January 20, 2010New York City isn’t immune to earthquakes; a couple of small tremors measuring about 2.5 on the Richter scale even struck back in 2001 and 2002.But on August 10, 1884, a more powerful earthquake hit. Estimated from 4.9 to 5.5 in magnitude, the tremor made houses shake, chimneys fall, and residents wonder what the heck was going on, according to a New York Times article two days later.The quake was subsequently thought to have been centered off Far Rockaway or Coney Island.It wasn’t the first moderate quake, and it won’t be the last. In a 2008 Columbia University study, seismologists reported that the city is crisscrossed with several fault lines, one along 125th Street. With that in mind, New Yorkers should expect a 5.0 or higher earthquake centered here every 100 years, the seismologists say.Translation: We’re about 30 years overdue. Lucky for us the city adopted earthquake-resistant building codes in 1995.1884 A Forewarning Of The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)
Shia leader Moqtada al Sadr has the numerical advantage to control the formation of government, but it requires juggling several moving pieces.
Despite two months passing since the election in Iraq, no significant progress has been made towards forming government. The Sadrist Bloc, led by firebrand Shia leader Moqtada Al Sadr, claimed victory by securing 73 seats, while the pro-Iran Fatah Alliance obtained only 17 seats of 329-seat-parliament.
Sadr wants to establish a “national majority government” – a bloc must have over half of seats in parliament – calling on Iran-backed militias to disarm if they want to join.
Pro-Iranians support a “consensus government” in which most parties will be included and government members would be responsible to their leaders first, then to the prime minister. Fears about the exclusion of pro-Iranians from the new government is deepening uncertainty.
In the new order established in Iraq after 2003, Shias – almost 60 percent of the population – are the primary decision makers in politics.
Along with the ethnic and sectarian quota system, the presidency was allocated to the Kurds, the prime ministry to the Shia and the position of parliament speaker to the Sunnis.
The allocation of the executive position to Shia leaders opens up space for Iran in Iraqi politics. While governments are headed by Shias, the laws give the task of forming the government primarily to the largest bloc.
Sadr is committed to forming a “national majority government” that is also compatible with his “nationalist agenda,” which goes against both Iranian domination and the US presence.
The Taqaddum Coalition and Azm Alliance have already agreed to form a Sunni bloc that is expected to support Sadr. Along with Sunnis, support of the Kurdish party KDP, which secured 31 seats, gives Sadr enough of a majority to form the government.
The potential support of another Kurdish party, the PUK, which has 17 seats, would further strengthen Sadr’s hand. Some smaller Shia groups and the Iraqi Turkmen Front are also likely to join Sadr’s majority government. In that scenario, pro-Iranian groups could be completely excluded from government.
National consensus governments, since 2005, have corrupted the domestic political system and allowed for outsized Iranian influence in Iraq. The government that Sadr established with pro-Iranians in 2018 was overthrown after mass protests against corruption and Iranian influence.
Pro-Iranian militias were condemned for their brutality resulting in the deaths of 600 protesters. Because of growing Iranian influence and domestic opposition to consensus governments, Sadr has no intention of establish such a government even if it means he sits in the opposition.
Sadr’s scepticism towards the Iran-backed Fatah Alliance is no secret. Aware of the discord, Fatah sued to have the election annulled and pressured the Independent High Electoral Commission through militias they control.
Pro-Iranians in power
If Sadr’s national majority government plan fails, Sadr may abandon negotiations and claim leadership of the opposition. Considering the frequent negotiations that Sadr has been involved in – and the promotion of him as the ‘saviour’ of the country – this option might be difficult. Given his unexpected u-turns, such as boycotting elections and then taking part, Sadr might opt to sit in opposition.
In a scenario where Sadr is in opposition, pro-Iranians will rise to power, with Kurds and Sunnis most likely joining the government. Sunnis and Kurds will not adopt a definitive stance as they will watch the competition between the Shias.
While the new Sunni leaders are very pragmatic and have close ties to Iran, the Kurds are generally focused on being government stakeholders.
However, Sadr’s position in the opposition will lead to frequent protests against the government, considering his power to mobilise large numbers. Such a scenario may create a military confrontation with pro-Iranian militias and harm the fragile security in Iraq. This could translate into a more influential Iran, while space for Turkey and the Gulf narrows even further.
