Israel Military Forum

Israel Military Forum (
-   North America (
-   -   WWIII Warning (

Paparock 09-07-2016 03:33 PM

WWIII Warning
WW3 WARNING Planet closer to catastrophic World War III than at any time for SIXTY years, experts warn… and it doesn’t look good for Britain or America if it does kick off
Several flashpoints could erupt into a global conflict involving the US, China and Russia, it is claimed

THE world is closer to a catastrophic and bloody World War III than at any other point in the past 60 years, experts have warned.

Russia and China, both of which are pumping vast amounts of money into their militaries, could soon rival the US in terms of power and prestige.

All three nations want to remain a global superpower – if not the only one – and are preparing for war, it is claimed.

But they oppose each other on a swathe of issues across the globe, creating a delicate political balance that could collapse and engulf nuclear states and alliances such as NATO.

A range of experts have identified several flashpoints across the globe which are today the most likely triggers for such a war.

The proximity of NATO and Russian bombers flying over Syria, Vladimir Putin’s aggression in eastern Europe, and China’s movements in the South China Sea are among them.

Experts have also raised concerns about the instability of nuclear-power Pakistan as extremist factions and terrorist groups within the country grow in power.

Adding to this is these groups’ sworn opposition to neighbouring India – which holds its own much-coveted nuclear arsenal.

Britain’s Admiral Lord West told The Sun Online: “Basically none of us know what is going to happen but we are in a more dangerous, chaotic and unpredictable time than any other in my 50 years in the force.
North Korean soldiers march through Pyongyang during a military parade last year carrying nuclear-marked backpacks

“I believe that because of Brexit, I think Europe is very flaky, I think it is unfortunate that we didn’t stay in, because they actually need our military expertise.

“I can see bits of Europe breaking up and when Europe gets into a mess, twice in the past we’ve had to go in there and clear it up with immense loss of blood and lives.”

He warned that Britain was not sufficiently investing in its defence – and in particular, its Royal Navy.

The investment required to maintain its strength had not materialised in the years since the Falklands War, he said, leaving Britain in a precarious place.
Russian army soldiers sit on a military vehicle in Palmyra, Syria. Putin has used the conflict as a test-run for his new weaponry


In July, a 25-page report by the US-based think tank Atlantic Council warned of Russia’s growing threat to NATO. (

NATO has been Europe’s primary military alliance since WWII – all 28 member states have sworn to respond as a group if a single member is attacked.

The council’s report warned that Russia was an “existential threat to the Baltic states and Poland” and an annexation could be implemented “with great speed”.

It continued: “This might come at a time NATO and the EU are distracted by another crisis, or it might relate to some particular high profile event, the outcomes of which Moscow wants to shape.
Russia’s Vladimir Putin is becoming increasingly aggressive towards the NATO-aligned Baltic states

“It might also result from a misperception of NATO’s activities and a miscalculation of the Alliance’s resolve.”

Admiral Lord West also said: “Russia under Putin is becoming quite aggressive, it’s spending a large amount of money on its military capabilities.

“Putin has said he believes in using tactical nuclear weapons if there is a war. That is highly dangerous.

“There’s little debate that he thinks of the Baltic states and possibly Poland as a Russian sphere of influence. They are NATO countries – I find that extremely dangerous.”

“I think people like Putin understand robust responses, they understand military power. I think he thinks he’ll pick (the Baltic states) off one-by-one.”

Russian soldiers bearing no identifying insignia march through a Ukrainian naval base during their annexation of the region in 2014

Experts warn Putin may be planning more surprise invasions of other Baltic states

Russia-backed separatists inspect damaged Ukrainian tanks near Debaltseve in February last year


Another point of simmering tensions is Syria, where US and Russia are both carrying out airstrikes in support of opposing groups.

While they share a common foe in ISIS, the US has backed Kurdish and moderate Syrian rebel groups against President Bashar al-Assad.

Russia, on the other hand, is backing al-Assad against the rebels.

With both countries carrying out air raids across the relatively small area, the chances of accidental clashes and misperceptions is high.

Peter W. Singer, a leading expert on future war, wrote in The Daily Telegraph last year: “As in the past, it is perfectly possible that a third world war could start with a small event, or even by accident.

“One of the many Russian bomber planes now probing NATO’s borders could collide with an RAF Typhoon, prompting an aerial skirmish the likes of which the world has not seen for decades.

A Russian fighter jet was shot down by Turkey last year in a frightening example of how small incidents can quickly escalate

The downing of the jet triggered a massive diplomatic fallout between the two countries

“Indeed, the skies over Syria are starting to get dangerously crowded, with Russian jets flying near US planes on bombing runs, and sparring with NATO air defences in neighbouring Turkey.”

Such an incident – albeit on a much smaller scale – was seen in November when Turkey downed a Russian jet it claimed it had encroached on its airspace during raids in Syria.

The incident led to a collapse in diplomatic relations between the two countries and sparked weeks of mudslinging between Ankara and Moscow.

With neither side prepared to lose face, their military posturing only came back from the brink after a Russian soldier was photographed travelling through the Bosphorus Strait brandishing a rocket launcher.


In the past few years China has moved aggressively to dominate the South China Sea with the construction of artificial islands containing fighter jet bunkers.

The move has alarmed countries such as Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines who dispute its territorial claims in the region.

Futhermore, it has aggravated Japan and South Korea – two key members of a Pacific bloc the US has sworn to protect.

A photograph taken by the Philippines Department of Defence shows a Chinese ship cruising through the disputed territory

China has aggressively built artificial islands, such as this one pictured, where it will base fleets of jet planes

Peter W. Singer is also among those to suggest World War III could be triggered when “a Japanese or American ship scrapes paint with its Chinese Navy counterpart amid the reefs in the Pacific that are being militarized as part of Asia’s current arms race”.

Indeed, Chinese military commanders – who are pushing ahead with new submarine deployments into the US’s Pacific sphere – believe this to be a genuine and legitimate scenario.

