Misc. posts from online, tweets and GLP alternative news site:
Talks between Ukraine and Russia postponed until tomorrow due to fighting.
Hungary will not supply weapons to Ukraine - Prime Minister Orban
Potential Russian US Nuclear Targets:
1. Washington D.C.
2. New York city, New York.
3. Cheyenne Mountain Complex, Colorado
4. Raven Rock underground complex, Pennsylvania
5. Southern California Military stations/ports
6. 2 underground COG sites, locations undisclosed
Note: It is reported that Russia has 2 nuclear attack subs lurking on the west and east coast of the US. with a strike time of less than 7 min.
According to reports, the airborne troops of Belarus received an order to fly to Ukraine on 28.02 at 05:00.
The source is verified.
Americans in Russia should leave immediately while flights are still available, U.S. Embassy says
Satellite imagery shows large deployment of Russian ground forces with a convoy of more than 5 kilometers (3.2 miles) moving towards Kyiv - Reuters
11:27 AM · Feb 27, 2022
BREAKING: #EU countries will provide 'fighter jets' to #Ukraine under Brussels funding: Borrell
Russia can't use nuclear weapons because it would be the end of their nation. You people are so addicted to do that you don't understand that people wouldn't choose an option that they can't win with. There is no situation in this conflict where it makes sense for Russia to use nuclear weapons unless they just decide they're tired of living. Unless Putin is a madman there's no way.
Quoting: Arkwright
Did you not see the post a few pages ago where basically Russia said why have a world when there wouldn't be a russia in it?
That is EXACTLY how they think. If they are going down they are taking everybody with them.
They readied their nuclear weapons for a reason, and it certainly isn't because "we are addicted to them nuking something" that's the most ridiculous thing I've seen from you so far.
Russian military doctrine is very clear that faced with war from NATO they WILL launch a first strike. THAT is what we are watching for, not because we want it to happen but because it is a very distinct possibility that its something that might affect us, sooner rather than later. This is not a game or a joke.
Powerful explosion in Cherkasy
How World War 3 Became Possible
To those of you surprised by this invasion, not only was it foreseen but absolutely inevitable. The following article was written in 2015 and worryingly outlines how Putin believes a nuclear war is winnable and he would use nuclear weapons.
[link to www.vox.com (secure)]
Here are a few excerpts from this article (my comments at end):
To solve the problem of Russia's conventional military weakness, he (Putin) has dramatically lowered the threshold for when he would use nuclear weapons, hoping to terrify the West such that it will bend to avoid conflict. In public speeches, over and over, he references those weapons and his willingness to use them. He has enshrined, in Russia's official nuclear doctrine, a dangerous idea no Soviet leader ever adopted: that a nuclear war could be winnable.
..the apocalyptic logic of nuclear weapons. Mutual suspicion, fear of an existential threat, armies parked across borders from one another, and hair-trigger nuclear weapons all make any small skirmish a potential Armageddon.
In some ways, that logic has grown even more dangerous. Russia, hoping to compensate for its conventional military forces' relative weakness, has dramatically relaxed its rules for using nuclear weapons. Whereas Soviet leaders saw their nuclear weapons as pure deterrents, something that existed precisely so they would never be used, Putin's view appears to be radically different.
Russia's official nuclear doctrine calls on the country to launch a battlefield nuclear strike in case of a conventional war that could pose an existential threat. These are more than just words: Moscow has repeatedly signaled its willingness and preparations to use nuclear weapons even in a more limited war.
This is a terrifyingly low bar for nuclear weapons use, particularly given that any war would likely occur along Russia's borders and thus not far from Moscow. And it suggests Putin has adopted an idea that Cold War leaders considered unthinkable: that a "limited" nuclear war, of small warheads dropped on the battlefield, could be not only survivable but winnable.
"It’s not just a difference in rhetoric. It’s a whole different world," Bruce G. Blair, a nuclear weapons scholar at Princeton, told the Wall Street Journal. He called Putin's decisions more dangerous than those of any Soviet leader since 1962. "There’s a low nuclear threshold now that didn’t exist during the Cold War."
