WAR 02-18-2022-to-02-24-2022__THEWINDSofWAR

Housecarl · Feb 18, 2023

(280) 01-28-2022-to-02-03-2022__THEWINDSofWAR

(281) 02-04-2022-to-02-10-2022__THEWINDSofWAR

(282) 02-11-2022-to-02-17-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

________________________________________________________________________________________

WAR - 02-11-2022-to-02-17-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(279) 01-21-2022-to-01-27-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR**** (280) 01-28-2022-to-02-03-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR**** (281) 02-04-2022-to-02-10-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****...

www.timebomb2000.com

WAR - 02-11-2022-to-02-17-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(279) 01-21-2022-to-01-27-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR**** (280) 01-28-2022-to-02-03-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR**** (281) 02-04-2022-to-02-10-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****...

www.timebomb2000.com

WAR - Regional conflict brewing in the Mediterranean

Well, I adore your philosophical side, but. . . as a practical matter we are probably best served by addressing the issues in a single spot? Mine suggest that the reporting on Iranian CE is a wee bit suspect at this point and bears watching- perhaps even a cover for something else? Perhaps...

www.timebomb2000.com

ALERT - RUSSIA INVADES UKRAINE - Consolidated Thread

@@@ Drone warfare has gotten VERY sophisticated in the last year. @@@ View: https://twitter.com/Trollstoy88/status/1626906176565702657?cxt=HHwWgsCzkYij95MtAAAA

www.timebomb2000.com

WAR - Main Armenia Versus Azerbaijan War Thread - Open Hostilities Underway Now

Eduard Abrahamyan @abrahamyan13 54m Sorry for this graphic but this video is an evidence of war crime. The #Azerbaijan commando unit executes #Armenia|n POWs. Such behaviour should make any attempt of signing the imposed "pease deal" 0 & void also this makes #Artsakh #Karabakh impossible to be...

www.timebomb2000.com

WAR - CHINA THREATENS TO INVADE TAIWAN

We look very feeble with Joe and his dumpster fire administration running/ruining our country.

www.timebomb2000.com

ALERT - The Winds of War Blow in Korea and The Far East

Business profile picture Reuters @Reuters 5m Norway seizes record $5.8 million of crypto stolen by North Korea Norway seizes record $5.8 million of crypto stolen by North Korea

www.timebomb2000.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted for fair use.....

End of two-way nuclear deterrence makes world more dangerous

Countries other than U.S., Russia now hold more than 10% of nuclear arms

asia.nikkei.com

DATAWATCH

End of two-way nuclear deterrence makes world more dangerous

Countries other than U.S., Russia now hold more than 10% of nuclear arms

JUNNOSUKE KOBARA, Nikkei staff writer
FEBRUARY 18, 2023 17:00 JST

SEOUL -- The global balance of nuclear deterrence is changing. With China rapidly expanding its stockpile of nuclear weapons, the U.S. and Russia are losing their dominance in this category of arms. As nuclear weapons proliferate to countries such as India, Pakistan and North Korea, it has become more difficult to advance nuclear disarmament and make deterrence work.

The Federation of American Scientists estimates there were some 12,000 nuclear warheads in the world as of last year. In addition to the five nuclear weapons states recognized under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons -- the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China -- India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea are known to have nuclear arms.

The number of warheads peaked at just over 70,000 in 1986, before the end of the Cold War, with the U.S. and the Soviet Union accounting for 98% of the 64,000 active warheads, excluding those marked for destruction.

Following the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, nuclear disarmament, led by the U.S. and Russia, made big progress: In the 30 years through 2022, the U.S., Russia, Britain and France cut their combined holdings of nuclear warheads by roughly 80%.

Bucking this trend is China, which increased its stockpile of warheads to about 350 from just over 200 about three decades earlier, cementing its position as the world's third-biggest nuclear power. The total share of nuclear warheads held by the U.S. and Russia fell to 87%, while that of other nations rose to more than 10%.

https%253A%252F%252Fs3-ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fpsh-ex-ftnikkei-3937bb4%252Fimages%252F_aliases%252Farticleimage%252F0%252F9%252F8%252F6%252F44446890-3-eng-GB%252Fworlds-total-stockpile-of-nuclear-warheads.png

Last year, the U.S. Defense Department forecast that China will expand its nuclear cache to 1,500 warheads by 2035. If other nuclear powers keep their stockpiles unchanged, Beijing will possess 14% of all warheads, up from 4% at present, reducing the combined share of the U.S. and Russia to less than 80%.

Of the estimated 350 warheads China currently has, about 75% are designed for use on long-range missiles, or strategic nuclear weapons, according to analyses by Hans Kristensen of the FAS and other experts. China's second-generation, multiwarhead DF-5 intercontinental ballistic missiles can hit several targets simultaneously. Beijing is also developing submarine-launched ballistic missiles capable of reaching the U.S. mainland from the South China Sea.

During the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union avoided a nuclear war by adhering to a doctrine known as mutually assured destruction, or MAD. This ensured peace because any first strike by one side was certain to provoke deadly nuclear retaliation.
After the Cold War, the U.S. and Russia moved forward with nuclear disarmament while maintaining balance in their strategic nuclear weapons stockpiles. Under the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, signed in 2010, both sides agreed to cap the number of warheads at 1,550 apiece.

Meanwhile, China, which is not bound by the treaty, has expanded its holdings of strategic nuclear weapons. If Beijing raises the number of warheads as forecast by the U.S. Defense Department, the world will see the bipolar nuclear order shift to a tripolar game, making it more difficult to achieve deterrence and move forward with disarmament.

https%253A%252F%252Fs3-ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fpsh-ex-ftnikkei-3937bb4%252Fimages%252F_aliases%252Farticleimage%252F1%252F4%252F9%252F6%252F44446941-3-eng-GB%252Fchanges-in-holdings-of-nuclear-warheads.png

The spread of nuclear weapons to countries other than the five official nuclear weapons states is also expected to continue. A rise in the number of nuclear-armed countries may destabilize the global order and heighten regional tensions. More countries could follow the examples of India and Pakistan, with neighboring rivals engaged in a fierce nuclear competition. Pakistan joined India as an unofficial nuclear power in 1998, with its first nuclear test. India, which first crossed the nuclear threshold in 1974, also carried out its second test in 1998, raising concern over a possible nuclear war.

Nuclear arms races may be about to break out elsewhere. "They [North Korea] have nuclear weapons, but we don't. The U.S. and South Korea will cooperate closely in managing the American nuclear arsenal" in the region, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol said recently. Some lawmakers and pundits in South Korea are calling for the country to acquire a nuclear deterrent.

North Korea plans to build a large number of short-range "tactical" nuclear weapons for use in a possible war with South Korea. A country may be less inhibited about using such weapons, which are mostly designed to target military installations, rather than cities. Russia has hinted at the use of tactical nuclear weapons in its war with Ukraine, and is sending more nuclear-powered submarines to the Far East.

To ensure peace in East Asia, Japan and South Korea, two major non-nuclear powers in the region, must work closely with the U.S. to make China, Russia and North Korea realize that the use of nuclear weapons will never pay.

MORE ON:ISIS

An ambush attack that killed at least 53 people in Syria was blamed Saturday on ISIS, making it the deadliest attack by the terrorist group in over a year, according to multiple reports.

State media reported the victims were gathering desert truffles Friday when they were attacked in Homs province, which is controlled by the Syrian government and its allies. The victims’ bodies were taken to the Palmyra state hospital, and they had gunshot wounds to the head, state news agency SANA reported.

The attack left 46 civilians and seven soldiers dead, hospital director Walid Audi said. One of the survivors told SANA that ISIS fighters also burned their cars.