After a close call last year, China’s naval commander Admiral Wu Shengli warned his US counterpart: “If the United States continues with these kinds of dangerous, provocative acts, there could well be a seriously pressing situation between frontline forces from both sides on the sea and in the air, or even a minor incident that sparks war.”


Experts have long feared the collapse of nuclear-armed Pakistan – a country rife with instability, terror groups and with a sworn hatred of neighbour India.

The concern is that its nuclear arsenal could fall into the hands of non-state groups ready to use it against the West, or other proxy groups.

It is feared nuclear-armed Pakistan is too unstable to keep its atomic bombs secure from extremists

Notably, Pakistan was the birthplace of the Taliban – a fundamentalist Islamic group that spread into Afghanistan and ran the country following its war with the Soviet Union.

A British Ministry of Defence report released in January earmarked the region as one that will continue to generate threats to the UK.

It also warned that “inter-state conflict and internal instability” were possible.

A March report by Harvard Kennedy School stated the “risk of nuclear theft in Pakistan appears to be high”.

The authors wrote: “The trend seems to be toward increasing risk, as Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal expands and shifts toward tactical nuclear weapons, while adversary capabilities remain extremely high.

“Over the longer term, the possibilities of state collapse or extremist takeover cannot be entirely ruled out.”

Pakistan is home to a powerful faction of the Taliban (pictured) who run rampant in the country’s north

George Friendman, the founder of geopolitical forecaster STRATFOR, has warned: “Be ready for war.”

Mr Friedman has written extensively about emerging trends and international affairs.

He recently told Business Insider that interstate war – such as that seen during World War I and II, is a recurring characteristic of politics.

There has never been a century that has not had a systemic war — a systemic war, meaning when the entire system convulses.

“Do you want to bet this will be the only century that doesn’t have one? I’ll take that bet.

“When you have the countries like Germany, China, and Russia decline, and be replaced by others, that’s when systemic wars start.

“That’s when it gets dangerous, because they haven’t yet reached a balance. So Germany united in 1871 and all hell broke loose.

“Japan rose in the early 20th century, and then you had chaos.

“So we’re looking at a systemic shift. Be ready for war.”

Paparock 09-07-2016 03:49 PM

How Poland and NATO Should Counter A Resurgent Russia
Arming For Deterrence
How Poland and NATO Should Counter A Resurgent Russia
By Gen. Sir Richard Shirreff and Maciej Olex-Szczytowski

This is a 28 page document prepared by Atlantic Council that proposes to develop Poland as a stronghold for war if it develops Russia

View it all here>

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________

Atlantic Council proposes to develop Poland as a stronghold for war with Russia
By Clara Weiss

10 August 2016

On July 19, the Atlantic Council, an American think tank, published a 25-page strategy paper titled “Arming for Deterrence” calling for a massive NATO military build-up against Russia. Poland in particular is to be made into a stronghold for a war with Russia.

The paper is a kind of postscript to the NATO summit held in Warsaw in July. It calls for measures that go even further than the summit resolutions.

The authors of the paper, General Sir Richard Shirreff, a former high-ranking NATO General, and Maciej Olex-Szczytowski, a Polish banker, describe Russia as “the most serious geopolitical and military threat to NATO.”

They claim Russia has the military capability to rapidly attack the Baltic states and Poland with the Russian army’s Baltic fleet reputedly in a position to cut communications and connecting routes between the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, Poland and other NATO countries. At the same time they argue that NATO is insufficiently prepared for war when it comes to command structures and military equipment.

While Russia does not appear willing to attack NATO for the moment, this could change unexpectedly should a crisis break out in Russia itself or—as a reaction to US foreign policy—in another part of the world, they say.

Although the authors claim the danger comes from Russia, their arguments show that in reality it is they who advocate a war of aggression against Russia, whose defence capabilities would be disabled as quickly as possible with the help of Poland and the Baltic states.

At least half of the paper consists of concrete proposals for a fast and comprehensive armament of Poland that already plays a leading role in war preparations against Russia. Poland’s Civic Platform (PO) government raised the military budget to 2 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014. The current right-wing nationalist government of the Law and Justice Party (PiS) has since raised it to 3 percent of GDP (around 14.2 billion US dollars).

The Atlantic Council supports this course, but calls for it to be implemented more rapidly and resolutely, and for greater participation from the private defence sector. In addition to concrete measures regarding the modernization of the Polish army and the acquisition of fighter jets and other military technologies, the authors propose a number of steps for the Polish government that can only be seen as active preparations for a war.

They include:

A declaration by the Polish government stating that it will come to the aid of the Baltic states and Romania in the event of a Russian attack;
The publication of a list of potential targets for military strikes by Poland, especially Kaliningrad;

That the Polish government reserves the right to attack targets in Kaliningrad and other areas with conventional weapons should Moscow threaten nuclear war;

The nuclear armament of Poland, in particular its F-16 fighter jets;
A declaration by Poland that it will attack targets deep inside Russia with cruise missiles and rockets should it be attacked itself;

A declaration by Poland that it will launch cyber-attacks against Russia, with targets including the Moscow subway system, the St. Petersburg power supply and the broadcaster RT;

A declaration by Poland that in the event of a Russian attack, it will send special forces into Russian territory to assist NATO and destroy missile defence systems;

That Poland “demonstrate its ability” to deploy its military and quickly send troops into the Baltics and Romania.

The authors also call for a “credible” joint defence plan under the leadership of NATO headquarters and for the unification of Polish armed forces with those of the Baltic states and other willing NATO forces. While this has implications for national sovereignty, they write, “Political issues aside, Poland is well-placed, by virtue of the size of its armed forces, to act as lead nation for a ‘Baltic’ division under command of NATO’s Multinational Corps Northeast.”

