| National
|
[
National ] [ Main Menu ] |
|
|
|
441321 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 01:57:51
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
URL: https://x.com/KatrinaNation |
|
Glenn Greenwald@ggreenwald
Throughout 5 decades of the Cold War, concern over preventing nuclear war
between Washington and Moscow was central to all US foreign policy (as was
fear of driving Russia and China together).
Now, if that concerns you, it probably is proof that you're a paid Kremlin agent.
💣"
Katrina vandenHeuvel@KatrinaNation
·Sep 14
And note that more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear
war/
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441335] [441338] [441346] [441351] [441350] [441332] [441322] [441323] [441324] [441439] [441440] [441446] |
|
441335 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 08:28:21
From: shadow , [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
|
|
And your point would be what, exactly?
That we should not focus so much on this rightwing puppet
who lives in the ear of a presidential candidate who's
dangerously close to insanity?
Yeah okay then pal...lol...
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441338] [441346] [441351] [441350] |
|
441338 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 09:10:49
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
|
|
point is twitter's destroying her brain. Sad.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441346] [441351] [441350] |
|
441346 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 09:26:31
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
|
|
|
I'm not surprised The Nation would be a publication unfamiliar to you.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441351] [441350] |
|
441351 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 09:33:41
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
|
|
via Greenwald and twitter?
Because Greenwald's twitter is what you posted.
Don't have an account, and not getting one.
...moving on...
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
441350 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 09:32:35
From: shadow, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
|
|
And you think The Nation and its "uncompromising
journalism" gets *closer to the Actual Truth of
things*...do you, akira?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
441332 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 07:55:17
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of nuclear war |
URL: https://www.wired.com/story/you-might-survive-a-nuclear-blast-if-you-have-the-right-shelter/ |
|
"more media time spent on Laura Loomer than danger of
nuclear war"
Truly, in my lifetime there has never been a time we
weren't at threat of nuclear war, while having people
as venal, stupid and corruptible as Loomer so obviously
close to a presidential candidate is a newsworthy shock
to a democratic system.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
441322 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 02:07:30
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Biden open to using Western long-range missiles inside Russia |
URL: https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/13/politics/biden-starmer-meeting-ukraine-missiles/index.html |
|
Biden signals openness to using Western long-range missiles inside Russia as
he meets Britain’s leader to discuss
Washington
CNN
—
President Joe Biden is signaling new openness in allowing Ukraine to fire
missiles provided by the West on targets deep inside Russia, and plans to
discuss the matter with his new British counterpart at the White House on
Friday.
Ahead of the meeting, US officials said they did not expect Biden would
immediately sign-off on allowing US-provided Army Tactical Missile Systems —
known as ATACMS — to be launched on targets inside Russia far from the
Ukrainian border.
But like the US, the United Kingdom has sent its own long-range Storm
Shadow missiles to Kyiv. Their use, along with use of similar weapons from
France, is currently limited to within Ukraine, and any change will require US
sign-off — a matter for discussion at Friday’s talks.
The president has long resisted calls from Ukrainian officials to ease
restrictions on the weapons. But as the war grinds on, and as the US watches
with growing concern as Iran supplies Russia with ballistic missiles, intensive
discussions have been underway at the White House about a potential change.
“We’re working that out right now,” Biden said when questioned this week
whether he would permit Western-provided long-range missiles to target
military sites like airfields, missile launchers, fuel tanks and ammunition depots
inside Russia. The New York Times, citing European officials, reported that
Biden appears to be on the verge of clearing the way for Ukraine to use long-
range missiles as long as it doesn’t use arms provided by the US.
Within the Biden administration, the debate has pitted some officials who
support loosening the restrictions against others who appear more skeptical,
wary both for the risk of escalation and the usefulness of such a move.
Some assessments show Russia has already moved its assets – particularly
launch points for glide bombs, currently the biggest threat to Ukrainian troops
in the Kursk border region – out of range of the long-range missiles.
