camera in your Iphone - Nowadays that's all the depth a very good camera needs if price is no object, so it is easy to build convincing and deceptive functionality into the unit to justify it's enormous size.
Israel's main strategy has been to smuggle nuclear weapons into sensitive areas of nations under the disguise of security contracts. These security contracts use "proprietary" equipment that is maintained only by Israelis. In this particular case, the proprietary equipment is stated to be "biscopic" cameras, which are put in place by security companies operating as front companies on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces. Magna BSP, the company which provided"security" at the Fukushima nuclear facility in Japan is one of them. During my investigation of the Fukushima mission, I studied Magna BSP and discovered that in addition to Japan, they also got security contracts in Brazil, Germany, and the United States. All 4 of these countries have provided massive financial "bailouts" to zionist bankers, and though I have not proven that all of these countries were blackmailed with the threat of a nuclear armageddon, the coincidence is very suspicious and given what happened in Japan, even a little more than suspicious. In the fukushima report the reason given was that Japan offered to enrich uranium for Iran. But shortly thereafter, Japan damaged it's economy by surrendering 1.7 trillion USD to Jewish bankers even though no prior debt was owed.
This particular "camera" is a concept drawing of what the final design will look like. But don't count on it looking that way after this report or the Fukushima report, many large items which can be excused off as security devices can also house a nuke. Additionally, other types of contracts use equipment that is very suitable for housing an implosion nuke, which is often much smaller than a gun nuke.
Gun type nukes do not produce very predictable results which is a good explanation for why the other two exploded reactors did not produce a mushroom cloud. Reactor 4, which "exploded" had been de-fueled and did not even have a core in it, this was proven with the classified photos in the Fukushima report. This made the explosion at reactor four flatly impossible. The un predictability of gun nukes is a good reason to move away from them, so I expect the gun nuke camera to be a dying breed. Perhaps the Israelis wanted to get rid of old nuclear inventory, and from the crudeness of the looks of the units delivered thus far, I suspect exactly that. I strongly recommend you take the time and read the Fukushima report in full, it's all documented from official sources, contains about 7 hours of reading material and took hundreds of hours to research out.
With the inadequately explained and inexcusable absense of helium 3, most of the world's borders are now wide open for Israel to get it's deterrent fully in place and have been for some time. I believe Israel has multiple nuclear weapons in place in key areas of the United States, Germany, Japan and Brazil, and has plans for or has succeeded in smuggling nukes into many other countries. Israel has been able to make hundreds of nuclear weapons from the reactor in Dimona, and has stolen enough nuclear material from America to make additional thousands. I believe Israel is holding the world nuclear hostage. If anyone says anything, opens their mouth, they get killed. If a nation goes against the will of Israel, and does not submit financially, BOOM. And it will all be blamed on the environment, a meteor, or "terrorists" because after all, TERRORISTS smuggle nukes in through the ports, RIGHT?
The next time that guy you voted for renegs on his campaign promises IMMEDIATELY after inaguration
The next time your government forks over unbelievable cash to Jewish bankers and destroys your future;
The next time your government sends your children off to die in a war against a nation that never attacked you;
The next time a 911 happens;
The next time another SOPA act passes, or some other legislation no one wants passes and directs hatred at a government that needs our support to survive:
consider this article -- I BET I NAILED IT!
OK, SO MAYBE PEOPLE STILL DOUBT THE NUCLEAR BLACKMAIL ANGLE. IF YOU DO, CONSIDER THIS, NUCLEAR BLACKMAIL IS NOW MSM DOCUMENTED!