Poland itself should expand its regular armed forces and increase its active troop strength from the current 100,000 troops to 150,000. To this end, the Polish government should prevent many Polish citizens capable of military service from migrating to other EU countries.

At the same time, the paramilitary units under state control should be expanded, a policy that the PiS government has already made a key component of its efforts to build up the military in recent months.

The authors of the paper hope that the strength of these units will be increased from the current 35,000 to as much as 90,000. According to the authors, in order to raise these numbers, the government can draw on the roughly 400,000 men now active in various paramilitary organizations.
The authors fail to mention that these paramilitary organizations are made up of militant right-wing nationalists. Significantly, however, they name the “Forest Brothers” as an example to follow.

The Forest Brothers were right-wing partisans in the Baltics who collaborated with the Nazis during the Second World War. After the war, they waged a guerrilla war against the Soviet Union with the support of Western intelligence services until the mid-1950s.

The authors are clear that not all NATO members will support their proposals. Without naming names, they repeatedly warn of insufficient agreement within the alliance. In the past, the German government in particular has been against permanently stationing NATO troops in Eastern Europe. France and Italy also criticize the aggressive position toward Russia and advocate the easing of Western sanctions.

The Atlantic Council paper calls on Poland to take a stand within the EU against plans for a common European army. It does not elaborate on this point, but its meaning is clear: Within the EU, Poland should take a more offensive position than Berlin, which calls for an EU army and, following a Brexit (British exit), work to push the EU in the direction of developing a military union. The authors of the Atlantic Council, however, insist that an EU army would weaken NATO, especially if Britain were no longer part of the EU.
Notably, both authors of the paper maintain close ties to the weapons industry and the military.

Shirreff was, until 2014, a high-ranking NATO general. This year he published the book 2017: War with Russia, which predicts imminent war with the world’s second-largest nuclear-armed power. Furthermore, he recently founded the consulting firm Strategia Worldwide Ltd., which employs numerous ex-military officers who until recently occupied high-ranking posts in the British military and NATO. Among them is Rob Weighill, who boasts on the firm’s website that in 2011, he planned the attack of NATO forces against Libya.

More than anyone else, Olex-Szczytowski embodies the close connection between finance capital and militarism in Poland. Since the late 1970s, he was active in important international banks. From 1983 to 1986, he was a member of the Polish government-in-exile in London, which based itself on the Polish constitution of 1935 that legitimized the dictatorial regime of General Józef Piłsudski.

In the 1990s, he played an important role in mass privatizations and the Polish government’s business with Western banks. In the 2000s, he led the Military Property Agency and in 2012-14 was an economic advisor to then Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski.

Paparock 09-09-2016 10:15 PM

Islamic Predictions of WWIII
Islamic Predictions of WWIII

Paparock 10-05-2016 02:45 PM

The UK, Norway, France and Spain all intercepted the TU-160 planes
WAR GAMES Panic as two Russian bombers blast across Europe – causing FOUR countries to scramble fighter jets to intercept them
The UK, Norway, France and Spain all intercepted the TU-160 planes
The bombers headed across the top of Scotland from Norway, before skirting Ireland’s west coast towards France and Spain

During the flight, the bombers swooped across the top of Scotland, before skirting the west coast of Ireland, completing their route near northern Spain.

Spanish media has reported it is the furthest south such an operation has had to take place – while the frequency of Russian bombers being intercepted by Nato aircraft has significantly increased.

Although the incident occurred on September 22, the full details only emerged following an statement from the French Ministry of Defence.

According to the statement, the two bombers were first detected by Norway, which scrambled two F-16 jets to accompany them to the north of Scotland – where they were then intercepted by RAF Typhoon aircraft.

French Rafale fighter planes then picked up the bombers after they skirted Ireland’s west coast, before Spain sent two F-18 jets to intercept the Russian planes north of Bilbao.

The RAF has confirmed that the Russian jets did not enter UK airspace at any point.

However, for the UK, the incident was the latest of several involving Russian military aircraft.

Relations between Russia and West have declined since 2014, when Russia annexed the Ukrainian territory of Crimea.

Recently, they worsened even further as the United States ended military co-operation with Russia over Syria. (

View Videos Here>

Paparock 10-05-2016 02:55 PM

Russia Tells Citizens ‘Nuclear War With The West Could Happen Soon’
Russia Tells Citizens ‘Nuclear War With The West Could Happen Soon’
By Rob WaughRob Waugh for

As tensions rise in the middle East, an official TV channels in Russia has issued a chilling warning that war with the West could be imminent.

Zvezda, a nationwide TV service run by the country’s Ministry of Defence, said last week, ‘Schizophrenics from America are sharpening nuclear weapons for Moscow.’

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday proposed a law suspending a Moscow-Washington agreement to dispose of weapons-grade plutonium.

Officials said on Friday that underground shelters had been built which could house 12 milion people – enough for the entire population of Moscow.

Russia has clashed with the Western powers over its policy in Syria – where it’s accused of bombing civilians – and the U.S suspended negotiations with the country yesterday.

Both Russia and NATO are still in the position to unleash global-scale nuclear attacks – and the weapons are armed and ready.

The Arms Control Association says, ‘United States and Russia still deploy more than 1,500 strategic warheads on several hundred bombers and missiles – far more than necessary to deter nuclear attack – and they are modernizing their nuclear delivery systems.

No state with a large nuclear arsenal – such as Russia or America – actively WANTS nuclear confrontation.

What observers fear is a military or political confrontation which builds up tensions around a nuclear missile attack – possibly leading one side to fire.

Hydrogen bombs would destroy most civilian buildings in a 10-mile radius (based on a 20-megaton weapon exploding 3.3 miles above the ground), according to calculations in Physics and Nuclear Arms Today.

The effects on people nearby would be even more frightening, with a blast killing thousands or millions instantly, followed by poisoning from radioactive fallout from the blast.

Witnesses of the Hiroshima attack said that people near the centre of the blast ‘vanished’.