There were no immediate claims of responsibility for the attack,according to Al Jazeera news network.

If confirmed that ISIS was responsible, the attack would mark the deadliest action by the group since January 2022 when its fighters stormed a prison in the Kurdish-controlled northeastern city of Hassakeh in a bid to free fellow members.

The news comes after US commandos killed a senior ISIS figure identified as Hamza-al Homsi in a helicopter raid in Syria Thursday night. Four American troops and a military working dog were wounded in the action.

The attacks Friday occurred more than 200 miles away the site of a tragic earthquake Feb. 6 that leveled cities and killed more 45,000 people in Turkey and Syria.

Housecarl · Feb 18, 2023

Posted for fair use.....

Ukraine invasion reshaped global alliances, renewed fears

BANGKOK (AP) — Nearly a year after Russia invaded Ukraine, the battlefield has narrowed and stiff resistance has forced Moscow to scale back its military goals. But the diplomatic consequences of the war still reverberate worldwide.

apnews.com

Ukraine invasion reshaped global alliances, renewed fears

By DAVID RISING
yesterday

BANGKOK (AP) — Nearly a year after Russia invaded Ukraine, the battlefield has narrowed and stiff resistance has forced Moscow to scale back its military goals. But the diplomatic consequences of the war still reverberate worldwide.

The fighting has reshaped global alliances, renewed old anxieties and breathed new life into NATO and the bond between Europe and the United States.

The invasion drew Moscow closer to Beijing and the pariah states of Iran and North Korea. It also raised broad questions about sovereignty, security and the use of military power, while intensifying fears about China’s designs on Taiwan.

“The war underscores the interrelationship between diplomacy and the use of force in a way that has not been thought about in quite the same fashion for many, many years,” said Ian Lesser, vice president of the German Marshall Fund think tank.

When Russian forces invaded on Feb. 24, it “marked the complete end of the post-Cold War world,” Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said last month in a speech at Johns Hopkins University. “It has come to light that globalization and interdependence alone cannot serve as a guarantor for peace and development across the globe.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has claimed that Ukraine is an “integral part” of Russian history that never achieved “real statehood” — a stance that echoes Chinese President Xi Jinping’s position on Taiwan, a self-governed island that Beijing claims as its own.

RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR

AP PHOTOS: Fading graveside portraits of Ukraine's war dead
https://apnews.com/article/russia-u...rael-nations-f2e4430b235b683071f8cc4ce2e4531d

Ukraine in mind, US frantic to avert Mideast showdown at UN

Some six months after the invasion of Ukraine, China issued a white paper on Taiwan, saying the island “has been an integral part of China’s territory since ancient times.” The paper said Beijing seeks “peaceful reunification” but “will not renounce the use of force.”

China’s designs on Taiwan date to well before the war in Ukraine, but China stepped up its pressure over the past year or more, including firing ballistic missiles over the island and into Japanese waters in August in [URL='https://apnews.com/article/taiwan-china-beijing-congress-8857910a1e44cefa70bc4dfd184ef880']response to then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taipei.

If Russia is allowed to succeed in Ukraine, it could further embolden countries like China, with its visions of an international order “that diverge from ours and that we can never accept,” Kishida said.

He pledged to use Japan’s presidency of the G7 this year to strengthen “the unity of like-minded countries” against Russian aggression.

“If we let this unilateral change of the status quo by force go unchallenged, it will happen elsewhere in the world, including Asia,” he said.
[/URL]
A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be far more complicated than Russia’s attack on Ukraine, said Euan Graham, a Singapore-based expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

“Russia’s incompetent performance on the battlefield in Ukraine has to give pause to any military or senior political leader in China about an adventure on a much more ambitious scale with Taiwan,” Graham said.

But the fear is real. Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen extended the nation’s compulsory military service in a December announcement that referenced the war in Ukraine.

“They’ve drawn the lesson from Ukraine that you need to have a larger military reserve if there is a conflict,” Graham said.

North Korea, which has threatened to preemptively use nuclear weapons in a broad range of scenarios, was already a regional concern. But Russia’s suggestion that it could use nuclear weapons in Ukraine fueled new worries.

South Korea, which is under the protection of the American “nuclear umbrella,” last year expanded exercises with the U.S. military that had been downsized under the Trump administration. South Korea is also seeking stronger assurances that Washington will swiftly use its nuclear capabilities in the face of a North Korean nuclear attack.

North Korea has been strongly supportive of neighboring Russia. Late last year, the U.S. accused Pyongyang of supplying Russia with artillery shells.

Iran has also been helping Russia militarily, providing the bomb-carrying drones Moscow uses to strike power plants and civilian sites throughout Ukraine.

While Western allies have cooperated closely in their responses to the war, a major diplomatic challenge has been to convince much of the rest of the world of the invasion’s significance.

Only a handful of countries in Asia have taken tough action against Moscow, and many abstained from the United Nations resolution condemning the attack.

Just weeks before the invasion, China declared a “no limits” friendship with Russia. It has refused to criticize the war and has drawn closer to Russia, buying more of its oil and gas and helping Moscow to offset Western sanctions.

But there are signs of “complicated fault lines” in the China-Russia relationship, Jude Blanchette, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in a call with reporters.

During September talks in Uzbekistan, the Chinese president raised unspecified “concerns” with Putin over the invasion, though at the same time promised “strong support” to Russia’s “core interests.”

“I think if Xi Jinping could snap his fingers, he would like to see the war end but in a way that Russia comes out of this with Putin in power and Russia continuing to be a strong strategic partner,” Blanchette said.

India, which is heavily reliant on Russia for military equipment, also abstained from the U.N. resolution and has continued to purchase Russian oil.

But as regional rival China moves closer to Russia, India has quietly drifted toward the U.S., especially within the four Quad nations that also include Japan and Australia, said Viraj Solanki, a London-based expert with the IISS think tank.

In Europe, the invasion has reinvigorated NATO after a barrage of criticism from Donald Trump during his presidency that led French President Emmanuel Macron to declare the alliance had experienced “brain death.”

NATO member countries and allies have rallied to support Ukraine, with several changing policies that prohibited the export of weapons to countries in conflict. Perhaps most remarkably, Germany shed post-World War II taboos and provided Leopard battle tanks.

The war also prompted Finland and Sweden to seek NATO membership, which most experts think will be approved this year.

NATO last year singled out China for the first time as a strategic challenge, although not a direct adversary. The alliance warned about China’s growing military ambitions, its confrontational rhetoric and its increasingly close ties to Russia.

Beyond NATO, the war has also underscored the importance of the relationship between the U.S. and European Union, which Lesser said has been “absolutely critical” to sanctions and export controls.

China insists that it is the U.S. that started the Ukraine crisis, partially through NATO’s expansion into more Eastern European countries. Beijing has also criticized the alliance for suggesting the war could influence China’s actions in Asia.

“NATO claims to be a regional defense organization, but it keeps breaking through the territory and field, stirring up conflicts, creating tension, exaggerating threats and encouraging confrontation,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Wang Wenbin said Thursday.

The war’s long-term effects on global diplomacy are difficult to predict. But Lesser said one thing is certain: It will be “very hard for Russia to recover from the damage to its reputation on many levels.”

A core group of countries such as Syria, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela “may be inclined to stick with Russia,” he said. But in terms of broader diplomacy, Russia’s reputation ”has experienced an enormous blow.”

___

Associated Press writers Lorne Cook in Brussels and Jon Gambrell in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, contributed to this report.

jward · Feb 19, 2023

US fumbling to close hypersonic gap with China, Russia

Gabriel Honrada

The US plans to test a hypersonic weapon from a Zumwalt-class destroyer in 2025, a move that likely aims to plug a growing deterrence gap vis-à-vis China in the Pacific.
This month, Naval News reported that the US Navy will conduct a test launch of a hypersonic weapon from the USS Zumwalt in December 2025, with intensive preparations underway to address any potential technical issues before the launch.

