Connect with us

conflict

US and UK authorize missile strikes into Russia, but are we really in danger of World War III?

Published

9 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

Hopefully a world war appears unlikely, but the decision to allow Ukraine to shoot U.S. and U.K.-provided missiles into Russia once again reveals the lengths to which the ‘neocon globalists’ will go to throw a lifeline to their failing business model.

News that the lame duck President Joe Biden has authorized long-range strikes into Russia using NATO systems was announced with the alarming warning that he had “started World War III.”

The following day, U.S.-supplied and operated ATACMS missiles were fired into Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described the authorized strikes as an “escalation” showing that the West wants war.

“The fact that ATACMS were used repeatedly in the Bryansk region overnight is, of course, a signal that they want escalation,” he said, according to Reuters.

Lavrov continued: “Without the Americans, it is impossible to use these high-tech missiles, as Putin has repeatedly said.”

Why would the U.S. president finally give the green light to use NATO systems to attack Russia? German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has refused to follow suit and supply German-made Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine – because he does not want to see Germany drawn into a direct war with Russia.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer responded by suggesting it is only a matter of time before U.K.-supplied Storm Shadow cruise missiles strike deep into Russian territory.

The U.K. government has been behind a long campaign to escalate the war in Ukraine, a move seen as an attempt to secure continued U.S. commitments in Europe. The Trump camp has long signaled its desire to draw down its security provision to leave a “dormant NATO.”

In an indication of the dangers of the U.K.-backed move by Biden, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced an alarming amendment of the Russian nuclear doctrine.

The policy change, announced in September and published following Biden’s announcement, says “an attack from a non-nuclear state, if backed by a nuclear power, will be treated as a joint assault on Russia,” according to the BBC.

Russian nuclear doctrine has long included the use of low-yield “tactical” nuclear weapons in “conventional” warfare – a significantly lower threshold than that of NATO.

While Russian officials urged Western leaders to consult the text, Foreign Minister Lavrov stressed that “we strongly are in favor of doing everything to not allow nuclear war to happen.”

As Reuters reported, this latest provocation is “unlikely to be a gamechanger.” Western media outlets have moved from a narrative of Ukrainian victory to mulling how or even if the state of Ukraine can survive its “inevitable” defeat.

Yet it is not only Ukraine which faces an uncertain future with a Russian victory. The entire globalist order faces a significant blow should the war conclude. Statements from figures such as George Soros, U.S. General Mark Milley, E.U. chief Ursula von der Leyen, and the former head of NATO stressed that their liberal-globalist regime is threatened by defeat in Ukraine.

Biden’s decision has been seen as an attempt to frustrate Donald Trump’s declared agenda – to clear out the “deep state globalists” whose “neocons seeking confrontation … such as Victoria Nuland” have led the U.S. into endless wars since that in Iraq.

An escalation to all-out war with Russia would not only be a disastrous precursor to nuclear escalation, but would also preserve the dominance of the same “neocon globalists” whose “forever wars” Trump has pledged to end.

Arch-neocon Robert Kagan said Americans who support ending wars are “intolerant.” He went on to author two articles which Hitlerized Trump and appeared to incite the assassination of a man who promised in his 2024 victory speech, “I’m not going to start wars. I’m going to stop wars.”

This follows a long series of claims in the same vein.

“I will end the war in Ukraine,” Trump declared in February 2023, saying he would also end “the chaos in the Middle East” and “stop World War III.”

 

This move by Biden has no military significance in improving Ukraine’s chances of victory. Russia claimed to have shot down seven of eight ATACMS fired into its Bryansk region. Yet prolonging or even escalating this war has enormous political significance.

Since the publication of the RAND Corporation’s 2019 paper “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia,” a strategy of bleeding Russia on the battlefield to collapse its government has been clear. Russia’s near-limitless mineral wealth would provide an obvious boon to a Western system self-sabotaged by sanctions and the destruction of the Nordstream gas supply.

The enormous significance of the war is found in its use as an attempt to extend and consolidate the power of the same system of neocon “globalism” which Trump has vowed to end.

This context explains why the U.K. government has consistently pressed for escalation since the 2022 intervention of then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson seems to have sabotaged peace in favor of an all-or-nothing gamble towards “regime change” in Russia.

Since then, the U.K. government has urged the authorization of long-range strikes into Russia, and it has supplied cruise missiles to attack Russian over-the-horizon nuclear radar warning systems, which play no role in the Ukraine war.

Reports have confirmed “terrorist operations” in Russia, including attacks on the Kerch Bridge leading to Crimea were U.K.-led. A recent expose by The Grayzone revealed that the British state appears to be training Ukrainians to fight a guerilla war, extending hostilities even beyond any ceasefire.

Ukraine’s recent and failed offensive into Russia’s Kursk region appears to have also been a British operation – to secure the kind of “morale boost” which Alastair Crooke says is the only significant war-fighting contribution of the authorization of “wonder weapons” like ATACMS.

The ATACMS authorization was heralded as a turning point in the war by Foreign Affairs. Yet the suspicion of Responsible Statecraft that it was a “sideshow that may become a tragedy” appears to have been confirmed.