William Burchett said, ‘Of thousands of others, nearer the centre of the explosion, there was no trace. They vanished. The theory in Hiroshima is that the atomic heat was so great that they burned instantly to ashes – except that there were no ashes.’

Paparock 10-05-2016 02:56 PM

Russian Newspapers Predict 'Direct Conflict' With USA
Russian Newspapers Predict 'Direct Conflict' With USA
Russian state newspapers predict ‘direct military conflict’ with US as it compares Syria stalemate to Cuban missile crisis

'Third World War' fears have been voiced by the newspapers over the growing tensions between the USA and Syria

A RUSSIAN newspaper fears a Third World War with the US over Syria.

Tabloid Moskovsky Komsomolets predicts a “direct military confrontation” on par with the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The US suspended contact with Russia over Syria on Monday.

Secretary of State John Kerry has been enraged by airstrikes on rebel-controlled areas of Aleppo.

Hundreds of innocents are believed to have been killed in the attacks.

BBC Russia correspondent Steve Rosenberg referred to two Russian newspapers taking an aggressive tone towards the US.

In one article headlined ‘The stakes are higher than Syria’, the paper Moskovsky Komsomolets warns of a potential new war.

It states: “Just imagine that the US does what it has wanted to do for a long time and strike against Assad, not by mistake but on purpose and openly.

“Should Russia defend its ally or consider striking against the Americans but this would definitely lead to a Third World War (

“Russia can win big in Syria but it can also lose big too. We must not forget that in Syria we are playing an astonishingly risky game.”

Moskovsky Komsomolets adds that even its country's own fighters would not be confident in a war with the US.

"According to our fighter pilots, the best we could do is shoot down a few coalition forces but this would mean a full-scale war," it added.

The Russian tabloid Moskovsky Komsomolets discusses the potential war with the US

Veteran broadcaster Vladimir Pozner told the BBC: "There's a real feeling now that America is out to prove it is the only superpower.
"The continued expansion of Nato is seen by the Russian leadership, perhaps incorrectly, is seen as being a real threat.

"There is a danger of real confrontation, perhaps leading to some kind of military engagement and war."

It has previously been reported that Putin is preparing for war with the West (

Russia is already staging a massive evacuation drill to prepare for nuclear war. (

More than 200,000 emergency services personnel and soldiers will use 50,000 pieces of equipment during the civil defence exercise.

Paparock 10-07-2016 03:11 PM

Russia’s Nuclear Surge: Putin Adding Nukes While Obama Cuts
Russia’s Nuclear Surge: Putin Adding Nukes While Obama Cuts
Should we be worried that Moscow deployed 429 more warheads than Washington? Why the number may be misleading—and Putin ditching other treaties may be scarier.

As of Oct. 1, Russia had hundreds more nuclear warheads deployed than the United States did. A startling 429 more, in fact, according to the U.S. State Department.

Don’t panic quite yet. The gap is probably temporary. But that doesn’t mean all’s well when it comes to potentially world-ending weaponry.

The reason for the disparity is simple. While the U.S. military has been steadily cutting the number of nukes it loads on submarines and bombers and in missile silos, Russian forces have recently been adding more.

Seemingly more worrying for the United States, Russia’s 1,796 deployed warheads exceed—by a whopping 246 weapons—the cap of 1,550 deployed nuclear weapons that Moscow and Washington agreed to as part of the 2011 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

The United States, meanwhile, is already well below the New START cap. America’s missile submarines, nuclear-capable heavy bombers, and land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles are armed with just 1,367 warheads, the State Department says.

Both Russia’s nuke surplus and America’s lesser total could change in the next 17 months. Washington and Moscow have agreed on a Feb. 5, 2018, deadline for fully implementing New START. Until then, the countries’ respective nuclear arsenals could fluctuate in size—and often.

“You have to keep in mind that numbers go up and down on a day-to-day basis, so a one-day [snapshot] may mislead about force trends over time,” Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear expert who blogs at Arms Control Wonk, told The Daily Beast.

Both the United States and Russia have signaled their intention to abide by New START’s terms, meaning Russia will probably start shedding old warheads pretty soon, replacing them with a smaller number of newer atomic munitions and ultimately erasing the current nuclear disparity. “Neither of us is in violation of the agreement,” Lewis stressed.

New START is actually one of the few reasons for optimism amid the U.S.-Russia strategic arms race. For starters, the treaty only covers deployed nukes—meaning those on quick alert aboard subs, on planes, and in silos.

The treaty doesn’t limit how many perfectly functional nuclear weapons the United States and Russia can keep in storage. In many cases, those warheads could go from “stored” to “deployed” with just a few hours’ work.

Neither Washington nor Moscow discloses the exact number of nukes it keeps in storage, but Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, has estimated each country’s total stockpile to be around 4,500 warheads.

Neither government has expressed any interest in cutting its overall atomic stockpile. And both governments plan to spend hundreds of billions of dollars in coming decades modernizing their nuclear arsenals with new warheads… and better rockets, bombers, and submarines to carry them.

“Although these programs do not constitute a buildup of the overall nuclear arsenal, they are very comprehensive and reaffirm the determination by both Russia and the United States to retain large offensive nuclear arsenals at high levels of operational readiness,” Kristensen wrote on his blog.

While New START seems to be holding strong, a separate disarmament deal—whereby the United States and Russia agreed to dispose of excess fissile material—has just collapsed. The Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, signed in 2000, covered 34 tons of surplus, weapons-grade plutonium in each country.

Under the terms of the agreement, both Russia and the United States would render the plutonium unusable for military purposes—not only to decrease nuclear tensions between the two powers, but also to ensure the excess plutonium didn’t somehow wind up in terrorists’ hands.

Citing a “radically changed environment,” Russian President Vladimir Putin announced Oct. 3 that Russia was pulling out of the deal. Nevertheless, Moscow informally pledged that it wouldn’t use the old plutonium in weapons—agreement or no.