The report notes that the US is integrating an underwater weapons control system with Tactical Support Center (TSC) control to facilitate data and message transfer to launch the missile.
It also mentions that the US is scheduled to do virtual tests of both control systems by simulating an Integrated Combat System (ICS) in a laboratory next month. That will be followed by an onboard ship demo both in port and underway.
The ICS tests, Naval News notes, will inform the US Navy how to field and integrate hypersonic weapons aboard the Zumwalt class by 2025 and on Virginia-class nuclear attack submarines by 2028.

Last March, Asia Times reported on the rationale behind repurposing the Zumwalt class from a stealthy shore bombardment platform to a hypersonic missile-armed surface combatant. The Zumwalt class features advanced technologies such as stealth shaping, electric propulsion and advanced radars and processing capabilities, all key for its new role.
However, this decision may also stem from a section of the Navy’s desire to save a problematic design. Critics note the Zumwalt-class tumblehome hull could become unstable in rough seas and can be readily detected using low-frequency radar.

Concept art of a Zumwalt-class destroyer firing missiles. Image: topwar.ru

The class foregoes close-in weapons systems (CIWS) to preserve its stealthy hull shape, potentially making it vulnerable to anti-ship missiles. Moreover, the high cost per ship at US$4.24 billion per hull ($7.5 billion including R&D costs) means only three have so far been built, with the navy likely requiring more to meet China’s rising challenge.
Given that, it may be more feasible for the US to design a new surface combatant built around hypersonic weapons rather than endure increasing sunk costs with the Zumwalt class. Asia Times reported this January on the US DDG (X), an upcoming large surface combatant designed to replace the Ticonderoga-class cruisers and older Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and supplant the Zumwalt-class.

The DDG (X) reuses technologies from the Zumwalt class, notably its integrated electric propulsion (IEP) system, which reduces detectable noise and vibration, increases time on station and provides more power to weapons systems.
The class is also envisioned to have enlarged variants of the AN/SPY-6 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar mounted on Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and is designed to accommodate future upgrades such as directed energy weapons. It is planned to have a 32-block cell of the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) or a larger 12-cell VLS for hypersonic missiles.

This month, Naval Technology reported that the US Department of Defense (DOD) awarded naval architecture firm Gibbs & Cox a US$39.6 million contract to support emerging ship concepts, including the DDG (X). The report notes that the contract could mean that Gibbs & Cox will be the primary company responsible for the DDG’s (X) main design, working alongside the US Navy to put the ship in service by the 2030s.

The DDG (X) design aims for “a greater missile capacity than previous destroyers with room for future larger and hypersonic missiles, a range increase of >50% and engine efficiency >25%, being able to launch initial ships with room to upgrade to the ‘next generation’ of radar, sensors, and communications, and improvements to survivability by reducing noise and radar signatures by roughly >50%,” said GlobalData defense analyst James Marques, as reported by the source.

China and Russia’s increasing deployments of hypersonic missile-armed large surface combatants are pressuring the US to respond.
This month, Asia Times reported on the export version of China’s YJ-21 hypersonic anti-ship missile, whose domestic version was first observed last April during a test launch from a Type 055 cruiser. The People’s Liberation Army-Strategic Support Force (PLA-SSF) touts that the YJ-21 can travel at Mach 10, or 34,000 meters per second, and that no existing ship defenses can shoot it down.

The PLA-SSF also emphasized that even without an explosion, the tremendous kinetic energy of the YJ-21’s impact will have devastating effects on its target. It also claims that the YJ-21 marks a significant evolution in China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, capitalizing on the operational flexibility and survivability of a sea-based launch platform such as the Type 055 cruiser.
A YJ-21 hypersonic missile. China claims the US lacks an answer to the weapon. Image: Facebook
At the same time, Newsweek reported this month that warships assigned to Russia’s Northern Fleet have gone to sea with tactical nuclear weapons, citing the Norwegian Intelligence Service saying that this may mark the first time in 30 years that the fleet has done so.

Moreover, the source notes that while the Soviet Union’s Northern Fleet warships frequently go to sea with nuclear weapons aboard, this marks the first time Russia has deployed nuclear weapons aboard its surface ships.
In contrast, the US’ lack of similarly-armed large surface combatants may put it at a disadvantage vis-à-vis near-peer competitors China and Russia.
Last October, Asia Times noted that the US Navy’s lack of a ship-based nuclear deterrent has potentially opened a deterrence gap with China and Russia following the Obama administration’s decision to end the deployment of nuclear weapons aboard US surface ships.

Placing strategic nuclear weapons on surface ships entails unnecessary risk and vulnerability, making submarines the best option for a sea-based strategic nuclear deterrent. However, forward-deploying tactical nuclear weapons for offensive battlefield roles is a hotly-debated issue among US strategists.
US Strategic Command Admiral Chas Richard argues that ship-based cruise missiles with tactical nuclear warheads are necessary to counter China and Russia’s growing tactical nuclear weapon arsenal.

However, US Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Mike Gilday has criticized the idea, saying arming US surface ships with tactical nuclear weapons would detract from other missions, contribute to fleet overstretch and that conventionally-armed hypersonic missiles are a feasible alternative for ship-based deterrence.

US fumbling to close hypersonic gap with China, Russia

The US plans to test a hypersonic weapon from a Zumwalt-class destroyer in 2025, a move that likely aims to plug a growing deterrence gap vis-à-vis China in the Pacific. This month, Naval New…

asiatimes.com

jward · Feb 19, 2023

(3rd LD) N. Korea fires 2 short-range ballistic missiles toward East Sea: S. Korean military | Yonhap News Agency

김수연

(ATTN: UPDATES with N. Korea's announcement in paras 5-8, 13)
SEOUL, Feb. 20 (Yonhap) -- North Korea fired two short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) toward the East Sea on Monday, Seoul's military said, a day after South Korea and the United States staged joint air drills, involving B-1B bombers, in response to the North's long-range missile launch.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) said it detected the launch from the Sukchon area in South Pyongan Province between 7 a.m. and 7:11 a.m. It did not immediately provide details.
"While strengthening its monitoring and vigilance, our military is maintaining a full readiness posture in close cooperation with the U.S.," the JCS said in a text message sent to reporters.
Monday's launch marks the North's third missile provocation this year.
About an hour after the JCS announcement, North Korea said its military carried out firing drills involving multiple rocket launchers at 7 a.m.

An artillery unit of the Korean People's Army (KPA) launched two rounds of shots from the 600-mm rocket launch system toward the East Sea, according to the North's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
The North described the "super-large" rocket launcher as a means of "tactical nuclear attack," stressing that its latest firing drills reinforced the KPA's readiness to respond to the allies' air force power.
In a ceremony to "present" the 600-mm rocket launcher at a key party meeting in late December, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un called it an "offensive weapon" capable of carrying tactical nuclear warheads that could put the entire South Korea within its range.

The latest saber-rattling raised concerns that the North may continue to engage in such provocations as the allies plan to hold a tabletop military exercise against North Korean nuclear threats this week and their springtime Freedom Shield exercise next month.
The allies carried out the air drills, involving the U.S. bombers and South Korean F-35A stealth jets, on Sunday as the North launched what it claims to be a Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Saturday.
Kim Yo-jong, the influential sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, issued another sharp-tongued threat of "corresponding" actions against the allies' military drills.
"The frequency of using the Pacific as our firing range depends upon the U.S.," she said in an English-language statement carried by the KCNA.