The superiority of Sadr
The most difficult option remains voiding elections. Due to the Fatah Alliance’s lawsuit for the annulment of the election results, the process of government formation, which needs the approval of Supreme Federal Court, could not start.
The court is expected to announce its decision in the coming days. In the event of an annulment, the reputation of pro-Iranian groups will be further damaged in the eyes of Iraqis, and Sadr’s approach towards these groups will become harsher.
Sadr is well aware of his mathematical superiority. Therefore, he wants to establish a government within the framework he desires. A majority government with Sunnis and Kurds is the most likely option, but the exclusion of pro-Iranians may increase the potential for violence.
Iran won’t stand by and watch its power wane after the boost it received from the US withdrawal.
Due to the possibility of losing its gains in Iraq, Iran may be obliged to encourage its proxies to join Sadr’s government even with weakened representation.
It can be expected that Iran may become more flexible due to its economic crisis and the ongoing negotiations regarding the nuclear deal. In this context, without compromising his role as a ‘saviour’, Sadr could try to form government by giving pro-Iranian groups limited space that he can still control.
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and editorial policies of TRT World.
We welcome all pitches and submissions to TRT World Opinion – please send them via email, to firstname.lastname@example.org
The US Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced the development of America’s latest nuclear weapon.
The B61-12 Life Extension Program First Production Unit is a more accurate and lower-yield variant of the nuclear gravity bomb, capable of being air-dropped — either through “gravity or guided drop modes.”
Replaces Previous Bomb Variants
Department of Energy Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and NNSA Administrator Jill Hruby remarked that the nine-year-old program “improves accuracy and reduces yield with no change in military characteristics, while also improving safety, security and reliability.”
“The work on the B61-12 will also ensure the warhead can be air-delivered on both current and future platforms to meet Department of Defense requirements,” extending the munition’s life by 20 years. Once deployed, the B61-12 will replace variants 3, 4, and 7, leaving only the 11 along with it.
‘Possible Deterrence’ Against Tactical Nuclear Strike
According to National Interest, the B61-12 allows the US Air Force to deploy the munition for “low-yield nuclear attack, earth-penetrating strikes, above surface detonation, and bunker-buster explosions.” The outlet stated that the low-yield nuclear attack capability also provides US commanders with “possible deterrence against a more limited or tactical nuclear strike.”
Since its first deployment in 1968, the B61, deployed from US Air Force and NATO bases, has undergone multiple modifications to improve its “safety, security, and reliability.”
In its latest iteration, the bomb has had all of its nuclear and non-nuclear components refurbished or replaced to extend its life. Full-scale production is scheduled from May 2022 through 2026.
Tehran’s landmark accord with world powers — Britain, France, Germany, the U.S., Russia and China — granted Iran sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on its nuclear program.ASSOCIATED PRESS / December 27, 2021
VIENNA (AP) — Negotiators from Iran and five world powers resumed negotiations Monday on restoring Tehran’s tattered 2015 nuclear deal, with Iran insisting that the United States and its allies promise to allow it to export its crude oil.
The latest round of talks in Vienna, the eighth, opened 10 days after negotiations were adjourned for the Iranian negotiator to return home for consultations. The previous round, the first after a more than five-month gap caused by the arrival of a new hard-line government in Iran, was marked by tensions over new Iranian demands.
“If we work hard in the days and weeks ahead, we should have a positive result,” Enrique Mora, the European Union diplomat who chaired the talks, said after the opening session. But “it’s going to be very hard — difficult political decisions have to be taken.”
Tehran’s landmark accord with world powers — Britain, France, Germany, the U.S., Russia and China — granted Iran sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on its nuclear program.
But in 2018, then-President Donald Trump withdrew America from the deal and imposed sweeping sanctions on Iran, including against its oil sector — the lifeline of its economy. Iran’s crude exports plummeted and international oil companies scrapped deals with Tehran, weakening its economy.
The other signatories struggled to keep alive the agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The United States is participating only indirectly in this year’s talks to restore the deal, which President Joe Biden has signaled he wants to rejoin.