Immigrant Nuclear Blackmail? perhaps so. Explosives found in Swedish Nuke plant
Permalink Jim Stone, Sunday, July 1 2012
We need ACTION on the following topic:
UPDATE: The original link I had for this report is now dead, however the BBC covered it, but not as well or as accurately as the original report I quoted did. The original report was very clear: The explosives were found on top of the fire extinguisher behind the seat of a forklift that goes in and out of the reactor area of the nuclear facility. BBC did a relative whitewash, but at least their report proves something happened. I have left the original link in place even though it does not work anymore
Prepare for another Fukushima! A fist sized lump of plastic explosives was found on top of the fire extinguisher in a forklift which had access to the heart of a Swedish nuclear facility. Plastic explosives of the type used for demolition are like modeling clay, which can be rammed and crammed into any space. And you cannot get a fist sized lump of this type of explosive left laying around ANYWHERE unless it came from a larger batch. You can bet the forklift brought in a whole pallet or several pallets of explosives, which are now planted inside. The linked report tries to make it sound like "A fist sized lump on the fire extinguisher in the forklift" was no big deal because "it did not have a detonator." Where did that fist sized lump come from? Someone most likely spaced out, and forgot one of those fist sized lumps in the forklift while DOING THE JOB. Probably while repositioning the forklift to make it easier to grab more to cram it into the bottom of one of the reactors. OOOPS!!
All the news reports about this are playing it down, and I beg the question WHY? WHY WOULD THEY PLAY THIS DOWN? Explosives found in a nuke plant? The answer is obvious. Someone is blackmailing Sweden with a nuclear armageddon the same way they did with Fukushima, and the only way Sweden, and not Israel, will be forced to take the blame for any nuclear disasters Israel causes is to keep a tight lid on the fact that Israel is using it's victim status and the holocaust to blind people with sympathy while they use security firms to install death promises for non compliance to whatever Israel and other zioelitists want. Update: Yes, Sweden's immigration situation was probably deeply rooted in this incident. And if this was silenced in the ziopress, the Jews did this, pure and simple. And if the Swedes do ANYTHING to remove the explosives, they are no doubt under surveillance and will be set off.
If explosives were found at a Burger King in Peoria, do you think it would be more newsworthy? Why are they silent about this at a nuke plant?
I will make a guess. If Sweden now fails to live up to blackmail demands and destroy their country doing it, the nuke plant goes BOOM. So it will be a choice between a physical death and a financial/cultural one. I would bet this is one of MANY nuclear facilities around the world which has been rigged to explode just like Fukushima did. This is just the one where someone spaced out and it got caught by someone who could speak around the censorship. And I predict (but I will not put a date on it) that IF the elite really feel threatened they will just destroy a large number of nuclear facilities, contaminate everything, and THEN use the window of opportunity to throw the final control net. Explosives in a nuke plant is such major news the silence on this topic is damning.
Think about this - They have TRILLIONS of dollars to blow, and have hired MILLIONS of psychologically sterilized goons, on top of having almost their entire tribe be to one extent or another psychopathic. They easily have the manpower and patience they need to get the right people into key places in various facilities to lace them with explosives under the full permission of security and the employees. Needless to say, when the places go boom they will have all called in sick that day, or will have left one by one in the months before the event. Explosives in ONE nuclear facility is grounds for having ALL of them shuttered and gone through by legitimate bomb teams, but you can bet that will never happen. The fact that it will not, and the media silence on this issue is proof that the world has for the most part already been conquered. The alternative press did not even run with this story. What's up with THAT?
No doubt Stuxnet also found it's way to wherever the explosives did, to create a plausible scenario before the place goes BOOM.
We need ACTION on this topic.
APPARENTLY CREDIBLE VIDEO SURFACED OF SYRIA SHOOTING DOWN TOMAHAWKS Russia said they did not do it. But that does not mean Syria did not do it!
Credible video has surfaced of 4 successful shoot downs of Tomahawk missiles by Syria. The video is taken from the perspective of a high speed aircraft in low altitude flight. The video shows what appears to be launches of surface to air missiles that fly towards targets and release chaff for the tomahawks to fly through and be destroyed. The explosion event at the end of the missile stream (where it detonates to destroy its target) looks like a detonation sequence of extended duration, involving the explosion of a huge number of bomblets. Additionally, the missile streams themselves are laced with bomblets, that also explode along the entire length the missile traveled.
If this video is legit, it fully explains how so few tomahawks hit their targets, AND it also fully explains why they did so poorly on arrival - if they mostly had damaged sensor systems from flying through shrapnel but still managed to arrive they would not do as well at selecting targets when they arrived. This video could explain it all, SEE THIS
UPDATE: This video had dozens of comments and now they are expunged??!!?? There were great comments below this video when I first posted this, now they are all gone! GEE, I WONDER WHY?
jim, Tomahawks are subsonic. they can be shot down by fast aircrafts and even by ground fire. they cost 1.5 million dollars each. S300 - 400 are hundred times as much per piece. They have only a very limited umber of them available. Even Russia does not have too many of them. Neither russia nor Syria would use those for shooting down Tomahawks whose arrival and target was announced 30 minutes prior. Russia clearly said they did not fight the tomahawks. they said only 19 were fired. Stop spreading fake news clickbate videos."