She said the North is "carefully" examining the impact of the deployment of U.S. strategic assets on its security, vowing to "take corresponding counteraction" if the move is judged to pose any "direct or indirect" threat to the North.

Youtube

View: https://youtu.be/9ZTSmKKkudY

This photo, carried by North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency on Feb. 19, 2023, shows the North's launch of a Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile at a lofted angle the previous day. (For Use Only in the Republic of Korea. No Redistribution) (Yonhap)

(3rd LD) N. Korea fires 2 short-range ballistic missiles toward East Sea: S. Korean military | Yonhap News Agency

(ATTN: UPDATES with N. Korea's announcement in paras 5-8, 13) SEOUL, Feb. 20 (Yonha...

en.yna.co.kr

jward · Feb 20, 2023

The Kremlin’s Grand Delusions

By Fiona Hill and Angela Stent
February 15, 2023

This article is part of an ongoing series examining what a year of war in Ukraine has revealed.

Despite a series of blunders, miscalculations, and battlefield reversals that would have surely seen him thrown out of office in most normal countries, President Vladimir Putin is still at the pinnacle of power in Russia. He continues to define the contours of his country’s war against Ukraine. He is micromanaging the invasion even as generals beneath him appear to be in charge of the battlefield. (This deputizing is done to protect him from blowback if something goes badly wrong in the war.) Putin and those immediately around him directly work to mobilize Russians on the home front and manipulate public views of the invasion abroad. He has in some ways succeeded in this information warfare.

The war has revealed the full extent of Putin’s personalized political system. After what is now 23 years at the helm of the Russian state, there are no obvious checks on his power. Institutions beyond the Kremlin count for little. “I would never have imagined that I would miss the Politburo,” said Rene Nyberg, the former Finnish ambassador to Moscow. “There is no political organization in Russia that has the power to hold the president and commander in chief accountable.” Diplomats, policymakers, and analysts are stuck in a doom loop—an endless back-and-forth argument among themselves—to figure out what Putin wants and how the West can shape his behavior.

Determining Putin’s actual objectives can be difficult; as an anti-Western autocrat, he has little to gain by publicly disclosing his intentions. But the last year has made some answers clear enough. Since February 2022, the world has learned that Putin wants to create a new version of the Russian empire based on his Soviet-era preoccupations and his interpretations of history. The launching of the invasion itself has shown that his views of past events can provoke him to cause massive human suffering. It has become clear that there is little other states and actors can do to deter Putin from prosecuting a war if he is determined to do so and that the Russian president will adapt old narratives as well as adopt new ones to suit his purposes.

But the events of 2022 and early 2023 have demonstrated that there are ways to constrain Putin, especially if a broad enough coalition of states gets involved. They have also underscored that the West will need to redouble its efforts at strengthening such a diplomatic and military coalition. Because even now, after a year of carnage, Putin is still convinced he can prevail.

BACK IN THE USSR

One year in, the war in Ukraine has shown that Putin and his cohort’s beliefs are still rooted in Soviet frames and narratives, overlaid with a thick glaze of Russian imperialism. Soviet-era concepts of geopolitics, spheres of influence, East versus West, and us versus them shape the Kremlin’s mindset. To Putin, this war is in effect a struggle with Washington akin to the Korean War and other Cold War–era conflicts. The United States remains Russia’s principal opponent, not Ukraine. Putin wants to negotiate directly with Washington to “deliver” Ukraine, with the end goal of getting the U.S. president to sign away the future of the country. He has no desire to meet directly with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. His goal remains the kind of settlement achieved in 1945 at Yalta, when U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill sat across the table from the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and accepted Moscow’s post–World War II dominance of Eastern Europe without consulting the countries affected by these decisions.

For Russia, World War II—the Great Fatherland War, as Russians call it—is the touchstone and central theme of the conflict in Ukraine. Putin’s emphasis a year ago on ridding Ukraine of Nazis has faded somewhat into the background. This year, the victorious outcome in 1945 is his primary focus. Putin’s message to Ukrainians, Russians, and the world is that victory will be Russia’s and that Moscow always wins, no matter how high the costs. Indeed, beginning with comments ahead of his 2023 New Year’s speech, Putin has cast off the depiction of the war in Ukraine as just a special military operation. According to him, Russia is locked in an existential battle for its survival against the West. He is once more digging deep into old Soviet tactics and practices from the 1940s to rally the Russian economy, political class, and society in support of the invasion.

Putin is capable of learning from setbacks and adapting his tactics in ways that are also reminiscent of Stalin’s approach in World War II, when the Soviet Union pushed back Nazi Germany in the epochal battle of Stalingrad. In September 2022, as Russia was clearly losing on the battlefield, Putin ordered the mobilization of 300,000 extra troops. He then declared that Russia had annexed four of Ukraine’s most fiercely fought-over territories: Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia, transforming the military and political picture on the ground and creating an artificial redline. Putin has repeatedly made changes in Russia’s military leadership at critical junctures, and he has worked fiercely to ensure his country has enough weapons for the war effort. When Russian forces began to run out of armaments, Putin purchased drones from Iran and ammunition from North Korea.

Putin is practiced at playing people, groups, and countries against one another.

Putin has also shifted his narrative about the war several times to keep his opponents guessing about how far he might still go. He and other Russian officials, including his spokesman and foreign minister, have openly stated that the invasion of Ukraine is an imperial war and that Russia’s borders are expanding again. They have asserted that the four annexed Ukrainian territories are Russia’s “forever” but then suggested that some borders may still be negotiated with Ukraine. According to newspaper reports, they have pushed for the full conquest of Donetsk and Luhansk by March but also indicated that another assault on Kyiv could be in the offing. At this stage of the conflict, Russia’s actual war goals remain unclear.

What is clear is this: after more than two decades in power, Putin is practiced at playing people, groups, and countries against one another and using their weaknesses to his advantage. He understands the weak points of European and international institutions as well as the vulnerabilities of individual leaders. He knows how to exploit NATO’s debates and splits over military spending and procurement. He has taken advantage of European and American partisan divides (including the fact that only one third of Republicans think the United States should support Ukraine) to spread disinformation and manipulate public opinion.

At home in Russia, Putin has proved willing to allow some hawkish dissent and debate about the war, including the grumbling of pro-war commentators and bloggers who used to serve in the military. He seeks to use these debates to mobilize support for his policies. But although Putin is adept at managing quarrels, he cannot always control the content and tone of these disputes, just as he cannot control the battlefield. Some of the domestic commentary on the war has become shrill and even threatening to Putin’s position. There is speculation that Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of the Wagner paramilitary group, whose forces have been doing some of the war’s bloodiest fighting, could even seize power at some point in the future. Russia’s wartime casualties appear to be approaching 200,000. As many as one million people are estimated to have left Russia in the past year in response to the war, either because they oppose the invasion or simply to avoid being drafted. In this regard, the world has learned that there are some limits to Putin’s coercive capabilities, even if this mass exodus of dissenters seems to leave behind a more quiescent majority.

DISSUADABLE, NOT DETERRABLE

Russian opponents of the war may have had no chance of stopping Putin from invading Ukraine on February 24, 2022. And none of the United States and Europe’s mechanisms and practices for keeping the peace after World War II and the Cold War had much, if any, effect on his decision-making. The West clearly failed to stop Putin from contemplating or starting the invasion. Nevertheless, the United States’ release of declassified intelligence before February 24 clarified Russian aims and mobilization and helped the pro-Ukraine Western coalition quickly come together once the war started. Furthermore, this past year has shown that even if he cannot be deterred, Putin can be dissuaded from taking certain actions in specific contexts.