The grim reality of this war is underscored by the fact that measures taken which will result in even more needless loss of human life are done so to legitimize useful propaganda headlines. This is undertaken to sell a war which has long been predicted to end as it now seems certain to do so: with a victory on Russian terms.

Though it appears unlikely that a world war will result from this latest reckless move, what has been demonstrated once more is the lengths to which the “neocon globalists” will go to throw a lifeline to their failing business model.

That lifeline is perpetual war, and when they end – so do the careers of so many whose livelihoods and reputations depend on keeping them going.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

conflict

Trump tells World Economic Forum ‘time to end’ war in Ukraine

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Matt Lamb

President Donald Trump urged Vladimir Putin to make a deal and end the war in Ukraine. He also told the World Economic Forum that he will lower the price of oil, which will put pressure on Russia.

President Donald Trump urged Vladimir Putin to “make a deal” and end the war in Ukraine on Thursday. The same day, he also told the World Economic Forum (WEF) it is “time to end it.”

“I don’t know, I think he should make a deal,” President Trump told reporters on Thursday when asked if tariffs and sanctions would lead to negotiations, as reported by The Hill.

He also said Vladimir Zelenskyy is “ready to negotiate a deal.”

Speaking about China’s role, Trump said further:

It’s a very big trading partner. But, Russia supplies a lot of energy to China, and China pays them a lot of money for that, and I think they have a lot of power over Russia. So, I think Russia should want to make a deal. Maybe they want to make a deal. I think, from what I hear, Putin would like to see me meet as soon as we can. I’d meet immediately.

On Thursday morning, Trump addressed the World Economic Forum virtually and said his energy plan will put pressure on Russia by bringing down the price of oil. He also then said that China can help end the war.

He stated:

If the price came down, the Russia-Ukraine war would end immediately. Right now, the price is high enough that that war will continue. You got to bring down the oil price; you’re going to end that war. They should have done it long ago. They’re very responsible, actually, to a certain extent, for what’s taking place — millions of lives are being lost.

Trump criticized the death toll in Ukraine, calling it a “killing field,” during his WEF speech.

“Millions of soldiers are being killed,” Trump said, twice comparing it to World War II.

Saying there are “millions of Russians and millions of Ukrainians” killed, he said it is “time to end it.”

Trump ran on a pledge to end the war in Ukraine and to be a president of peace. He has reiterated that pledge since the election.

“I will end the war in Ukraine. I will stop the chaos in the Middle East, and I will prevent World War III from happening,” Trump said on January 19 during a pre-inauguration victory rally at the Capital One Arena in Washington, D.C.

Russia first invaded Ukraine in Februrary 2022. As of September 2024, United States taxpayers promised $183 billion to Ukraine.

The president’s focus on peace won him the endorsement of Tulsi Gabbard, who is now his pick for director of national intelligence.

Criticizing Kamala Harris during a rally in October, Gabbard said “she has shamelessly embraced the endorsement and support of warmongers like Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney and others who care more about power and feeding the military-industrial complex than they care about you, the American people, and peace.”

Continue Reading

conflict

Trump Fails to End Ukraine War on Day 1

Published on

Armstrong Economics

 

By Martin Armstrong

It was a lofty promise and a campaign tale that no one believed could happen. Donald Trump stayed true on his promise to carry out a number of executive orders on Day 1 of his presidency, but he cannot simply sign an EO to end the war in Ukraine. Yet he did promise to stop sending blank checks to Ukraine and has appointed a special envoy who is requesting 100 days to reevaluate America’s position in the war. More importantly, Trump would like to go directly to the source and speak with Putin.

The Kremlin broadcast Putin’s weekly security council message earlier than expected to address Trump directly. “We are open to dialogue with the new US administration on the Ukrainian conflict,” Putin said. “Its goal should not be a short truce, not some kind of respite for regrouping forces and rearmament with the aim of subsequently continuing the conflict, but a long-term peace based on respect for the legitimate interests of all people, all nations that live in this region.”

Russia will never waiver on a deal that does not include prohibiting Ukraine from joining NATO. Trump seems to be aligned with him on this issue as any reasonable mind can comprehend how this would lead to an immediate escalation into World War III. Territorial concessions? Neither Russia or Ukraine is willing to surrender territory.

BBC Trump Proof War

New US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has reaffirmed the new administration’s message that the war in Ukraine must end. America can withhold funding or direct intervention. America cannot undo the damage that has been done. There are too many hands in the money pit that is Ukraine from world governments to investment banks. Everyone is heavily invested in Ukraine and will demand repayment for untold fortunes spent on prolonging the for-profit war. Even withdrawing from NATO would not be sufficient to end the war as the alliance has been preparing for a Trump victory before campaigning efforts began.

Europe is pushing full speed ahead to fabricate World War II, with both Germany and France offering to send “peacekeepers,” a digestible new term for “trained soldiers.” Zelensky simply wants the money to continue pouring in. “Will President Trump even notice Europe?” Zelensky asked in appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos. “Does he see NATO as necessary, and will he respect EU institutions?” Ukraine’s president is attempting to shape this as a Europe v the USA matter as if America is abandoning Europe under Trump.

Continue Reading

Trending

X