My response: If you can't prove where the video came from, you can't debunk it. Where's your link? Where is Russia's statement only 19 Tomahawks were fired? How would they know anyway? Where did I say what missile was used in this video? And you are wrong about the price of the S-300, when even an S-400 costs less than a Tomahawk, in some minimal configurations the S-400 only costs $200,000 per missile and NONE cost as much as a Tomahawk, including those that can shoot down satellites. The "price" always includes 128 or more missiles! That is not the price of ONE MISSILE! Even the S-300, in it's latest version, can shoot down satellites. Why use that against a cruise missile? The S-300 is not the only thing Syria has.
The Swedish medical team There is a story going around about a Swedish medical team that analyzed the "gas attack" and determined the white helmets murdered children to stage the recent gas attack videos from Syria. I know the original source of this story and consider that source to be far less than credible. I won't name the source. HOWEVER, if 40 percent disinfo as a guaranteed self admitted minimum will cut it for you, whatever.
Now, let's forget the source for a moment, and ask a different question: DO YOU THINK THAT A PROVEN PEDOPHILE CHILD MURDERING ELITE POWER STRUCTURE WOULD MURDER KIDS AS MOVIE PROPS TO GET A WAR? Well, put that way, maybe mister 40% has a point. YEP, I think they'd do it.
Flaming Falcon sent: "Hi Jim, I came across this post from livejournal. I had to use Chrome (ugh!) to translate it from Russian to understand it, but from what I gather the Tomahawks used were "Block IV" of 2014 vintage. Apparently using 2004 redesign?
Either way, it seems as if your assessment is correct, that the majority of them, despite being somewhat newer, were stopped in some manner of air defense. Can't be good, but of course, that depends on whose perspective you're taking.
Keep safe, Sir. - Flaming Falcon"
My response: Though the Tomahawks that were developed in the 80's and first used in the early 90's were good enough for permanent deployment, it would make sense that re-designs would be done with cheaper, newer, high tech parts. I do not think the million plus price tag is in any way justified, they should cost no more than $200,000. But that's another topic.
It was my understanding that every last one of the original Tomahawks was used long ago, and that anything we have now is new production. To say we are firing off 30 year old crap (as I have seen said several places) would be the same as saying the Army is running around with 50 year old Light Anti Tank Weapons just because the LAW happened to hit a niche that kept it from being deleted from the supply chain. Most likely any LAW that gets fired today is not more than a couple years old. The LAW is not powerful enough for any tank made today, but it is useful because it is the most accurate of any shoulder fired anti tank weapon made by any armed forces anywhere, and that makes it good for precise hits against things other than tanks. So it lived beyond obsolescence.
The Tomahawk is an expendable item that gets replaced as used, just like any other ordnance. And in the case of the Tomahawk, if they did find an old early 90's version in a warehouse somewhere, they'd probably use it, and it would work fine. EXCEPT AGAINST RUSSIA, Yes, I think Russia probably jammed them.
And if Russia DID jam them, then the Tomahawk obviously needs 1. GPS guidance for one part of the trip, 2. Inertial guidance to help it tolerate jamming, and 3. visual guidance for the entire trip. Obviously if 23 out of 60 made it, something needs to be fixed because the weakness was found.
I don't think people realize how good inertial guidance systems got before GPS was introduced. Back in the 80's jumbo jets still had auto pilot, but it was inertial guidance based. And it was good enough so that at the end of a trans-pacific flight the pilot would always be able to get visual of the runway at the end of the trip. It was not precise enough to land the plane, but if you could at least see the runway at the end of a long flight, that was pretty good guidance. And that would be good enough to prevent a Tomahawk from being sent seriously off course during a brief GPS blackout. The Tomahawk should have that if it does not have it now.