“The decision by the Russians to unilaterally withdraw from this commitment is disappointing,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said. “The announcement about the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement is more in line with those kinds of decisions that have only deepened Russia’s isolation in the international community.”

Meanwhile, the United States has been insisting for at least three years now that Russia is violating the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which bans many types of short-range nuclear weapons.

U.S. officials have not said just how Russia is allegedly violating the treaty, but the purported breach might involve the road-mobile SS-25 ballistic missile and the RS-26, a small, nimble ballistic missile apparently designed to thwart U.S. missile defenses.

Earnest expressed cautious optimism that, despite everything, Russia is still committed to reducing the risk of atomic warfare. He pointed to Russia’s cooperation with the United States in negotiating the deal with Iran to end that country’s nuclear-weapons program. “I think that’s an indication of the priority that Russia has placed on nonproliferation,” Earnest said.

But Russia’s and America’s equal commitments to maintaining and modernizing their overall nuclear arsenals—regardless of any agreement to cap the number of deployed warheads—speaks to an underlying atomic distrust that lingers a quarter-century after the Cold War ended.

“How the two countries justify such large arsenals is somewhat of a mystery,” Kristensen noted, “but seems to be mainly determined by the size of the other side’s arsenal.”

The Russian Bear Threatens America Across The Middle East

Russia Again Strongly Warns U.S. Against Striking Syrian Army -

Paparock 10-07-2016 03:30 PM

Obama Media Cover-Up Of Putin Threats to Use Nukes in The Middle East
Putin Threatens Turkey & Saudi Arabia with Tactical Nuclear Response to Syrian Ground Invasion

Back on February 22, 2016 did you hear this reported on your main stream news media?

A source close to Russian President Vladimir Putin has informed award-winning journalist Robert Parry that Putin has warned Turkey that any attempted ground invasion of Syria will be met with the defensive use of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield.

A tactical nuclear weapon also known as non-strategic nuclear weapon refers to a nuclear weapon which is designed to be used on a battlefield in military situations. These differ from strategic nuclear weapons, which refers to weapons that are much larger in destructive power and are typically delivered by ICBM or SLBM missiles (though there are some that are air-dropped).

Parry’s background as a respected investigative journalist includes reporting on the Iran-Contra scandal for the Associated Press and Newsweek. In addition, he’s also received the George Polk award for reporting on intelligence matters, suggesting that this information should be treated as a credible warning.

Turkish-Saudi threats of a ground invasion have ratcheted up in the past month, as the finalization of a negotiated Syrian political settlement came closer to fruition, which would potentially usurp the group’s goal of regime change in Syria.

As Vice President Joe Biden pointed out during a speech at Harvard in 2014, that Turkey and Saudi Arabia had “poured hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad,” going on to point out that “the people who were being supplied were Al Nusra and Al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world.”

According to the report, written by Parry, for Consortium News:

If Turkey (with hundreds of thousands of troops massed near the Syrian border) and Saudi Arabia (with its sophisticated air force) follow through on threats and intervene militarily to save their rebel clients, who include Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front, from a powerful Russian-backed Syrian government offensive, then Russia will have to decide what to do to protect its 20,000 or so military personnel inside Syria.

A source close to Russian President Vladimir Putin told me that the Russians have warned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan that Moscow is prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons if necessary to save their troops in the face of a Turkish-Saudi onslaught. Since Turkey is a member of NATO, any such conflict could quickly escalate into a full-scale nuclear confrontation.

The Russian threat to use tactical nukes in the event of a joint Turkish-Saudi invasion should be taken extremely seriously given the duo’s recent failed attempts to garner U.S. support for a ground invasion under the guise of aiding refugees and assisting “moderate rebels.” In reality, this is simply a non-threatening label for the group’s preferred Islamic extremist organizations in the Syrian theater of war.

Moscow’s warning comes on the heels of Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir telling CNN that Syrian President Assad must be removed “by force” if a diplomatic solution fails.

The reality in Syria is that the Russian intervention has decimated all insurgent groups on the ground and helped solidify the internationally recognized government’s control over the war-torn country, much to the chagrin of the Western-AngloZionist/GCC coalition actively supporting regime change.

Parry breaks down the recent posturing by the Turks, as he highlights the events that have led to the current crisis, writing:

Turkey has left about 100 kilometers of its border open for various jihadist groups to bring in reinforcements and weapons while letting the Islamic State smuggle out oil for sale on the black market. Last fall, after Russia (and a reluctant United States) began bombing ISIS oil-truck convoys, Turkey shot down a Russian bomber near Turkey’s border, leading to the deaths of the pilot and a rescuer.

Now, as the Russian-backed Syrian army makes major gains against the Nusra-dominated rebels around Aleppo and encroaches on Islamic State territory near Raqqa – and as U.S.-backed Kurdish forces also advance against ISIS – Turkey’s Erdogan has grown frantic over the prospects that his five-year project of aiding Syrian jihadists may be collapsing.

Amid this desperation, Turkey has been urging President Obama to support a limited invasion of Syria to create a “safe zone,” supposedly to protect Syrian rebels and civilians in northern Syria. But that humanitarian-sounding plan may well be a cover for a more ambitious plan to march to Damascus and forcibly remove President Assad from power.

That is a goal shared by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states along with Israel and America’s influential neoconservatives and their “liberal interventionist” sidekicks. For his part, Obama has called on Assad “to go” but has favored diplomatic negotiations to achieve that end. Russia has advocated a political settlement with free elections so the Syrian people can decide Assad’s future themselves.

There is an epic battle taking place for the heart of the international system between the West and the “Eurasian Sovereignists,” that is playing out in places like Ukraine and Syria as Western powers move to consolidate their position by toppling regimes deemed problematic for the intended paradigm of U.S. hegemony. States such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia utilize the current international order to forward their interests by working to gain regional economic, military and cultural dominance (Sunni Islam) while acting in concert with their Western overlords.