Speaking in Tehran ahead of the talks’ resumption, Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian said Iran wants the upcoming round of talks to focus on its sanctions-hit oil industry. The aim is to get to the “point where Iranian oil is being sold easily and without any barriers and its money arrives in Iran’s bank accounts,” he said.
Amirabdollahian said Iran wanted to “be able to enjoy full economic concessions under the nuclear deal.”
“Guarantee and verification (of the removal of sanctions) are among topics that we have focused on,” he said.
The new administration of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi has repeatedly demanded the removal of all economic sanctions before Iran reins in its nuclear advances.
Separately on Monday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said it would be “intolerable” for the West to demand anything from Tehran beyond compliance with the original deal.
Iran has steadily abandoned all of the accord’s limits since the American withdrawal and is now enriching uranium to 60% purity — a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels. It spins ever-more advanced centrifuges also barred by the deal.
Iran insists that its nuclear program is peaceful. But the country’s significant nuclear steps have alarmed regional foes like Israel and world powers. Diplomats have warned that time is running out to restore the deal as Iran maintains a hard line in putting the onus on the U.S. to lift sanctions.
Foreign Minister Yair Lapid of Israel, which fiercely opposed the 2015 deal, repeated his country’s vow that Iran will never get a nuclear weapon.
“Certainly we prefer to act through international cooperation, but if necessary — we will defend ourselves, by ourselves,” he said, a veiled threat of unilateral military action against Iran’s nuclear program.
Diplomats from the three European powers have said that time is running out for a successful conclusion to the talks.
And Russian delegate Mikhail Ulyanov tweeted after the resumption of the talks was announced that “we need to orient ourselves towards successful completion of the talks as soon as possible, preferably by the beginning of February.”
He described Monday’s opening session as “businesslike and result-oriented.”
Mora, the talks’ chair, said the decision to resume discussions between Christmas and the new year was made because “there is a sense of urgency” and it “was not acceptable to lose, let’s say, 10 days more.”
He said he wouldn’t “speculate” on target dates for an agreement, but reiterated that “we are talking about weeks, not about months.”
By ALEX SCHULLER and GEIR MOULSON Associated Press
Moulson reported from Berlin. Associated Press writer Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran contributed.
Russia, China and Afghanistan dominated much of the national security space in 2021. Here’s where to watch in 2022 – including some particularly pressing concerns.By Paul D. Shinkman|Dec. 27, 2021, at 1:52 p.m.SaveMore
5 Places to Watch for Conflict in 2022More
Stranded people wait for the reopening of border crossing point in the Pakistan’s border town of Chaman on July 16, 2021, following clashes between Afghan forces and Taliban fighters in Spin Boldak to retake the key border crossing with Pakistan.(BANARAS KHAN/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES)
A revisionist China, provocations from Russia and the fraught U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan dominated much of the international space in 2021 – a year defined by the ongoing fallout from the coronavirus pandemic as well as the backlash from the end of a singularly combative U.S. presidency and the beginning of a new era of supposed “relentless democracy” from Washington.
Each of these national security quagmires will continue into the near year, particularly the ongoing crisis in and around Ukraine after the Biden administration revealed it plans new deescalation talks with Moscow early in January. China, too, appears more emboldened than ever to return to mainland control other territories it considers its own, principally Taiwan.
Iran nuclear talks restart in Vienna
But beyond some of these most pressing concerns facing national security leaders, other corners of the globe remain ripe for new conflicts or resurgences of previous confrontations.
Here are five places to watch in 2022:
America’s goal of maintaining relations with both South Asian nuclear powers has suffered during the war in Afghanistan and the widespread concerns in Washington of duplicity in Islamabad. The shift in balance spilled out into the open during the Trump presidency, when the White House appeared to adopt a more overt preference for its relationship with India, renaming its U.S. military headquarters for the region as “Indo-Pacific Command” and pushing the previously untethered democracy into greater lockstep with Washington’s regional ambitions. That slide has only accelerated under the Biden administration, sped up by new concerns that Pakistan appears to increasingly operate under the influence of Beijing.
And tensions will only continue to rise, as an already precarious humanitarian disaster in Afghanistan worsens under the governance of the Taliban and the potential for conflict between India and China heats up in increasingly militarized contested territory on their shared border in the Himalayas.