Strategic partners of Russia, such as China and India, have criticized Putin’s threats to use nuclear weapons on the battlefield. He allowed grain shipments from Ukraine through the Black Sea after complaints from the United Nations, Turkey, and African countries. Putin and the Kremlin remain committed to maintaining partner countries’ support, as was demonstrated during the G-20 meeting in November 2022 in Bali, Indonesia. Russia still seems not to want a full-on fight with NATO. It has avoided expanding its military action outside Ukraine (at least so far), including by not shelling military supply convoys entering the country from Poland or Romania. But Moscow’s aggressive rhetoric has risen and ebbed throughout the war. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, once known as a moderate leader willing to engage with the West, now plays the role of Putin’s attack dog, periodically threatening a nuclear Armageddon.

The Kremlin is shameless in its rhetoric, and no one in Putin’s circle cares about narrative coherence. This brazenness is matched by domestic ruthlessness. Putin and his colleagues are willing to sacrifice Russian lives, not just Ukrainians’. They have no qualms about the methods Russia uses to enforce participation in the war, from murdering deserters with sledgehammers (and then releasing video footage of the killings) to assassinating recalcitrant businessmen who do not support the invasion. Putin is perfectly fine with imprisoning opposition figures while sweeping through prisons and the most impoverished Russian regions to collect people to use as cannon fodder on the frontlines.

Only 34 countries have imposed sanctions on Russia since the war started.

The domestic ruthlessness is in turn exceeded by the brutality against Ukraine. Russia has declared total war on the country and its citizens, young and old. For a year, it has deliberately shelled Ukrainian civilian infrastructure and killed people in their kitchens, bedrooms, hospitals, schools, and shops. Russian forces have tortured, raped, and pillaged in the Ukrainian regions under their control. Putin and the Kremlin still believe they can pummel the country into submission while they wait out the United States and Europe.

The Kremlin is convinced that the West will eventually grow tired of supporting Ukraine. Putin believes, for example, that there will be political changes in the West that could be advantageous for Moscow. He hopes for the return of populists to power in these states who will back away from their countries’ support for Ukraine. Putin also remains confident that he can eventually restore Russia’s prewar relationship with Europe and that Russia can and will be part of Europe’s economic, energy, political, and security structures again if he holds out long enough (as Bashar al-Assad has in the Middle East by staying in power in Syria). This is why Russia is seemingly restrained in some policy arenas. For instance, it has vested interests in working with Norway and other Arctic countries in the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard and the Barents Sea, where Moscow has been careful to comply with international agreements and bilateral treaties. Russia does not want its misadventure in Ukraine to embroil and spoil its entire foreign policy.

Putin is convinced that he can compartmentalize Moscow’s interests because Russia is not isolated internationally, despite the West’s best efforts. Only 34 countries have imposed sanctions on Russia since the war started. Russia still has leverage in its immediate neighborhood with many of the states that were once part of the Soviet Union, even though these countries want to keep their distance from Moscow and the war. Russia continues to build ties in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. China, along with India and other key states in the global South, have abstained on votes in favor of Ukraine at the United Nations even as their leaders have expressed occasional consternation and displeasure with Moscow’s behavior. Trade between Russia and these countries has increased—in some cases quite dramatically—since the beginning of the conflict. Similarly, 87 countries still offer Russian citizens visa-free entry, including Argentina, Egypt, Israel, Mexico, Thailand, Turkey, and Venezuela. Russian narratives about the war have gained traction in the global South, where Putin often seems to have more influence than the West has—and certainly more than Ukraine has.

jward · Feb 20, 2023

BLURRING THE LINES

One reason the West has had limited success in countering Russia’s messaging and influence operations outside Europe is that it has yet to formulate its own coherent narrative about the war—and about why the West is supporting Kyiv. American and European policymakers talk frequently of the risks of stepping over Russia’s redlines and provoking Putin, but Russia itself not only overturned the post–Cold War settlement in Europe but also stepped over the world’s post-1945 redlines when it invaded Ukraine and annexed territory, attempting to forcibly change global borders. The West failed to state this clearly after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.

The tepid political response and the limited application of sanctions after that first Russian invasion convinced Moscow that its actions were not, in fact, a serious breach of post–World War II international norms. It made the Kremlin believe it could likely go further in taking Ukrainian territory. Western debates about the need to weaken Russia, the importance of overthrowing Putin to achieve peace, whether democracies should line up against autocracies, and whether other countries must choose sides have muddied what should be a clear message: Russia has violated the territorial integrity of an independent state that has been recognized by the entire international community, including Moscow, for more than 30 years. Russia has also violated the UN Charter and fundamental principles of international law. If it were to succeed in this invasion, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states, be they in the West or the global South, will be imperiled.

Yet the Western debate about the war has shifted little in a year. U.S. and European views still tend to be defined by how individual commentators see the United States and its global role rather than by Russian actions. Antiwar perspectives often reflect cynicism about the United States’ motivation and deep skepticism about Ukraine’s sovereign rights rather than a clear understanding or objective assessment of Russian actions toward Ukraine and what Putin wants in the neighboring region. When Russia was recognized as the only successor state to the Soviet Union after 1991, other former Soviet republics such as Belarus and Ukraine were left in a gray zone.

Some analysts posit that Russia’s security interests trump everyone else’s because of its size and historical status. They have argued that Moscow has a right to a recognized sphere of influence, just as the Soviet Union did after 1945. Using this framing, some commentators have suggested that NATO’s post–Cold War expansion and Ukraine’s reluctance to implement the Minsk agreements—accords brokered with Moscow after it annexed Crimea in 2014 that would have limited Ukraine’s sovereignty—are the war’s casus belli. They think that Ukraine is ultimately a former Russian region that should be forced to accept the loss of its territory.

Kyiv is fighting to protect other countries.

In fact, the preoccupation of Russian leaders with bringing Ukraine back into the fold dates to the beginning of the 1990s, when Ukraine started to pull away from the Moscow-dominated Commonwealth of Independent States (a loose regional institution that had succeeded the Soviet Union). At that juncture, NATO’s enlargement was not even on the table for eastern Europe, and Ukraine’s affiliation with the European Union was an even more remote prospect. Since then, Europe has moved beyond the post-1945 concept of spheres of influence for East and West. Indeed, for most Europeans, Ukraine is clearly an independent state, one that is fighting a war for its survival after an unprovoked attack on its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The war is about more than Ukraine. Kyiv is also fighting to protect other countries. Indeed, for states such as Finland, which was attacked by the Soviet Union in 1939 after securing its independence from the Russian empire 20 years earlier, this invasion seems like a rerun of history. (In the so-called Winter War of 1939–40, Finland fought the Soviets without external support and lost nine percent of its territory.) The Ukrainians and countries supporting them understand that if Russia were to prevail in this bloody conflict, Putin’s appetite for expansion would not stop at the Ukrainian border. The Baltic states, Finland, Poland, and many other countries that were once part of Russia’s empire could be at risk of attack or subversion. Others could see challenges to their sovereignty in the future.

Western governments need to hone this narrative to counter the Kremlin’s. They must focus on bolstering Europe’s and NATO’s resilience alongside Ukraine’s to limit Putin’s coercive power. They must step up the West’s international diplomatic efforts, including at the UN, to dissuade Putin from taking specific actions such as the use of nuclear weapons, attacks on convoys to Ukraine, continued escalation on the battlefield to seize more territory, or a renewed assault on Kyiv. The West needs to make clear that Russia’s relations with Europe will soon be irreparable. There will be no return to prior relations if Putin presses ahead. The world cannot always contain Putin, but clear communications and stronger diplomatic measures may help push him to curtail some of his aggression and eventually agree to negotiations.