The West wants Russia to be accepted as a subservient partner in the AngloZionist Empire, while the latter want to fully “sovereignize” Russia and then create a multi-polar international system with the help of China and the other BRICS countries.

If interventions into Syrian and Ukrainian politics were truly about democracy, freedom, and the rule of law, as feigned in the West, would they really be supporting Islamist extremist groups in Syria and neo-nazis in Ukraine?

Make no mistake that the potential for this conflict to spiral rapidly out of control and into a nuclear war type scenario is a clear and present danger. Obama would be wise to call in his Turkish-Saudi attack dogs and make clear that they will have no U.S. support in the event that they engage the Russians in Syria.

Paparock 10-07-2016 03:57 PM

Putin Threatens The Use Of Nuclear Weapons
Putin Threatens The Use Of Nuclear Weapons

Paparock 10-07-2016 04:17 PM

To Once Again Emphasize: Putin’s Ultimatum To USA NATO WW3 Red ALERT
To Once Again Emphasize:
Putin’s Ultimatum To USA NATO WW3 Red ALERT

Paparock 10-07-2016 04:36 PM

Putin says we are on the brink of WWIII. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.
Putin says we are on the brink of WWIII.
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.
Will Russia Strike First?

Paparock 10-08-2016 06:02 PM

Pentagon Hyping Test of Two Fake Nuke Bombs in Nevada Desert
Pentagon Hyping Test of Two Fake Nuke Bombs in Nevada Desert
Amid efforts to modernize its nuclear stockpile, the US test-dropped two dummy nukes in the Nevada desert earlier this month.

With the United States’ Minuteman II intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBMs) arsenal aging, the US Air Force has pushed the Pentagon ( to fund nuclear modernization programs.

To that end, the Air Force conducted successful tests with two B61 nuclear bombs. Neither carried a live warhead.

"The primary objective of flight testing is to obtain reliability, accuracy, and performance data under operational representative conditions," reads a statement ( released by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).

"Such testing is part of the qualification process of current altercations and life extension programs for weapon systems."

The 700-pound bombs were dropped by B-2 bombers over a test range in Nevada.

"The B61 is a critical element of the US nuclear triad and the extended deterrent," said Brig. Gen. Michael Lutton of the NNSA, according to the statement.

"The recent surveillance flight tests demonstrate NNSA’s commitment to ensure all weapon systems are safe, secure, and effective."

In addition to building 400 new missiles to replace the aging Minuteman ICBMs, the Air Force is also in pursuit of a new nuclear cruise missile known as the Long Range Standoff (LRSO). The former program is estimated to cost roughly $85 billion. The LRSO development is expected to cost at least $20 billion. In addition to cost concerns, a number of Congressional lawmakers have fought to abandon the LRSO program on humanitarian grounds, arguing that a new nuclear weapon puts world peace at risk. "Nuclear war poses the gravest risk to American national security," ten Democratic Senators wrote in a letter. US officials seem unlikely to bow to these concerns, as this month’s tests demonstrate.

Paparock 10-09-2016 04:50 AM

Russia Deploys Nuclear-Capable Missiles On NATO Doorstep
Russia Deploys Nuclear-Capable Missiles On NATO Doorstep

Vilnius (AFP) - Russia is again deploying nuclear-capable Iskander missiles into its Kaliningrad outpost that borders two NATO members, Lithuania said Saturday, warning the move was aimed at pressuring the West into making concessions over Syria and Ukraine.

Poland also reacted angrily to Moscow's move while Lithuania added that it could breach a key nuclear weapons treaty.

"Russia is holding military exercises in Kaliningrad, and its scenario includes deployment of Iskander missile systems and the possibile use of them. We are aware of it," Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius told AFP.

He said modified Iskander missiles had a range of up to 700 kilometres (435 miles) which means they could reach the German capital Berlin from the Russian exclave, which is sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania.

Linkevicius said that this time he thought Moscow was using the move to "seek concessions from the West".

Polish Defence Minister Antoni Macierewicz on Saturday called Russia's activities "very alarming".

Lithuania meanwhile said the Iskander deployment could breach the international nuclear arms treaty.

"Such actions are possible violations of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty," the foreign ministry said in a statement.

Russia's defence ministry on Saturday confirmed deployment of the Iskander hardware but dismissed Western concerns, saying that "contingents of missile troops have been moved many times and will continue to be moved to Kaliningrad region as part of a Russian armed forces training plan."

Kaliningrad is "not an exception" to drills conducted across the country, spokesman Igor Konashenkov said in an emailed statement.

Estonian media reported on Friday that Russia was shipping Iskanders on a civilian vessel in the Baltic sea.

Konashenkov said that one Iskander was placed in the open to "confirm the parameters of operation" of a US intelligence satellite he alleged was flying overhead.

Moscow sent Iskanders to Kaliningrad in 2015 as part of a series of mammoth military drills as tensions with the West reached their worst point since the Cold War, triggered by Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine and its military campaign in Syria a year later.

The United States on Friday called for Russia and Syria to be investigated for war crimes for the bombing of hospitals in Aleppo, and accused Moscow of trying to "interfere" with the American presidential election.

- 'Divide, intimidate' -

Judy Dempsey, a Senior Associate at Carnegie Europe, told AFP Saturday that Moscow's latest Iskander deployment to Kaliningrad is "a way to divide the West" just weeks before the US presidential election.

"These types of moves by Russia are making the Europeans and the US nervous. Putin is pressing all the buttons," Dempsey said.

"Tensions over Iskander have been going on for seven years. It's a very tried way to pressure the West.

"The latest events in Kaliningrad are a way to intimidate the Baltics and Poland," she added.

"They cause higher tension in the region, reduce trust, and have a negative impact on security in the region."