On the eve of Biden’s meeting with the prime minister, US officials continued to
insist that no change in policy was expected to be announced this week on
Ukraine’s use of ATACMS. In light of growing public pressure to allow
American-provided long-range missiles to be launched deeper into Russia,
senior administration officials have stressed that the US does not believe that
such a change would help change the overall course of the war.
And while US officials have had ongoing discussions about the use of long-
range missiles by Ukraine with both their Ukrainian and UK counterparts,
American officials said the topic was not poised to take up the majority of
Friday’s Biden-Starmer meeting – despite high interest in the topic in recent
days.
The two leaders were eager to discuss a “wealth of issues” as Starmer was
beginning to get settled into the job, one US official said.
The National Security Council on Thursday declined to comment on whether
Biden was preparing to give a thumbs-up to the use of the UK’s Storm Shadow
missiles far inside Russian territory.
For Starmer, who was elected as part of his Labour Party’s landslide general
election victory in early July, the meeting is an opportunity to further develop an
important global relationship. He and Biden also met on the margins of a NATO
summit in Washington over the summer.
That meeting took place one week after Starmer’s election as prime minister
and two weeks before Biden would exit the race for re-election. Starmer, people
familiar with the matter said, requested another face-to-face with Biden before
he left office in a bid to forge ties between the two nations, with questions
looming about what the special relationship could look like after November’s
US election.
No announcements are expected to come out of the talks, people familiar with
the matter said, and officials have said policy changes on the US weapons are
not imminent.
Still, that the conversation over long-range weapons is happening at all is an
indication of how stalled battlefield dynamics are causing western leaders to
rethink their approach.
Russian President Vladimir Putin told reporters Thursday that allowing Ukraine
to use long-range missiles to strike Russia is a matter of deciding whether
NATO countries are going to become directly involved in the military conflict.
If Western nations decide to allow Ukraine to use their long-range weapons,
Putin said: “This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and
European countries – are at war with Russia.”
The top American and British diplomats traveled to Kyiv this week and heard
renewed pleas from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to allow his
military to fire long-range weapons on Russian military sites.
American officials argue they constantly reevaluate their approach based on
battlefield conditions. Although the US has shifted its policy to allow limited
cross-border strikes into Russia using US-provided weapons, the
administration has yet to allow longer-range strikes.
Asked about the concerns of escalation, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken
said Wednesday that they are one factor, but “certainly not the only factor, and
it’s not necessarily a dispositive factor.”
“From day one, as you heard me say, we have adjusted and adapted as needs
have changed, as the battlefield has changed, and I have no doubt that we’ll
continue to do that as this evolves,” Blinken said at a news conference in Kyiv
with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha and UK Foreign Secretary David
Lammy.
The revelation that Iran has been providing Russia with ballistic missiles has
changed the debate over Ukraine’s capabilities, Lammy said.
Other top American officials have sounded more skeptical. Last week,
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin pushed back on the notion that lifting the
restrictions and hitting deeper into Russia is a silver bullet, saying that “there’s
no one capability that will, in and of itself, be decisive in this campaign.”
“There are a lot of targets in Russia – a big country, obviously,” Austin said at a
meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Germany on Friday. “And
there’s a lot of capability that Ukraine has in terms of (unmanned aerial
vehicles) and other things to address those targets.”
A US official said the administration views Ukraine’s long-range attacks on
Crimea, and Russia’s naval fleet there, as a much more effective use of the
ATACMS, and a strategy that has been yielding significant success in recent
months.
The Defense Department has a limited stockpile of the long-range systems, the
official said, so the US has been trying to persuade Ukraine to use them to the
maximum effect possible rather than on disparate targets in Russia that the US
considers to have little strategic value.
A separate US official said they expect Russia to continue to move assets out
of reach of the long-range systems and noted that “several hundred” ATACMS
have been transferred to Ukraine “and Ukraine has used most of them.”
Despite those reservations, a growing chorus of voices in Washington is calling
for the restrictions to be lifted. Senior Democrats on the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, including its chairman Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland and
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, have said the restrictions should be
eased in order to provide Ukraine a better chance of success.