The events of the last year should also steer everyone away from making big predictions. Few people outside Ukraine, for example, expected the war or believed that Russia would perform so poorly in its invasion. No one knows exactly what 2023 has in store.

That includes Putin. He appears to be in control for now, but the Kremlin could be in for a surprise. Events often unfold in a dramatic fashion. As the war in Ukraine has shown, many things don’t go according to plan.

The Kremlin’s Grand Delusions

What the war in Ukraine has revealed about Putin’s regime.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Housecarl · Feb 20, 2023

Uh oh.....

Posted for fair use.....

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?

The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.

www.jpost.com

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?

The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.

By YONAH JEREMY BOB

Published: FEBRUARY 21, 2023 00:17

Over and over again, we need to learn new terminologies and pierce the veil of smoke and mirrors to understand what is happening with Iran.

The world is back in this position again after the IAEA leaked on Sunday that the Islamic Republic had enriched uranium up to 84%.

What on earth does 84% mean?

Even for observers who closely follow uranium enrichment statistics, the cut-offs are usually 3%, 5%, 20%, 60% and 90%. But 84%?

So from one perspective, what 84% means is obvious – it is very close to 90% - the all-important weaponized level which Tehran has been approaching since April 2021, but carefully avoided crossing.

From another perspective, it is still under that magic number so it is unclear if it means anything at all.

However, some nuclear experts, like Institute for Science and International Security Director David Albright have previously written that even uranium enriched to the 60% level over the last two years could be improvised to make a less powerful, but still extremely dangerous, nuclear weapon.

For those who stand with Albright on this issue, 84%, while not 90%, has real significance in terms of increased major danger.

What were the ayatollahs hoping to achieve by this new jump?

This is even harder to say.

How close is Iran to producing nuclear weapons?

At the 20% and at 60% enrichment levels, Iran proudly proclaimed and acknowledged its new scientific advancement and prowess.

Yet, on Monday the Islamic Republic alternated between denying the whole story or with the message that if a small number of particles were accidentally enriched to 84%, this does not mean that the government chose to blow past the 60% ceiling it has observed for the last two years.

Given that Tehran has been so loud about its previous nuclear achievements, it is possible that it is telling the truth here.

Mistakes happen, and if they are in very small numbers and Iran agrees to downgrade the uranium particles in question in front of IAEA supervision, maybe this is a small blip.

This could also make sense since Iran has been practically begging to return to nuclear negotiations and is about to get hit by stronger EU sanctions and much deeper inflation.

But all of this is only from the narrow perspective of the last two years.

Before this time period, the Islamic Republic had a long history of concealing nuclear progress, lying about it when caught, and only much later admitting and trying to spin being caught, when it realized it had no choice.

Its major nuclear enrichment sites at Natanz and Fordow were both revealed against Iran’s concealment plans. And it still denies the validity of Mossad’s seizure of its secret nuclear archive – despite the spy agency bringing a huge volume of original documents back to Israel.

One very likely scenario is that the ayatollahs were trying to quietly enrich and hide a very small amount of uranium close to 90% to see if it could get away with. If it got away with it once, then maybe it would try again. Maybe at a later date, it would present crossing the 90% threshold as a fait accompli to try to prevent the world from reacting.

An even worse scenario would be that Iran is currently enriched to levels beyond 60% in multiple places, and that what the IAEA caught is just the tip of the iceberg. Previously, top Israeli and US officials have told the Jerusalem Post that there would be an aggressive policy shift against Iran if it ever crossed the 90% weaponized threshold.

At a minimum, this was expected to lead to a referral to the UN Security Council if not more covert, or even overt, kinetic actions against Iran.

There are no signs of such a shift around a day after this latest revelation.

This could be because the West and Israel are still deciding what has happened and what it means about Iran’s intentions, especially given estimates that its weapons group needs another 6-24 months to develop actually deliverable nuclear weapons.

Or it could mean that everyone has been caught again by the Islamic Republic unprepared for the next move.

jward · Feb 21, 2023

Navy’s hypersonic launcher is headed to flight testing next year

Megan Eckstein

Artist rendering of Conventional Prompt Strike weapon system from destroyer USS Zumwalt. (Lockheed Martin image)
WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin will have a ship-based hypersonic missile launcher ready for flight tests next year, the company said, as part of the development work covered by a contract awarded Feb. 18.
Through a collaboration between the Army and the Navy, the hypersonic missile itself is already in flight tests, which will continue this year ahead of the Army forming its first hypersonic missile battery later in 2023. The Army has a basic truck-towed launcher and a standard weapon control system, developed through a previous weapon systems integration contract.

Now, according to Steve Layne, vice president of Hypersonic Strike Weapon Systems at Lockheed Martin, last week’s $1.2 billion contract award will use the progress so far to create a sea-based hypersonic capability.
Lockheed Martin will develop a new launcher for the Zumwalt-class destroyer, the weapon control system will be adjusted for the maritime environment, and a subsequent round of flight tests will evaluate the changes that turn the basic hypersonic weapon system into the Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike capability.
Layne said Lockheed Martin, the Navy and the rest of the industry team are more than a year into developing the ship-based launcher.

“We’re mid-way through that development phase right now,” he said in a Feb. 21 interview. “We’ve done a lot of sub-scale and full-scale testing and proofing on that capability, and more to follow as we move through 2023.”
That development work this year will lead to “a flight test campaign next year.”
In November, Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe, the head of the Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs office, said the ship-based launcher would require pressurized air to shoot the weapon out of the launcher to a great enough height to allow the missile to light off without torching the ship deck below it. He said early Navy testing had already shown this was possible.

Even as Lockheed Martin is working on the launcher, the weapon control system and more, Ingalls Shipbuilding is on contract to modify destroyer Zumwalt, so the futuristic-looking ship will be prepared to receive these new capabilities during a 2025 refit.

Ingalls Shipbuilding President Kari Wilkinson told reporters last month the Navy still hadn’t finalized the statement of work for the ship refit, as the sea service weighs how extensive a job it may be to install this new weapon onto Zumwalt and sister ships Michael Monsoor and Lyndon B. Johnson.
Layne said the previous hypersonic missile contract covered development and testing of the basic weapon system, as well as missile deliveries to the Army’s first batteries, while this month’s contract includes the development work, as well as the delivery of missiles for use on Zumwalt destroyers and missiles for Army batteries that will be established later in the fielding process.

The Navy will need to award a third contract later this decade to cover the development of a submarine-launched hypersonic missile capability, Layne said. In this case again, the missile will be common, but the Virginia-class submarine will need its own launcher and its own modifications to the weapon control system. The third contract would cover that development, missile deliveries to submarines, plus any further missiles required by the Army or the Navy’s three Zumwalt destroyers, he added.

Megan Eckstein is the naval warfare reporter at Defense News. She has covered military news since 2009, with a focus on U.S. Navy and Marine Corps operations, acquisition programs and budgets. She has reported from four geographic fleets and is happiest when she’s filing stories from a ship. Megan is a University of Maryland alumna.

Navy’s hypersonic launcher is headed to flight testing next year

Lockheed Martin's $1.2 billion hypersonic missile contract includes the development of a ship-based launcher and flight tests next year.

www.defensenews.com

jward · Feb 21, 2023

Housecarl said:
Uh oh.....