Michal Baranowski, Warsaw office director of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said the Iskander deployment is "obviously an openly aggressive move, but it isn't something that would require an immediate response from NATO -- it fits the previous pattern."

"I would be much more worried if Moscow were to deploy greater conventional forces to Kaliningrad," he told AFP Saturday.

Vilnius University analyst Laurynas Jonavicius however warned the sabre-rattling by "revisionist Russia" raises the risk of incidents in the Baltic region which could spark a major crisis.

Meanwhile, Lithuanian intelligence warned earlier this year that Iskanders deployed in Kaliningrad "may be used for hindering the actions of NATO's allied forces in the region".

Since the start of the Ukraine crisis in 2014, Russia has flexed its muscles with a series of war games involving tens of thousands of troops in areas bordering NATO Baltic states.

NATO responded by agreeing to deploy four battalions in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia as of next year to bolster its eastern flank.

Paparock 10-11-2016 09:46 PM

Russia's Top Propagandist Says US Behaviour Could Have 'Nuclear' Implications
Russia's Top Propagandist Says US Behaviour Could Have 'Nuclear' Implications
Dmitry Kiselyov said there has been a 'radical change' in relations between Russia and the US
By Alexandra Sims

A Russian news presenter, dubbed the “Kremlin’s chief propagandist”, has warned the United States any “impudent behaviour” towards Moscow could have “nuclear” implications.

Dmitry Kiselyov, who was appointed by Vladimir Putin to head the country’s government-owned news agency, made the warning on Monday night’s edition of his flagship current affairs programme Vesti Nedeli (News of the Week).

Relations between the two countries hit a new low on Friday after Washington accused Moscow of war crimes ( following a sustained bombardment of the besieged Syrian city Aleppo, where at least 250,000 people are still living in the rebel-held east of the city.

On Saturday, Russia vetoed a motion put to the UN Security Council ( demanding an immediate end to the bombing campaign in Aleppo. A rival motion proposed by Russia was also rejected at the meeting calling for a fresh ceasefire but did not explicitly mention the bombing.

Mr Kiselyov said there had been a “radical change” in the relationship between Russia and the US in recent weeks, the BBC ( reports.

“The loud talk in Washington of a ‘Plan B’ for Syria. Everyone understands what this means: direct military force in Syria,” he said.

During Monday’s programme a Russian defence ministry spokesman also warned US bombers not to target the Syrian army. “We’ll shoot them down,” commented Mr Kiselyov.

Mr Kiselyov is a key part of Russia’s media operations and has been described as a “militant anti-Westerner” by Russian media ( and the county’s “chief propagandist” ( He is also subject to Western sanctions.

In the past he has boasted that Russia was the only single country “genuinely capable of turning the USA into radioactive ash” (See Video #1 at bottom of this post) and claimed last year: "In Syria, America stands on the side of the terrorist caliphate”.

His most recent comments come as Russia bolsters its military presence in the Mediterranean and Baltic regions.

Russia recently deployed the S-300 anti-aircraft missiles ( system to Syria and sent three war ships armed with Malakhit cruise missiles from the Black Sea Fleet to the Mediterranean.

On Saturday, Moscow confirmed it has started moving nuclear-capable Iskander-M missiles ( into the Kaliningrad, an act Poland said it considers a matter of the “highest concern”.

The German foreign minister claimed that mounting tensions between the US and Russia have led to a global political situation which is “more dangerous” than the Cold War (

Writing for German newspaper Bild, Frank-Walter Steinmeir wrote: “It's a fallacy to think that this is like the Cold War. The current times are different and more dangerous”.

Former cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell compared Russia’s ( actions in the Syrian conflict ( to that of the Nazis before World War II, saying Russia has “shredded” international law by providing military support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s bombing campaign of rebel neighbourhoods.

Both Moscow and Damascus deny that strikes deliberately target civilians, and blame the US-backed and al-Qaeda allied fighting factions in Aleppo for the continued violence.

Video #1

Paparock 10-12-2016 01:41 AM

Russia This Week – October 5 - 10, 2016
October 10, 2016
Special Dispatch No.6638

Russia This Week – October 5 - 10, 2016

Russia This Week is a weekly review by the MEMRI Russian Media Studies Project, covering the latest Russia-related news and analysis from media in Russia, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and Eastern Europe.

The past week witnessed a further deterioration in Russia-US relations, prompting German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeir to call the situation "more dangerous" than the Cold War (, October 8) citing the tension over Ukraine and Syria and the lapse in nuclear material cooperation. Such cooperation had always been an area respected by both sides during the Cold War and was insulated from clashes in other areas.

Source: ", October 7, 2016"

Paparock 10-14-2016 04:01 PM

Russians Warned Nuke War 'Imminent'
Nuclear War 'IMMINENT' As Russia Tells Citizens To Find Out Where The Closest Bunkers Are
NUCLEAR war could be imminent as Russia told its citizens to urgently prepare for a devastating radioactive conflict as relations with the West stoop to their lowest since the Cold War.

A terrifying Russian television broadcast explicitly told civilians to find out where their nearest bomb shelter is and repeatedly asked viewers if they were ready for nuclear war.

One apocalyptic broadcast told viewers on Moscow's state-owned TV channel NTV: "If it should one day happen, every one of you should know where the nearest bomb shelter is. It’s best to find out now."

The enraged host, Evgeny Kiselyov, blasted America's "impudent behaviour" and spent two hours warning that a conflict could take "nuclear dimensions".

Aggressive posturing from Russia in recent weeks has seen the state force 40 million of its citizens to take part in a massive defence drill to prepare them for a nuclear holocaust.

Russia’s military announced it would run the country-wide drill in preparation of a large-scale war.

The governor of St Petersburg clarified what bread rations people could expect should Russia come under attack – 300 grams for 20 days.

The Kremlin also ordered nuclear capable missiles to be rolled into a base in mainland Europe, on an enclave near Poland called Kaliningrad.