“In light of Putin’s increasingly horrific attacks on civilian targets, it’s time to lift
restrictions on the use of long-range US-provided weapons to allow Ukraine to
reach high value Russian military targets,” Shaheen said.
Earlier in the week, the bipartisan congressional Ukraine caucus called on
Biden to allow Ukraine to strike targets inside Russia with the long-range
weapons.
“Unless these restrictions are lifted, Ukraine will continue to struggle to achieve
victory in its fight to defend its sovereignty and its people. The Ukrainian people
will continue to suffer unnecessary death, loss, and hardship as Russia
capitalizes on this policy and escalates its bombardments across Ukraine,” the
bipartisan lawmakers wrote.
A group of key House Republican also urged Biden to ease the restrictions in a
letter on Monday. And in a separate open letter, 17 former national security
officials, including former US ambassadors to Ukraine and top military
commanders, called on Blinken and Lammy to “act with alacrity.”
“A change in policy cannot come soon enough,” they wrote.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441323] [441324] [441439] [441440] [441446] |
|
441323 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 02:13:52
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Putin warns it would put Russia "at war" with NATO |
URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/14/world/europe/ukraine-long-range-weapons-atacms.html |
|
The Long-Range Weapons Ukraine Wants to Use on Russia, Explained
The United States and its allies are once again considering expanding the
capabilities they provide to Ukraine in its fight against Russia’s invasion.
By Eve Sampson and Lara Jakes
Sept. 14, 2024
Ukraine has asked to use Western long-range weapons to strike deeper into
Russia for months. It argues that it needs those weapons to hit military sites
that house Russian warplanes and that launch missiles into Ukrainian cities.
Those entreaties were a major topic of discussion on Friday as President Biden
met with Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain, who is trying to nudge the
United States to give more latitude to the Ukrainians. Mr. Starmer would
especially like Mr. Biden’s support for Britain to allow Ukraine to use British
Storm Shadow missiles to fire farther into Russia.
Neither leader announced any policy changes after that meeting. Leaving the
White House, Mr. Starmer told reporters, “We had a wide-ranging discussion
about strategy,” and a White House summary of the meeting said that the two
countries had “reaffirmed their unwavering support for Ukraine.”
Mr. Biden has been reluctant to approve deep strikes in the past, fearing
escalation with Russia. But in May, he allowed Ukraine to fire a number of U.S.-
supplied weapons just over the border to attack Russian military bases from
which attacks into Ukraine have been launched, and he later expanded that
permission.
Now, Ukraine wants long-range weapons. It is also seeking permission to use
weapons it already has to hit targets deeper in Russia. President Vladimir V.
Putin of Russia warned on Thursday that if the United States and its allies
allowed that, they would put his country “at war” with NATO.
The debate in the U.S. administration centers, in large part, on these weapons.
Storm Shadows and SCALPs
Britain and France have already sent Ukraine air-launched cruise missiles that,
so far, have struck Russian targets in Crimea and in the Black Sea. These
missiles have a range of about 155 miles and have been fired from Ukraine’s
aging fleet of Soviet-era and Russian-designed fighter jets.
They are known as Storm Shadows in Britain and SCALPs in France (and are
virtually the same model).
Britain is eager to allow Ukraine to use the Storm Shadows to strike farther into
Russia. Mr. Starmer was hoping to receive Mr. Biden’s approval of that plan so
the allies could present a united front.
France has previously expressed support for Ukraine’s deep strikes into Russia,
but only on military targets directly linked to Moscow’s war efforts in Ukraine.
Some analysts expect the United States to follow a pattern it established with
Ukraine’s previous requests for weapons, like Abrams tanks, F-16 fighter jets
and Patriot air defense systems: After long deliberations, Washington
eventually allows its allies to move first in providing Ukraine with new
capabilities or permissions, and then sometimes follows suit.
ATACMS
The Army Tactical Missile Systems, known as ATACMS (pronounced “attack
’ems”), are American-made long-range missiles that are filled with 375 pounds
of explosives and, depending on the model, can strike targets up to 190 miles
away. The United States supplied Ukraine with ATACMS last year, but the Biden
administration has so far withheld its approval for their use across the border
into Russia.