Division and violence has plagued the oil-rich nation since the U.S. intervention in 2011 that led to toppling the regime of Col. Moammar Gadhafi and his bloody death. A decade of war has followed, bolstered through proxy conflicts as several regional and world powers push weapons and other resources toward militias that have left the country largely split in two.
The country’s parliament declared late this month it would delay highly anticipated elections previously set to take place later in December, saying it would be impossible to do so effectively and fairly. Now it remains unclear whether the country will be able to elect a new president that could unite it, expel the foreign military influence and begin to rebuild its crumbling government institutions.
The two Middle Eastern powers have waged shadow warfare against one another for decades – hostilities that occasionally emerge in public, such as the news in late December that Israel carried out airstrikes in neighboring Syria – a hub for Iranian proxy militia forces.
Dynamics in the region were set to change dramatically a day later when national security adviser Jake Sullivan announced during a trip to Israel that the U.S. had privately set a date to end the option for diplomatic talks with Iran over its nuclear program, prompting new questions about whether the Biden administration and its allies may turn instead to military force to counter Tehran’s ambitions.
And notably, Iran has not yet indicated it believes it had successfully avenged the Trump administration’s brazen decision to kill Quds Force leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who died in a U.S. airstrike in 2020. Jan. 3 marks two years since that event.
Though the U.S. presence in Somalia dramatically diminished due to then-President Donald Trump’s unorthodox order after his election loss to withdraw all troops, the potential for conflict emanating from the Horn of Africa has only grown. Humanitarian concerns on the ground have reached crisis level as the U.N. now reports 1 in 4 Somalis face acute hunger due to a worsening drought.
Al-Shabab, an affiliate of the Islamic State group, remains a potent force in and around the region. It continues to carry out local attacks while overwhelming the U.S.-trained forces who remain locked in conflict with them. The group, and those like it, are trained on carrying out attacks against the West and its interests in that part of the world.
American national security leaders remain divided in public and behind closed doors about whether Beijing would risk the international economic isolation that would likely follow an attempt to reunite Taiwan with the mainland by force. China considers that goal as critical to overturning the so-called “Century of Humiliation” of largely Western liberal global dominance that its government has endured.
The World Bank assesses China’s economic growth will slow sharply next year – a time when leaders in Beijing have indicated they expect to see similar financial hardship rack American markets.
Though China is set to host the Winter Olympics in February, it remains unclear whether it will embrace the opportunity for benevolent engagement with other world powers, particularly following the Biden administration’s decision to boycott the games diplomatically.
Marchers call for expulsion of remaining US forces in Iraq as they commemorate General Qassem Soleimani’s assassination.
Thousands of people have rallied in the Iraqi capital to mark the second anniversary of the killing of a revered Iranian commander and his Iraqi lieutenant in a drone attack by the United States.
Chanting “Death to America”, the marchers filled a Baghdad square to honour Iran’s General Qassem Soleimani, who headed the Quds Force, the foreign operations arm of the elite Revolutionary Guard, until his death on January 3, 2020.
“US terrorism has to end”, read one sign at the rally by backers of the pro-Iranian Hashed, also known as the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF), a former paramilitary alliance that has been integrated into Iraq’s state security apparatus.
“We will not let you stay after today in the land of the martyrs,” another placard read. US and Israeli flags were strewn on the ground, with people trampling them.
Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed said the protesters are using the rally as an opportunity to reiterate their demands of full withdrawal of US and foreign troops from Iraq.
“Thousands of protesters, members of Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Forces were chanting against the US and the presence of US troops in Iraq,” he said, speaking from Baghdad.
Supporters of Iran-aligned Shia factions were bussed in from various Iraqi provinces to the rally in Jadriyah, near the headquarters of the powerful armed groups.
Former US President Donald Trump ordered the attack that killed Soleimani near Baghdad’s airport along with his Iraqi lieutenant, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, Hashed’s deputy.
Trump had then said the assassination came in response to a wave of attacks on US interests in Iraq.
The killing of Soleimani – the architect of Iran’s Middle Eastern military strategy – and al-Muhandis sent shock waves across the region and sparked fears of a direct military confrontation between decades-old enemies Washington and Tehran.
Days later, Iraq’s parliament passed a non-binding resolution calling for the expulsion of all foreign troops from Iraq.