Nuclear theory is complex and disputable; maybe Putin is right. But many theorists would say he is wrong, that the logic of nuclear warfare means a "limited" nuclear strike is in fact likely to trigger a larger nuclear war — a doomsday scenario in which major American, Russian, and European cities would be targets for attacks many times more powerful than the bombs that leveled Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (unquote)
My comments: This article was quite long and not 100% relevant to todays situation, but it was insightful and educational and gives a reader an idea how this subject is considered by the major nations.
The author comes across as a typical mainstream westerner, with no knowledge of nuclear weapons and "why" Putin or any nation would consider their use as a winnable choice on the battlefield. They simply gloss right over that part of the equation as if it doesn't matter. But the truth is, it does matter, a lot.
Tactical nukes have been engineered to be less radioactive and suited for smaller explosive needs against an enemy, which reduces radiation fallout and allows the military to go right in to mop up the conflict afterwards. The fact is, some of the nations have already been using these tactical type "mini" nukes in many instances, for years, and the general public was none the wiser.
Because of these new high tech weapons the US military, Nato and no doubt other nations, came up with an entirely new operational plan for future warfare. I know this because I had a friend that was part of local defense planning system in Utah, and he read the documents - and reveled this information to a crowd where I was also in attendance.
He said that the war theory changed a few years ago from the concept of a typical full nuclear exchange, to the idea of warring nations lobbing one nuke at a city or target, and then waiting to see how the enemy reacted, perhaps hoping for peace talks. Then they would all hunker down and then a few days or weeks later, the nation might get hit with a retaliation nuclear strike on one of their own cities.
This also applies to the battlefield, where each side has access to tactical nukes, and they exchange small nuclear strikes like two boxers in a ring. The theory is, each side is hoping that one of their strikes, luckily placed at a very sensitive area, might eventually persuade the enemy to call for a cease fire.
In my opinion, this game theory of modern warfare is what Putin has in his mind. He seems to be counting on the use of tactical nukes, while the western nations have hidden this concept from the public so they can keep the masses cowering in fear and under control.
Having said all that, there still is a chance that this kind of dangerous warfare could lead to a massive nuclear attack, and the one that pushes the button first will end up in better shape afterwards. The final result, if it goes that far, would be both nations destroying each other, which is where the term Mutually Assured destruction (MAD) comes from. But, it is based on the outdated concept that all the nukes used would pollute the planet for generations to come. This is no longer the main concern - it is the real destruction, lack of power, starvation and infrastructure collapse that would do the major damage.
Looking at the situation at hand in Europe, there is a real possibility now that Putin will use tactical nukes on the battlefield, or to selectively punish nations that have stood against Russia.
For instance, France attacked a Russian freighter in the Baltic sea recently, fired at them, injured the sailors, then seized the ship and took it to a port in northern France. How do you think that makes Putin feel? To add insult to injury, France also voted to banish Russia from using the Swift banking system for financial exchanges that is used all over the world. That kind of banishment places Russia in a very exclusive club along with Iran, North Korea and Venezuela. This very well may make France one of the targets in the near future. Nations that are sending military equipment, ammo, bombs and shoulder held missiles to Ukraine may also receive the wrath of Putin.
The bottom line is, events in Europe are incrementally leading to a real nuclear war. But it may be different than most people would expect. It could be the covert use of nukes on the battlefield, and a few select targeted areas against European nations, and the US. It is unknown how the globalist controlled press would handle such a war elevating to that level. The explosions may be suspicious, but the mainstream press may be slow to identify them as nuclear weapons. It is also hard to say what would be targeted and why. But in the west, with all the naval and military bases and mega manufacturing cities - the west is a "target rich environment".
In my opinion, we are being set up for destruction. And, the fact that the west has a very dangerous hobby of poking the bear, eventually the bear is going to get mad enough and strike back.
Right now the controlled news media has the western world riled up into a hateful fury of "Russia bad", and at this time the polls show that 77% of the public want the US and Europe to go to war with Russia over Ukraine. That is twice what it was 7 years ago.
Once a major war breaks out guess who suffers the most? You guessed it, the average citizen. All while the wealthy elite are laughing it up in their mansions as the public are burying their dead.
The only solution is not to play the game. Stay away from the major cities and target areas and have a plan to survive long term in the country in a place of your choosing. George Eaton