Posted for fair use.....
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-732203

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?
The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.
By YONAH JEREMY BOB

Published: FEBRUARY 21, 2023 00:17

Donya be worryin' yourself o'er it, Lad. Israel be a'vowin for the 100001 time they'll not be allowin such a thing, and this time they really really really mean it! :: stern face ::

(if I didn't know better I might wonder to what extent the status quo of an avowed enemy on the brink o' a nuclear breakthru was calculated to serve their best interests as well, or better, than delivering a decisive end to it :hmm:

)

I know. Ya dun be payin' me to think. ::Back to the coffee makin i go::
https://twitter.com/IranIntl_En
Iran International English
@IranIntl_En

Israeli Prime Minister @netanyahu: "I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. That is not merely an Israeli interest; it's an American interest; it's in the interest of the entire world."

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628165722433101826

View: https://twitter.com/IranIntl_En/status/1628165722433101826?s=20

jward · Feb 23, 2023

U.S. to Sanction Sinaloa Cartel Network of Fentanyl Suppliers Contributing to the U.S. Opioid Crisis

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

February 22, 2023

The United States is determined to disrupt the global production and supply chain of illicit fentanyl, including by denying the criminal actors who engage in this activity access to the international financial system. Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control is designating six Sinaloa Cartel members involved in the illicit methamphetamine and fentanyl trade, as well as six Mexico-based entities. Led by brothers Ludim Zamudio Lerma and Luis Alfonso Zamudio Lerma, this network is responsible for diverting illicit precursor chemicals directly into the hands of Sinaloa Cartel members and their labs.
Drug trafficking drives instability, fuels corruption, and kills young and old. This crisis cuts across every geographic, demographic, and economic category in our nation, damaging our prosperity and imposing tremendous suffering on our communities. The production and trafficking of these drugs is a global problem, and the United States is prepared to lead at a global level.
Today’s action is part of a whole-of-government effort to disrupt and dismantle the transnational criminal organizations that facilitate the illicit supply of fentanyl and other narcotics.

https://www.state.gov/u-s-to-sanction-sinaloa-cartel-network-of-fentanyl-suppliers-contributing-to-the-u-s-opioid-crisis/

Housecarl · Feb 23, 2023

ALERT - Vladimir Putin suspends New START participation in state of nation address

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2023/02/21/Putin-state-nation-Ukraine-Western-START/9411676980887/ Feb. 21 (UPI) -- President Vladimir Putin announced Russia would halt participation in the New START nuclear reduction treaty with the United States in his state of the nation address...

www.timebomb2000.com

Posted for fair use.....

Russia Plans to Deploy New Nuclear Missiles

The Wall Street Journal

Russia Plans to Deploy New Nuclear Missiles

Story by Ann M. Simmons • 4h ago

MOSCOW—Russian President Vladimir Putin said he plans to deploy Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missiles, which are capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads, as part of an effort to modernize the country’s nuclear forces.

The announcement, aimed in part at showcasing Russia’s nuclear arsenal, came two days after Mr. Putin said that Russia will pull back from the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty with the U.S. It comes on the eve of the first anniversary of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, a conflict that has exposed serious shortcomings of capabilities of the Russian military, which has struggled to advance on the battlefield in Ukraine in recent months.

“As before, we will pay increased attention to strengthening the nuclear triad,” Mr. Putin said in an address marking a national holiday in Russia that honors the country’s armed forces. Russia’s nuclear arsenal includes air, land and sea delivery systems.

Mr. Putin touted the Sarmat in 2018, boasting that it could reach any point on the globe. But earlier this week, Russia conducted a test launch of the Sarmat ICBM. The test, which was carried out at its Plesetsk launch site, nearly 500 miles north of Moscow, was a failure, according to U.S. officials.

The Kremlin didn’t comment on the outcome of the test, directing requests for comment to Russia’s Ministry of Defense, which also didn’t respond.

In addition to the Sarmat, Mr. Putin said full production of the Kinzhal air-launched hypersonic systems would continue. The Kinzhal can accelerate to 10 times the speed of sound and strike targets at a range of over 1,200 miles and can be outfitted with both conventional and nuclear warheads weighing around 1,100 pounds, Russia’s state media TASS reported Thursday.

Russia will also begin mass deployment of Zircon sea-launched hypersonic missiles, said Mr. Putin, and will commission the Borei-A nuclear-powered submarine, Emperor Alexander III, into the Russian navy. As a result of these moves, “the share of modern weapons and equipment in the naval strategic nuclear forces will reach 100%,” Mr. Putin said.

Under Mr. Putin, the Russian military underwent a large-scale effort to modernize its capabilities following the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, the conflict in Ukraine has exposed continued problems, such as antiquated or defective equipment and a troubled command structure.

In his Thursday speech, Mr. Putin promised to ensure that Russia’s military remained equipped with new strike systems, reconnaissance and communications equipment.

Kremlin watchers said Mr. Putin’s more aggressive military posturing, including suspension of participation in the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, New Start, was intended as a warning to the West. The U.S. and its allies have provided massive military support to Ukraine.

The New Start treaty provided the arms-control framework, limiting the number of strategic nuclear warheads deployed by the U.S. and Russia to 1,550, since it took effect in 2011.

At the same time, Russian officials made clear that Moscow wasn’t walking away from strategic arms control. After Mr. Putin announced the suspension, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Russia will continue to “strictly comply with the quantitative restrictions on strategic offensive arms” throughout the life of the treaty, which lasts until 2026.

That statement also said that Russia will continue to provide notifications of its ballistic missile launches on the basis of an agreement reached in 1988. The Russians notified this week’s test launch of the Sarmat in advance in accordance with the New Start treaty and a parallel 1988 accord. These commitments mean that Moscow is taking steps to preserve the core provisions of New Start and to provide strategic predictability.

It remains to be seen if Russia will continue to exchange data on strategic forces and provide other notifications.

The U.S. military is undertaking a costly strategic modernization and will field a new bomber, a new ICBM and a new sea-based nuclear force. That means that the Kremlin has an incentive to maintain reciprocal limits on both sides’ arsenal, current and former U.S. officials said.

The Russian leader’s public holiday message was also aimed at underscoring the country’s military strength to the domestic audience as the war heads into its second year, analysts said.

Although polls in Russia show that the majority of Russians support the Kremlin’s military campaign, there is anxiety over how long the war will last. Showing Russians that their military has the resources it needs to fight and win is a critical part of the Kremlin’s messaging, the analysts said.

“A modern and efficient army and navy are a guarantee of the country’s security and sovereignty, and a guarantee of its stable development and its future,” Mr. Putin said.

Write to Ann M. Simmons at ann.simmons@wsj.com

Housecarl · Feb 23, 2023

Posted for fair use.....

Northrop Completes Wind Tunnel Tests on Future Sentinel ICBM

Northrop Grumman has announced the completion of wind tunnel tests on the future LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile.

www.thedefensepost.com

Northrop Completes Wind Tunnel Tests on Future Sentinel ICBM

ROJOEF MANUEL
FEBRUARY 20, 2023
1 MINUTE READ

Northrop Grumman has announced the completion of wind tunnel tests on the future LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

The trials were part of the US Air Force’s program to modernize the land-based pillar of its nuclear triad and replace its 50-year-old Minuteman III ICBMs.

Sentinel scaled models underwent sub-to-hypersonic simulations to assess the maturity of the design.

Engineers laid out several stages, each with a set of metrics to validate the Sentinel’s capability under various load, speed, and atmospheric conditions.

The simulations also involved missile live-firing, separation, and flight maneuvers.

Wind Tunnel Testing

Wind tunnel testing is a critical evaluation phase for missile performance, according to Northrop Grumman.

“This wind tunnel campaign is an opportunity to put our digitally engineered designs to the test, under conditions that mimic a missile launch,” Northrop Grumman Sentinel Program Manager and Vice President Sarah Willoughby explained.

“Predictions from the modeling correlated with the testing results, giving us confidence in our model-based engineering approach.”