Iran, which wields considerable influence in neighbouring Iraq, warned it would avenge Soleimani’s death.
Five days after the killing, Iran fired missiles at an air base in Iraq housing US troops and another near Erbil in the north.
Since then, dozens of rockets and roadside bombs have targeted Western security, military and diplomatic sites across Iraq.
Iraqi and Western officials have blamed hardline pro-Iran factions for the attacks, which have never been claimed by any group.
In February last year, the US carried out an air raid against Kataeb Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed Iraqi paramilitary force stationed along the Iraqi-Syrian border, following rocket attacks on its Baghdad embassy and a US military contracting firm north of the capital.
Hashed has repeatedly called for the withdrawal of US troops who are deployed in Iraq as part of a multinational coalition fighting the ISIL (ISIS) group.
Senior Hashed official Faleh al-Fayyad reiterated the demand Saturday, saying the killing of Soleimani and al-Muhandis was “a crime against Iraqi sovereignty”.
In December, Iraq announced the end of the “combat mission” there of the US-led coalition against ISIL. But about 2,500 American soldiers and 1,000 coalition troops will remain deployed in Iraq to offer training, advice and assistance to national forces.
Written By Joseph Ragonese | Dec 31, 2021
December 31, 2021 -While the U.S. media has (for the most part) largely ignored the news coming out of the Russia-Ukrainian border area, things appear to be much different in the Russian Federation. The American media is so sycophantic that it ignores anything that implies that Joe Biden is less than competent. Nonetheless, his incompetence is putting the world in danger of a nuclear war between the United States and the Russian Federation.
According to the Daily Beast, Russian state media appears to be preparing Russian citizens for nuclear war over Ukraine. A few weeks ago Russian president, Vladimir Putin, had a virtual meeting with our “leader” Joe Biden, who warned of “consequences” if Russia invaded Ukraine.
The immediate reaction, after “Corn Pop” Biden’s hollow threats, was that Putin added an additional 10,000 troops on the border with Ukraine. Putin has every reason to hold Biden’s threats with disdain, knowing that he and Obama did absolutely nothing when drawing a red line in the sand against Syria after they called their bluff.
Putin might be looking forward to humiliating American Democrats.
The Russian president still reeling after the abysmal treatment given to Russia, and Putin personally, in the aftermath of Trump’s victory.
Do not think all the vial things said, and actions taken by Democrats over the false Russian collusion hoax didn’t have an effect on the Russian Federation and its leadership. Nor how Russia, and Putin, views the new Democrat leadership in America.
Up to and including a possible nuclear war.
It is even more likely after the way the Biden administration handled, or rather mishandled, the evacuation of Afghanistan. Russia very clearly sees that the American military is deteriorating more each day as they focus on diversity rather than combat readiness.
The Afghanistan withdrawal placed the American military in a new, much weaker, light to every one of our enemies. While Russia moves nuclear weapons closer to NATO’s borders, even into the Americas, with the possibility of nuclear missiles in Venezuela and Cuba, China, too, has begun to increase their nuclear weapons 200% above what they were when Trump was president.
Bringing us back to the Ukrainian border where Russian troops are gathering.
The Daily Beast reports that Russian state television is raising the issue of urgency around Putin’s NATO ultimatum, according to the host of Russia’s version of 60 Minutes in a recent report.
The NATO ultimatum is a proposed security treaty between Russia and the United States, which demands NATO roll back military deployments in Europe while forbidding Ukraine and other countries which were formerly under the Soviet Union, from securing membership in the multi-national organization.https://lockerdome.com/lad/8359602240623719?pubid=ld-541-9346&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commdiginews.com&rid=www.google.com&width=748
This is not a proposed treaty, rather a demand, or else.
They also want NATO to remove troops from new members, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland. It is doubtful that would be successful, at least in Poland where memories are long. (How Poland Saved the World from Russia; The world expected a rapid Communist victory. The Poles had other ideas.)
Returning to the Cold War, Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister, Sergei Ryabkov, said that Moscow would “raise the stakes” if Western countries didn’t take the demands seriously. Last Monday, he told Interfax (an independent Russian news agency) that Russia needed answers “urgently because the situation is very difficult.”