HERE'S A GOOD ONE Did the missing Tomahawks get gifted to Israel? Ha ha ha, now that makes sense!, Anonymous sent:
Russia officially stated that they did not intervene in the bombing. They disputed the caim that 59 were launched. The launch video does not show 59. they probably gave 40 to Israel and fired 19 at Syria. They were not jammed. They are not susceptible to jamming. They are not smart missiles, they are old fashioned dumb missiles."
My response: I'll give a thought to "they were gifted to Israel", however, the Tomahawk is the smartest missile in full deployment on earth, nothing surpasses it. It will therefore have vulnerabilities. The only missile that would be truly dumb and have no vulnerabilities would be an old scud!
Ciao Jim, did you consider that the attack on the Syrian airbase could be a false flag? A missile leaves a huge crater, no sign of craters there but only small ground explosions that left minor surface damage, there's no sign of penetration of an high speed flying object like a Tomahawk (about 550 mph). No response from the S-400 batteries despite the Russian knew, the base was evacuated before the alleged attack... Do you need more to qualify it as a false flag? At this point, from every image of film circulated, a missile attack is totally unproven and unrealistic
My response: That is what I thought. I did not see anything that looked like missiles actually did it, but I did not comment because I don't know how they arrived, or if they were programmed to slow down and do turns into targets at the end, (that would hide the missile strike appearance) but it really looked to me like kids put explosives here and there and set them off. The only explosion that looked like it would come from a cruise missile took out one end of a hangar. The rest? how do you explain nothing happening to the runway? It looked like ONE tomahawk hit and the rest was a bunch of crap. They did take off though, there is video of that, so maybe it really was just an apocalyptic failure.
If the missiles that did make it mostly went off 100 feet away from intended targets, nothing significant would happen. To blow holes in concrete you need to have the explosive on the concrete. Even 20 feet off the concrete with open air above would result in minimal damage. Maybe that happened, in addition to most not making it at all.
South Africa Anonymous sent:
Please post or confirm receipt. Want to know what you think about the situation in SOUTH AFRICA right now? Signed nuclear deal with Russia, fired our last finance minister (the guy who didn't want the deal), reshuffles his cabinet literally at night, before a 4 week close. We had big marches here on the 7th, approximately 60000-100000 people in Cape Town alone. #zumamustfall must be trending. He sold our country to the Guptas and whoever own them. Also a WIDELY unreported genocide on white farmers in the country, although I can't confirm that. But the apparent stats are shocking, and the murders apparently brutal, last week elderly lady got drilled to death. Please confirm or front page post. Cheers from Cape Town.
My response: This is news to me. I am sure this will be the first others have heard about it also.
Anonymous sent: "Russian TV says Tomahawks are invincible . Russians don't have anything like it"
My response: I don't call 23 arriving out of 60 fired invincible, unless as part of the acceptable design plan they are as reliable as a box of $1 radios that were returned as defective to a dollar store.
UPDATE TO THE SYRIA INVASION UPDATE: ALEX JONES CLAIMS A FULL ON INVASION HAS STARTED. I came across what I believed was credible info on an invasion starting in earnest (20 tanks) but could not follow up with further confirmation. So either Alex got punked or he has real insider info.
If Russia is to survive world war 3 (it will not be won) Russia has ONE option: To nuke America's aircraft carriers. A few reader messages got through. One reader said there is no way Russia will nuke an aircraft carrier because "aircraft carriers have defensive systems that will shoot down any nuclear missile".
MY RESPONSE: In the early 90's, in violation of restrictions, Toshiba sold Russia advanced computers that they were able to use to design truly silent propellers. After that, Russian subs went dark. Now, a long time later, Russian subs are probably even more quiet. They will suffice for the job. And since many American warships including all aircraft carriers are nuclear powered, neutrino detectors won't alert a carrier group to a submerged nuke because the reactors on the ships would interfere too much. Russia really could nuke a carrier group.
Russia will not use a missile because you cannot effectively destroy war ships with an air burst. War ships can only be be efficiently destroyed by setting a nuke off underwater, near them. To be effective, battle groups have to stay close enough to an aircraft carrier to be destroyed along with it. Russia will not be stupid about this. Russia did far more nuclear testing than America did. They know how to fight and win. If Russia does not turn every American aircraft carrier into a banana within the first hour of a real war, they will be rock stupid for not doing it. Once a war starts, for as long as there are aircraft carriers, America will keep going until so much is lost that what is left won't be worth having. And if America starts the war, no one can be blamed for taking whatever action will be necessary to stay alive.
