Skip to main content

MARK WAUCK: RINO/Biden sending MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System & "other recent Escalations" could lead to move to "full [European WWIII] mobilization... 2 million Russian soldiers on the borders of NATO—something few NATO countries bargained for when they bought into this insane Neocon adventure"

Yesterday Zhou [Biden] announced that the American Empire is still considering sending ATACMS systems to Ukraine. That would be the MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), which is a tactical ballistic missile with a range of up to 190 miles and is capable of precision strikes based on its GPS based guidance system. I have no idea of how the ATACMS would fare against Russia’s world class air defense system, but conceptually this would be a major escalation of the US war on Russia. Even one such missile making it through Russian air defense could cause significant loss of life or infrastructure damage. That is the US “poking the bear” as an active participant of war on Russia, while there is no responsible public discussion of our war in the US. My take on this announcement by Zhou [Biden] is that it’s probably in line with the other recent escalations: This is part of an effort to bluff Russia into agreeing to a “frozen conflict”—which amounts to a NATO Ukraine. Perhaps the idea is that the pinprick attacks inside Russia that we’ve been seeing will put sufficient public opinion pressure on Putin to agree to lose a war that Russia is winning. Not gonna happen.

Thanks for reading Meaning In History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Obviously Russia (and China) is taking the American Empire very seriously. They’d be fools not to, considering that the American Empire has an enormous nuclear arsenal, still has global economic and monetary clout, is run by a crazed and fanatical oligarchy and a corrupt political class, with an out of touch populace. Russia (and China) are not run by fools. Here’s how they’re responding.

Yevgeny Prigozhin, perhaps serving as a front runner for Putin, is calling on the Russian government to move to full mobilization. That would, as Douglas Macgregor says, place 2 million Russian soldiers on the borders of NATO—something few NATO countries bargained for when they bought into this insane Neocon adventure. Is this a bluff or for real? Hard to say. It could be preparing the Russian nation for some escalation that would fall short of full mobilization. It is, however, an indication of resolve. Here’s Putin’s own thought on where things stand, and his words indicate an intention to carry this war through to the end. And bear in mind that Putin has never, to my recollection, engaged in empty bluffing...

Comments

Anonymous said…
Recently, on the day of victory, commemoration about the Second World War that defeated the Germans in Russia. If you saw few soldiers, no missiles, that I remember, and only a tank. The Western media mocked and demonstrated a certain irrationality again with this event. Remember that Russia only uses 15% of its army in Ukraine, much of it was from the Wagner Group, infantry and many old weapons, in the times of the Soviet Union. She uses purpose wear and tear and wait herself for something bigger. Wouldn't that be coherent or not, if we read Alois Irimaier, for example, when he says he saw three great fronts heading towards Europe?

Renato

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...