Russia has now moved 90 percent of its air bases that house bomber jets out
of ATACMS range, U.S. and European military officials said, in anticipation that
Ukraine could soon be allowed to fire the missiles across the border.
Originally developed in the 1980s to destroy Soviet targets far behind enemy
lines, ATACMS could also strike Russian ground-based air-defense systems
that target Ukraine’s newly furnished fleet of F-16s, experts said.
JASSMs
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles, or JASSMs (pronounced “jazz
’ems”), are air-launched cruise missiles with a range of about 230 miles. These
have not yet been provided to Ukraine, but a U.S. official said that the Biden
administration was considering sending them.
The weapons carry 1,000-pound warheads and can be fired from F-16s. This
means that with JASSMs, Ukraine could strike military targets well within
Russian territory without leaving Ukrainian airspace.
Ukraine is believed to have received around a dozen American-made F-16s this
summer, though officials have not said exactly how many.
The U.S. official said that even if Mr. Biden approved sending JASSMs to
Ukraine, delivery might take months, and it is unclear whether Mr. Biden would
allow Ukraine to fire these missiles into Russia.
Eric Schmitt and Aurelien Breeden contributed reporting.
Eve Sampson is a reporter covering international news and a member of the
2024-25 Times Fellowship class, a program for journalists early in their careers.
More about Eve Sampson
Lara Jakes, based in Rome, reports on diplomatic and military efforts by the
West to support Ukraine in its war with Russia. She has been a journalist for
nearly 30 years. More about Lara Jakes
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441324] [441439] [441440] [441446] |
|
441324 |
|
|
Date: September 16, 2024 at 02:31:05
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: & NATO says, "ok then" |
URL: https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russia-war-nato-military-chiefs-d020f72aaa3abec8e5fa971f7123ffe1 |
|
but Taylor Swift!!
POLITICS
NATO military committee chair backs Ukraine’s use of long range weapons to
hit Russia
BY LOLITA C. BALDOR
September 14, 2024
PRAGUE (AP) — The head of NATO’s military committee said Saturday that
Ukraine has the solid legal and military right to strike deep inside Russia to gain
combat advantage — reflecting the beliefs of a number of U.S. allies — even as
the Biden administration balks at allowing Kyiv to do so using American-made
weapons.
“Every nation that is attacked has the right to defend itself. And that right
doesn’t stop at the border of your own nation,” said Adm. Rob Bauer, speaking
at the close of the committee’s annual meeting, also attended by U.S. Gen. CQ
Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Bauer, of Netherlands, also added that nations have the sovereign right to put
limits on the weapons they send to Ukraine. But, standing next to him at a press
briefing, Lt. Gen. Karel Řehka, chief of the General Staff of the Czech Armed
Forces, made it clear his nation places no such weapons restrictions on Kyiv.
ADVERTISEMENT
“We believe that the Ukrainians should decide themselves how to use it,” Řehka
said.
Their comments came as U.S. President Joe Biden is weighing whether to allow
Ukraine to use American-provided long-range weapons to hit deep into Russia.
And they hint at the divisions over the issue.
Biden met with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Friday, after this week’s
visit to Kyiv by their top diplomats, who came under fresh pressure to loosen
weapons restrictions. U.S. officials familiar with discussions said they believed
Starmer was seeking Biden’s approval to allow Ukraine to use British Storm
Shadow missiles for expanded strikes in Russia.
Biden’s approval may be needed because Storm Shadow components are
made in the U.S. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to share
the status of private conversations, said they believed Biden would be
amenable, but there has been no decision announced yet.
Providing additional support and training for Ukraine was a key topic at the
NATO chiefs’ meeting, but it wasn’t clear Saturday if the debate over the U.S.
restrictions was discussed.
Many of the European nations have been vigorously supportive of Ukraine in
part because they worry about being the next victim of an empowered Russia.