Ryabkov then explained that the U.S. and NATO must roll back from our (Russia’s) borders, otherwise we will, figuratively speaking,
“…roll up’ to their borders and create symmetrical, unacceptable risks…if you put a gun to our head, we will respond in kind.”
The whole point is that the development of the Ukrainian territory by the western bloc is not only Ukraine’s business but Russia’s too. At least according to Ryabkov.
He continued with his threat advising that,
“This is a complete breakdown of the global balance, which poses an existential threat to Russia. In other words, for Russia it is a matter of life and death…We simply will not allow it, regardless of the cost to us, and regardless of the cost to those responsible for it.”
Which is a not-so-subtle threat that nuclear war is not off the table if America and our NATO allies do not succumb to their threats.
The total weakness of Biden, and most NATO leaders combined, make this a strong threat
A threat that Putin expects America to carefully consider. There is no indication that Biden will not sell out Eastern European nations to appease Russia, as Neville Chamberlain did with Adolf Hitler just prior to the onset of World War II.
And if Biden does appease Putin, it will only bring about World War III that much sooner.
The Russian Federation’s threat of war if NATO troops are not removed, will cause a complete breakdown of the global balance if accepted.
Thus creating a leadership void that will be quickly filled by Russians. However, China may have other designs.
Putin believes that Russia has a valid claim on those Eastern European nations that they were controlled by Russian military forces between the end of WWII and the collapse of communism in 1988. Putin wants to revive the glory days of the old Soviet Union and will let nothing stand in his way.
A Russian state TV media host, Dmitry Kiselyov, once said that Russia “Is the only country that can reduce the U.S. to a pile of radioactive ash.” (Russia can turn US to radioactive ash – Kremlin-backed journalist – March 2014)
Kiselyov more recently echoed those words as the reason why the United States under Biden might be willing to accept Putin’s terms. Now maybe a good time to question Hunter Biden’s financial relationships with Russia and the impact they may have on Joe Biden. (Hunter Biden received $3.5M wire transfer from Russian billionaire: Senate report)
Kiselyov saying on December 20, 2021:
“Never before has anyone published the texts of the proposed treaties. But never before in the 21st century has the situation been so acute, and the risks so great. Non-standard situations require non-standard approaches. Secondly, we’re holding very strong cards in our hands.
Our hypersonic weapons are guaranteed to produce a response that is so unpleasant for America to hear: being reduced to radioactive ash.” – Russian state TV warns US ‘will be turned to radioactive ash’ over Ukraine moves American Military News
Remember that Russian state media speaks the words placed before it by the Russian government.
That is as close to nuclear blackmail from a Russian official that we are likely to have. And the likelihood that America would not respond in kind under a leader as weak and cognitively challenged as Biden makes the risk worth it to Putin.
December 30 phone call between Putin and Biden
Following the Dec. 7 virtual summit in which Putin coerced Biden’s agreement to US-Russian talks on “European security,” the two presidents spoke again yesterday (Dec. 30, 2021) The Biden administration has offered a package of measures designed to deter a Russian escalation. Biden warned that offensive actions would prompt new, punishing economic sanctions against Russia and the Russian elite.
Joe Biden is also sending US weapons and supplies to Ukraine, strengthening NATO’s defenses in the countries bordering Russia with NATO and major European countries’ support of U.S. efforts. Biden agreed on Dec. 28 to talks with Russia starting Jan. 10, announcing on Dec. 29 that the two presidents would speak on December 30, per President Putin’s request.
Putin’s response to the phone call has been mostly positive, giving hope that the threat of nuclear war is waning. However, whether we will see Russian troops moving away from the Ukraine border is unknown.
Putin did reduce the pressure and there is an agreement to continue with negotiations. However, a significant Russian de-escalation before that next call is unlikely.
As our enemies see us today, our military is so dysfunctional that it is incapable of defeating Russia or China,
Notwithstanding, Iran also believes it can defeat our newly purged military. (Iran: “American Soil is Now Within the Range of Iranian Bombs”)
In a play of history repeating itself, Germany attacked Russia after Stalin’s military purge. Hitler knew how inept the Russian military was when it couldn’t conquer the tiny Finnish Army. Leaving Russians, for at least a time, powerless against the German’s assault.