It comes as Russia vowed to shoot down any American fighter planes that attack President Bashar al-Assad's forces in Syria.

Verbal jousting between the US, Britain and Russia over the issue of the ongoing bombardment of civilians in Syria are reaching a peak, with the very real possibility of genuine armed conflict between the nations taking place over the city of Aleppo.

But one expert believes Putin's latest ramping-up of tensions is simply a tactic to prevent the US from interfering in Syria and to put the incoming American President on the back foot when they take office next year.

Aleksander Baunov, an analyst at the Carnegie Moscow Centre, said the civil defence drills and the heated programming on television were a ploy to deter the US from interfering with Russia’s military campaign in Syria or responding too strongly to suspected Russian efforts to interfere with the US elections.

He said: "They want to touch bottom and then to try to go up.

“Any responsible politician…if you are responsible and experienced, it cannot start with further downgrading already bad relations if they are already at bottom.”

See many pics here>

Paparock 10-14-2016 10:41 PM

'Posturing' Russians to send aircraft carrier and fleet along the English Channel
'Posturing' Russians to send aircraft carrier and fleet along the English Channel
By Ben Farmer, Defence Correspondent
HMS Dragon (foreground), a Type 45 Royal Navy destroyer, escorting the Admiral Kuznetsov in the English Channel in 2014 CREDIT: EPA

Russia is expected to sail its only aircraft carrier through the English Channel later this month amid strained relations between London and Moscow over the Syria crisis.

Royal Navy chiefs and their Nato allies are drawing up plans to escort up to eight Russian warships which are due to leave port imminently to join the country’s airstrike campaign against Syrian rebels.

Admirals believe the Kremlin will use the voyage as an opportunity for a show of strength as it passes Britain, and expect the carrier’s aircraft to carry out flying drills off the British and French coasts.

The Royal Naval preparations come after the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, this week triggered a diplomatic row by saying he would “like to see demonstrations outside the Russian embassy” in London over Moscow’s role in the ongoing Syrian conflict (

A former First Sea Lord on Friday said Russian posturing risked inflaming tensions further.

Nato navies have been preparing a major operation to track the 55,000 tonne Admiral Kuznetsov and its escorts in a game of “naval cat and mouse” down through the North Atlantic to the Bay of Biscay and then into the Mediterranean.

One Nato naval source said the Russian vessels were due to leave Severomorsk near Murmansk imminently and could pass Britain as early as next week.

The source said: “It’s not catching us by surprise, we are working up what to do and we are all over it. The most likely thing is that they will go through the North Sea, down the Dover Strait and through the Channel.

“They might even stop off the North East coast to fly for a bit.”

But the source said it was also possible the Russian warships would split, with some going through the Irish Sea or down the West coast of Ireland, “to cause more trouble”.

The source said: “Even if it splits five ways and we can’t man mark them, it doesn’t matter, we have got this covered.”

Paparock 10-14-2016 10:51 PM

Putin Ally Tells Americans Vote Trump Or face Nuclear War
Putin Ally Tells Americans Vote Trump Or face Nuclear War

Paparock 10-15-2016 05:28 AM

Jill Stein: Trump Is Less Dangerous Than Clinton
Jill Stein: Trump Is Less Dangerous Than Clinton;
She Will Start Nuclear War With Russia
By Tim Hains

Green party presidential candidate Jill Stein says Donald Trump is less scary on foreign wars, because he wants to work with Russia.

JILL STEIN: It's important to look at where we are going. It's not just a moment in time, but where has the strategy of voting for the lesser evil taken us?

All these times you have been told to vote for the lesser evil because you didn't want the wars, or the meltdown of the climate, or the offshoring of our jobs, or the attack on immigrants, or the massive bailout for Wall Street, but that is actually what we have gotten. By the droves.

Because we with public interest allow ourselves to be silent, and voted for the lesser evil. But the lesser evil doesn't solve the problem.

The Obama administration, even with both houses of Congress, actually did all of these fossil fuel emissions. "All of the above" gave us some renewable energy but it completely amplified and intensified our carbon production, which has been incredibly destructive to the climate.

The wars have gotten bigger, we are now bombing seven countries.

It is important to not just look at the rhetoric but also look at the track record and the reality is the lesser people and greater people is a race to the bottom, and even Donald Trump in the right wing extremism grows out of the policies of the Clintons, in particular Nafta, which sent our jobs overseas and Wall Street deregulation, which blew 9 million jobs up into smoke.

That is what is creating this right wing extremism. A vote for Hillary Clinton isn't going to fix it...

It is now Hillary Clinton that wants to start an air war with Russia over Syria by calling for a no fly zone.

We have 2000 nuclear missiles on hairtrigger alert. They are saying we are closer to a nuclear war than we have ever been.

Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria.

I sure won't sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won't sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. We have another choice other than these two candidates who are both promoting lethal policies.

On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary's policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.

He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.

Paparock 10-15-2016 05:37 AM

US Nuclear Attack Warning 'Upgraded To Level 3' As Russian Threat Goes 'Beyond Cold W
US Nuclear Attack Warning 'Upgraded To Level 3' As Russian Threat Goes 'Beyond Cold War'
By Joshua Nevett
Published 14th October 2016

AMERICA is edging closer to nuclear armageddon after upgrading its attack “defence readiness”, it has been claimed.

DEFCON warning upgraded nuclear war threat GETTY

UPGRADED: The US is getting closer to nuclear war, it has been claimed

The defense readiness condition, dubbed DEFCON, is an alert system used by the US military to indicate the risk of nuclear war.

The system has five levels of readiness, or states of alert, increasing in severity from DEFCON 5 – the least severe – to DEFCON 1 – the most severe.

The current DEFCON level is understood to be 5 – the lowest state of readiness.

But conspiracy theory website DEFCON warning system claims the threat has been upgraded to level 3, meaning the US Air Force is ready to mobilise in just 15 minutes.

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Israel Military Forum