At the opening of the meeting, Czech Republic President Petr Pavel broadly
urged the military chiefs gathered in the room to be ”bold and open in
articulating your assessments and recommendations. The rounder and the
softer they are, the less they will be understood by the political level.”
Image
Rescuers search for victims in an apartment building destroyed by Russian
missile attack in centre Lviv, Western Ukraine, Sept. 4, 2024. (AP Photo/Mykola
Tys, File)
The allies, he said, must “take the right steps and the right decisions to protect
our countries and our way of life.”
The military leaders routinely develop plans and recommendations that are
then sent to the civilian NATO defense secretaries for discussion and then on to
the nations’ leaders in the alliance.
The U.S. allows Ukraine to use American-provided weapons in cross-border
strikes to counter attacks by Russian forces. But it doesn’t allow Kyiv to fire
long-range missiles, such as the ATACMS, deep into Russia. The U.S. has
argued that Ukraine has drones that can strike far and should use ATACMS
judiciously because they only have a limited number.
Ukraine has increased its pleas with Washington to lift the restrictions,
particularly as winter looms and Kyiv worries about Russian gains during the
colder months.
“You want to weaken the enemy that attacks you in order to not only fight the
arrows that come your way, but also attack the archer that is, as we see, very
often operating from Russia proper into Ukraine,” said Bauer. “So militarily,
there’s a good reason to do that, to weaken the enemy, to weaken its logistic
lines, fuel, ammunition that comes to the front. That is what you want to stop, if
at all possible.”
Brown, for his part, told reporters traveling with him to the meeting that the U.S.
policy on long-range weapons remains in place.
But, he added, “by the same token, what we want to do is — regardless of that
policy — we want to continue to make Ukraine successful with the capabilities
that have been provided” by the U.S. and other nations in the coalition, as well
as the weapons Kyiv has been able to build itself.
ADVERTISEMENT
“They’ve proven themselves fairly effective in building out uncrewed aerial
vehicles, in building out drones,” Brown told reporters traveling with him to
meetings in Europe.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has made similar points, arguing that one
weapons system won’t determine success in the war.
“There are a number of things that go into the overall equation as to whether or
not you know you want to provide one capability or another,” Austin said Friday.
“There is no silver bullet when it comes to things like this.”
He also noted that Ukraine has already been able to strike inside Russia with its
own internally produced systems, including drones.
by Taboola
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441439] [441440] [441446] |
|
441439 |
|
|
Date: September 18, 2024 at 23:15:25
From: Rodney Boulderfield, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Speaking of Drones ... Toropets |
|
|
Probably just a coincidence, everywhere we started
seeing people calling Bull (Toro) on claims about
people cooking dogs (pets) in Ohio, then in the wee
hours yesterday, a UkraNATO Drone cooks everything
within a 20kt radius from the ammo dump in ...
Toropets. Steganography?
News coverage happened out in the world, relative
silence round here, just like the nearly invisible ex-
WSJ journalist story about alleged Migrant Trafficking
Network Hub in Springfield. Did Operation
Petsonthebarbie flush them out? Ok the guy making 10-
15 trips in the 100k Lexus SUV isn't actually achieving
stealth.
It's all so multiplistic. Did that drone drop a
beercan nuke? Hard to hit 20kt that way but maybe the
drone could scale up to that? Or, given what we're
seeing in the new field of detonation of comms devices,
and assuming the Russkies would not store nukes above
ground with detonator installed, did some adventurous
pranksters decide it was time to demo the detonator
donator program?
Really not looking good. Send an Assteroid soon?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441440] [441446] |
|
441440 |
|
|
Date: September 18, 2024 at 23:25:33
From: Rodney Boulderfield, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Kind of poetic |
|
|
|
How these 2 threads synchronized, not actually planned.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[441446] |
|
441446 |
|
|
Date: September 19, 2024 at 08:17:23
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Kind of poetic |
|
|
geezus Rodney.
no links or sources and no idea what you're scattershot
conspiracing about this time.
<<
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
[
National ] [ Main Menu ] |