However, Russia has a long memory and sees how America’s military is being purged in the name of diversity as all of its competent officers and NCOs.
Neither Russia, nor China, fear American military might any longer, nor do they fear Joe Biden.
Combat readiness is no longer a priority under the leadership of Secretary of Defense Austin, or Joe Biden. In fact, Russia does not see any real leadership in our military.
Russia, and China, see our seasoned military leaders being replaced by inexperienced soldiers, while our military implodes over diversity and racism. (The Problem with a ‘Woke’ Military – The National Review)
A couple of weeks back, Russia boasted it would place intermediate-range nuclear weapons on its Western border.
Showing his complete defiance of NATO, just this past week, Putin directed two long-range bombers, with nuclear capability, to fly into European airspace.
The key element to the threat of an impending war by Russia is that the Russian government developed a new national standard for “Urgent burial of corpses in peacetime and wartime.” Introduced in the past few months, this new standard may be an indication of pending nuclear war.
President Joe Biden’s hesitation to hammer down on Russia’s military advances into Ukraine shows the commander-In-chief is afraid.Adam Schultz/The White House.
Going into effect on Feb. 1, 2022, the new burial standard calls for burial in mass graves dug by bulldozers. Thus allowing the disposal of some 1,000 bodies in a 24-hour time period. Under the standard, bodies would be placed “in four layers, either in bags, wooden coffins, or zinc coffins, prepared in advance…and subsequently covered with dirt.
Afterward, the mass graves would be compacted with a bulldozer, filled with “a mineral binder” and equipped with
“devices for the absorption and neutralization of radioactive, hazardous chemicals, and biological agents formed during the decomposition of corpses.”
If a nation is not contemplating a nuclear, biological or chemical war, why would it issue new directives for the disposal of mass radio-active casualties? The key date to take note of is that it will go into effect on February 1. Look for Russia to make movement on their demands after then.
It is a clue to their timelines. Possibly they will invade Ukraine on that date. And who knows where things go from there.
Surprisingly, much of what is currently underway was predicted by chess legend, Garry Kasparov.
In 2016, he published a book called, Winter is Coming: Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must Be Stopped, in which he noted that the Russian government’s creation of a “mass burial” standard would signal one of “the signposts on the way to an apocalypse.”
Putin can likely see that the United States is more interested in virtue signaling in its military than developing a fighting force that can compete with the increasingly powerful Russian and Chinese militaries.
Russian propagandists have admitted as much on state television, insisting that Moscow “is now approaching the West from a position of strength,” the Daily Beast said.
Russia is placing the United States in a no-win situation; either we retreat voluntarily, or Russia will force us to retreat.
Only 120 days ago, under Trump, Russia would not have even thought such a thing possible.
Today, under the weakest leadership this nation has ever known, we have effectively been backed into a corner. Either we fight a war where millions of Americans die, or simply surrender.
The dirty little secret is that every nuclear-armed nation on earth has already decided that humanity will survive a mass nuclear war.
While it would cause massive human casualties and infrastructure damage, every nuclear-armed nation has in place the means for its leadership to survive. While the people become collateral damage, buried in lead coffins in a landfill.
Do not be fooled by some fiction writers’ fantasy of what would happen. The truth is that while major damage would occur in some places, other places would be almost untouched.
So the idea of a nuclear war is not out of the question. At least to some risk-taking nations.
What happens next?
There is no telling with Joe Biden. He isn’t operating with his full brainpower. If Biden’s handlers are truly from Obama’s administration, he will surrender without a shot being fired at America.
The recent withdrawal of the 10,000 Russian troops from the Crimea just before talks with Biden is the same 10,000 troops added when Joe threatened Putin. This indicates that Biden has already given Putin some concession ahead of the coming negotiations over NATO.
While a nuclear war may not be imminent, the threat of one is. Today America’s future is in the hands of Vladimir Putin.
Let’s see what he does with all that power.
About the author:
Political Staff Writer Joseph Ragonese is a veteran of the United States Air Force, a retired police officer, has a degree in Criminal Justice, a businessman, journalist, editor, publisher, and fiction author. His last book, “The Sword of Mohammad,” can be purchased at Amazon.com in paperback or kindle edition.