Right now there is so much going on that it is hard to sort it out. But one thing is still easy to say: It is awful damning that Syria, Iran, and North Korea are slated for destruction, and the thing they have in common is no Rothchild owned central bank. That says it all, the motive for everything can be known with that one simple fact.
Another thing: Russia is none too pleased with Trump's cruise missile attack. Russia has stated in no uncertain terms that the gas attack was fake/staged/scammed And that America knew that when Trump launched the cruise missile attack. There are 900 opinions circulating about why it failed. No one has the answer, and I can only guess also. My guess is that Russia used GPS jamming and no attempted shoot downs. That is the only thing that can explain why so many either over flew the base or landed short. America's cruise missiles don't guess, they run on a confirmed working system that is accurate 100 percent of the time provided no one jams it. I think that is what happened.
If Russia had shot them down, some speculate that could have led to an incident with the U.S. because it can be proven. But if Russia instead jammed them, well, Russia and Syria have the right to transmit whatever they want. Who could get mad at them for merely confusing the missiles by switching a transmitter on?
Kushner: My opinion: Kushner is a low life scamming Mossad agent that sought out Ivanka to get a foothold into Trump's life. Now that Trump is president, this is being exploited to the max, And I FIRMLY believe that both Trump and Ivanka are stoned off their asses on deeply researched and effective mind control drugs that show no outward signs other than a sudden switch to being easily manipulated. Trump might just be a drone now, but you'd never know that by looking at him or hearing him speak because the drugs won't affect that.
I believe 100 percent that Kushner drugged the shit out of Trump, and that Ivanka means absolutely nothing to Kushner other than as something cute to screw and gain power with. I 100 percent believe Kushner is rooted straight into the Knesset and America is now fully under Israeli rule, via Kushner. And it will only get worse, I expect to see Trump become a 100 percent Israeli owned robotic zombie (and he probably already is.)
It might be safe to call ADIOS to MAGA, there is no conceivable way the cruise missile attack would have happened if all was well.
Syria update There are many theories floating around about syria. Some people are saying it was an act of desperation by Trump. Others are saying it was a chess move, where he tested Russia's S-300 and S-400 missile systems. Others think as I do, and that he caved to the neocons. WHATEVER THE SITUATION, HERE IS THE OUTCOME SO FAR:
Inexplicably, 60 missiles were fired, 1 fell into the ocean, 59 headed to Syria successfully, and 23 made it. That's bad. If Russia's S-300 and S-400 missile systems caused that, IT IS BAD.
People don't seem to understand that you don't need a 100 percent kill rate on something like a cruise missile to have a weapons system like the S-400 be a success. I'd gauge outrageous success at a 30 percent hit rate on something like a cruise missile. That would be an AMAZING success. If twice that was lost to Russian missile defenses, it represents total doom for the United States. Why would that be? The answer is easy:
If Russia has a missile system so good it can nail cruise missiles better than half the time, it also means that it will have an extremely high success rate while shooting down aircraft. Aircraft are not expendable single use weapons. To make it worthwhile to have an aircraft it has to fly successfully many many times, at least 100 times. If there is something out there that will, on average, make it possible to fly an aircraft only twice you might as well give up before you even start.
Obviously we don't know if the super high failure rate was due to Russian missile defenses or if it was due to good Russian jamming, or if it was due to cruise missiles that were crap. I doubt they were crap. But we do now know that Russia is not a helpless victim in waiting.
If Russian defenses took out so many missiles, then the obvious best Russian retaliatory/defensive tactic would be:
1. Nuke the warships, and 2. Take the aircraft out with advanced missiles.
America without question has the world's most powerful navy. In fact, America's navy is twice or more as capable as the entire rest of the world combined. But nukes are a serious problem for warships, I'd call the U.S. Navy little more than a way to project power into nations that don't have nuclear weapons. Up against Russia, the navy is toast. Even Kim Jong could probably take the navy out. And the U.S. Navy is such a menace that not nuking it if you could would be the real life manifestation of "Dumb and Dumber". I doubt Russia would be stupid enough to just let the Navy stick a hot fire poker wherever it wanted.
