In the realm of global politics and security, tensions between Russia and the West have taken a notable turn. Russian President Vladimir Putin has openly suggested that Russia could start supplying long-range missiles to adversaries in the West. This statement comes in direct response to Ukraine’s use of Western-supplied weapons against Russian territories. Putin’s remarks underscore a tit-for-tat approach to military support, highlighting the escalating stakes in the conflict. The situation has been further complicated by a New York Times investigation, revealing that Ukraine has indeed been targeting Russian assets with U.S.-supplied long-range weapons, specifically mentioning the destruction of Russian missile launchers by Ukrainian forces using the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS). Social media evidence supports these claims, showing the aftermath of attacks on Russian anti-air systems. With the Russian Ministry of Defense reporting the destruction of foreign weapons stores in Ukraine and the Pentagon maintaining silence on the specifics of weapon use, the international community watches closely as the conflict inches closer to a potential direct confrontation with NATO.
Shifting focus to the economic sphere, the narrative surrounding the U.S. economy transcends the influence of individual political figures. The ongoing discourse often attributes economic trends to current or former presidents, yet the reality is that the economy’s performance is influenced by a myriad of factors beyond the control of any single administration. This perspective invites a broader understanding of economic dynamics, emphasizing the complexity of factors at play, including global market trends, domestic policy decisions, and unforeseen events. As such, attributing the state of the economy solely to the policies of either President Biden or former President Trump oversimplifies the intricate web of influences shaping economic outcomes.
Putin Threatens to Supply Long-Range Missiles to Enemies of the West in Retaliation
“That would mark their direct involvement in the war against the Russian Federation, and we reserve the right to act the same way,” Mr Putin told a three-hour meeting with the senior editors of international news agencies.
A friend of mine, Charles Burwell, advised Eisenhower et al on the weather, He made a 3D rubber contour map for that day, which is now at the Library if Congress.
“His assignment: briefing Generals Dwight Eisenhower and Bernard L. Montgomery on exactly which day the weather would be calm enough for D-Day while the moon was still bright.”
According to Ray McGovern speaking on Judge Napolitano’s show, Russia already gave North Korea a sample of a working ICBM for study, presumably so that they could make their own knockoffs.
He feels that they could now actually just supply the missiles whole (sans warhead). That would put the US mainland on the target for nuclear attack from North Korea, something previously thought impossible.
Also of course we now have a Russian nuke sub and four warships paying a ‘courtesy’ visit to Cuba next week. How about Russia sets up a naval facility there and then regularly has nuclear armed subs patrolling around the area? There are also numerous South American states where Russia (and China for that matter) could establish military/naval bases.
There are so many areas around the globe where Russia could cause trouble for US, British and French interests (as those countries poke their nose in around the World due to colonial pasts or present actions) that the situation could get very tricky for ‘the West’ , very quickly.
If the Russians really wanted to, they could even start agitating and arming Islamists in the European countries, that have flooded in thanks to the wave of uncontrolled migration since 2020. Many European countries already had a base of disgruntled Islamics and their first-gen kids, from previous rounds of migration.