Going up against the U.S. Navy without a nuclear response available would be equal to getting nuked. A nuclear response would be the only correct answer. Therefore, Trump had better keep the navy parked and do nothing against Russia because only one thing will happen if Trump sends a significant portion of the navy to fight Russia: 165 or more U.S. warplanes will be in the air, and have no place to land.
I do not think a war against Russia will be winnable I don't think a war against China would be winnable. Probably not even India. You might have luck against Pakistan. You would win against North Korea after significant losses. And the answer to why is easy: You can't send a navy against decent quality nukes. Pakistan has very crappy nukes so they are "iffy". But I'd bet Kim Jong could score between 3 and 7 Nimitz class aircraft carriers all by himself. China would eat them all, plus a lot of the U.S. mainland. Russia would be at least 5x worse than China.
The bottom line is that it does not matter how many toys you have, or what your budget is when the people you are attacking have nukes. Nukes are the great equalizer, 20 equal the entire U.S. Navy, and the navy cost 1000 or more times as much. When Russia has many thousands, screwing with that is idiot's play. There is no conceivable way you'd not get hit enough to wipe you out, even if you had a 99 percent kill rate against them.
Let's hope cool heads prevail. But there is a problem: They probably will not, because Israel could care less about America, and has a zombie tap right into America's brain. Israel won't mind poking the bear as long as they can fully put the blame on someone else. THAT is the real danger, don't count on cool heads prevailing when evil people have motives and can cause others to die while accomplishing their goals on behalf of evil.
TRUMP HAS TWO MAJOR FAILURES AS PRESIDENT It is time to call him out on this. Trump has tried to do a lot of good. For the most part, he has done very good things. But the bad cannot be ignored, when the bad is THIS BAD: TWO HUGE FAILURES.
FIRST FAILURE: He has failed to protect the alternative media by not cracking down on google, Facebook, Reddit, Youtube and others.
GOOGLE: By doing nothing as Google used monopoly status to kill advertising to perfectly legitimate alt news outlets, Trump has basically ensured the death of his true base. Fox news is not his true base, and even if it was, it is borderline criminal to simply allow Google to use monopoly powers to kill alternative views. Additionally, Trump has done nothing to stop Google from censoring alt media in an attempt to kill it off.
Maybe Trump is not tech saavy enough to realize that simply typing a web site address into Google and having Google give you that site, (which you obviously already know about) is not a test of censorship, and instead, to prove censorship you have to do topic searches and have topics turn up web sites when they should. If it won't do that, it is censoring.
FACEBOOK: Trump simply sat there and did nothing as Facebook put in place artificial intelligence to wipe out his support base. Now Facebook is a dead zone, and Trump was too stupid to realize that there is such a thing as a false flag news outlet that can be set up to show openness (I am sure Facebook allows Jew critical content) but it has to be a sanitized version that looks crazy and brainless. No one in the elite class is afraid of "crazy and brainless" and it seems more and more that any "dissent" you are allowed to see can be classed as that. Ditto for Google. Ditto for Reddit.
Youtube: Youtube is wiping great content left and right in the name of "combating hate". But censoring while "combating hate" is a classic soviet / Bolshevik tactic and if you don't know enough about history to know that, you are going to be severely hampered when put in charge of something like a nation.
Trump's support base will be killed off, because Trump allowed it to be killed off If Trump does not break up Google, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, and others and make them the subject of anti trust laws, and basic "live and let live" rules of the road, he's going to have no one to serve, and no votes again, EVER. He rode the wings of the alt media into power, and is now doing nothing to help it in a very real war to destroy it. THIS CONSTITUTES A MAJOR FAILURE, HIS FIRST FAILURE.
The second failure: Falling into neocon hands, and cranking up the war machine. SEE THE SYRIA COVERAGE FOR DETAILS, Trump violated ALL LAW by attacking Syria. And he did it for idiotic and totally unfounded reasons. My God, he's supposed to be the president, NOT the second place contestant in a 10th grade civics class!