“Data from these tests will inform future engineering decisions as we mature the design and continue on a path to deliver this critical capability to the Air Force.”

Future Developments

Following the trials, experts updated the Sentinel models to produce the missile’s flight hardware.

“Tests were conducted at industry and government-run facilities across the US in under a year,” Willoughby stated.

“This is an extremely complex effort proving the value of digital engineering in helping us move to the next phase with certainty.”

More than 10,000 US personnel are expected to be employed as the Sentinel program progresses, a statement from Northrop Grumman said.

----------------------

I have to wonder if there is build into the design the ability to take more than one warhead since all the info I've thus far found indicates that it would have either only one RV or aeroshell delivery vehicle per missile.

Housecarl · Feb 23, 2023

WAR - North Korea says that "If the US continues its hostile practices against the country, it will be considered a declaration of war

Faytuks News Δ @Faytuks BREAKING: North Korea says that "If the US continues its hostile practices against the country, it will be considered a declaration of war" - Yonhap View: https://twitter.com/Faytuks/status/1628944362263412738?s=20

www.timebomb2000.com

jward · Feb 24, 2023

A bit o' a spherical shaped item here () I spose,- but nothing really new. They've been upping their budgets, rewriting their wartime permissions n doctrines n preparing to break into WW3 pretty openly for quite a while now.

A New NATO: Common Data Sharing Systems Coming Soon

by Kris Osborn

NATO countries will now be accelerating steps to increase their ability to quickly deploy forces in response to a crisis while improving interoperability through common command and control systems. The Russian attack on Ukraine has motivated NATO members to increase defense budgets, forward deploy additional forces, and heavily emphasize operational connectivity among allies.

NATO is rapidly evolving to adjust to a new status quo, requiring a much more aggressive stance when it comes to forward positioning assets and demonstrating readiness for war along its eastern flank.
“There are things that we can do and will do to make sure that it's a lot easier to rapidly-deploy forces forward. Some of those things include pre-positioning of equipment, putting forces that are at home stations on higher levels of alert, and streamlining command-and-control so that it's easier to fall in on a formation,” Austin said.

Interoperability and rapid deployment reinforce one another. The more a multinational force is able to share sensitive information in real-time using common standards, interfaces, or interoperable data links, the faster a NATO force can move into position and conduct joint multi-domain operations. Improving interoperability has been a long-standing challenge for NATO forces. Radio frequencies need to be aligned, computing protocols need to enable data exchanges, and datalinks between separate countries need to operate with interfaces to ensure information transmission.

Common command and control systems, fortified by uniform technical standards, can ensure NATO members are increasingly able to act seamlessly in warfare formations on the eastern flank. One clear advantage to this effort can be found in the F-35 stealth fighter, as the aircraft uses a common data link for all F-35s across multiple nations. The F-35s Multifunction Advanced Datalink (MADL) enables F-35s from any country to interact with and share information across a multinational formation of fifth-generation aircraft.

The alliance is likely working to move beyond this existing synergy and connect drones, aircraft, ground vehicles, and surface ships from multiple countries in real-time using a common framework. This would allow an F-35 from Poland to send targeting detail to U.S. Abrams tanks positioned to defend Finland or to NATO surface ships in the Baltic Sea trying to disrupt Russian maritime supply lines. NATO will likely seek to build upon the existing framework of its NATO Standardization Agreement 4586 (STANAG 4586) to enable drones from different countries to exchange information in a common format. STANAG 4586 could perhaps be upgraded to reduce latency, prevent hacking, or expanded to other platforms using compatible technical standards, message formats, and protocol.

NATO’s ability to rapidly respond relies to a large extent on the alliance’s capacity for common command and control and data exchange, or else forces from different member nations will be alienated from one another in combat environments. Given the number of breakthroughs the U.S. military is achieving with joint information networking, it makes sense that Austin would emphasize ongoing efforts to extend this kind of real-time connectivity among NATO members.

Kris Osborn is the Defense Editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Master's Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.

A New NATO: Common Data Sharing Systems Coming Soon

NATO’s ability to rapidly respond relies to a large extent on the alliance’s capacity for common command and control and data exchange.

nationalinterest.org

Housecarl · Feb 24, 2023

China’s New H-20 Stealth Bomber is Worse Than You Think

RT 16:43

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K71zcqCEskE&ab_channel=Task%26Purpose

587,377 views Feb 21, 2023
National University is perfect for anyone interested in learning again! Find a new exciting career today: Veterans - Military Veteran – National University Info Active Duty Military - Military – National University Info

This new aircraft could change the balance of power in the world. Currently the United States is the only nation to operate a strategic stealth bomber fleet like the B-2. This new Chinese stealth bomber is the type of aircraft that is sent to destroy an entire enemy airfield or soften up defenses for an invasion. The H-20 would have major ramifications for a possible invasion of Taiwan if it is able to evade their air defense systems.

Written by: Chris Cappy & Justin Taylor
Video Edited by: Maksym Dimarov

But what kind of weapons and munitions would this stealth bomber drop if its stealthiness is truly able to match the American aircraft? It would drop a copy of the same bomb that the American stealth bombers use of course a JDAM copycat. China created the FT PGB in 2006 which is a family of chinese built precision guided munitions created at the China Academy of Launch Vehicle technology. They range from 100kg to 500 kg or 1,000 pounds. The F-12 variant has a rocket booster that can be attached to extend its range to 150 km, providing a release velocity of 600–1000 km/h.

Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.

Email capelluto@taskandpurpose.com for inquires.

Housecarl · Feb 24, 2023

Hummm.......

Posted for fair use.....

Officials Outline Strategy In Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review

By David Vergun The Defense Department released its unclassified Nuclear Posture Review, Oct. 27, 2022. Richard C. Johnson, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear and countering weapons of mass destruction policy, and Drew Walter, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear...

www.eurasiareview.com

Officials Outline Strategy In Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review

February 25, 2023 DoD News 0 Comments
By DoD News
By David Vergun
The Defense Department released its unclassified Nuclear Posture Review, Oct. 27, 2022.

Richard C. Johnson, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear and countering weapons of mass destruction policy, and Drew Walter, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear matters, spoke Feb. 15 at the Nuclear Deterrence Summit, in Arlington, Virginia, about NPR topics.

“This NPR recognizes that the international security environment has deteriorated, unfortunately, even since 2018,” Johnson said, referring to the year when the last NPR was released.

“Obviously, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a stark reminder of nuclear risks in contemporary conflict. And in the meantime, we have the PRC nuclear modernization and expansion, presenting us with new risks and new uncertainties,” he said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

These developments will mean that for the first time, the United States will face two major nuclear armed competitors. That presents new dilemmas for U.S. strategic and regional deterrence, Johnson said, adding that North Korea and Iran also present challenges.

Although the NPR states that the fundamental role of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack, it confirms a broader set of roles, the first being to deter strategic attack, the second to assure allies and partners and the third is to achieve U.S. objectives if deterrence fails, he said

This NPR sets a very high bar for nuclear employment, and the United States will only consider the use of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners, he said.

Walter said the NPR calls for a balanced, flexible stockpile, capable of pacing the threats, responding to uncertainty and maintaining effectiveness.

The systems now in place are old and not particularly flexible or adaptable, Walter said.

The department communicates its nuclear posture with Congress, he said. “The more information Congress has, the better decisions it will make. It truly does work quite well when you’re transparent,” he said, noting that there will always be disagreements but there’s been strong bipartisan support and support from current and past administrations.

Screen-Shot-2015-07-27-at-7.12.30-PM.png

DoD News

DoD News publishes news from the US Defense Department.

Housecarl · Feb 24, 2023

At this point probably a moot concern......

Posted for fair use.....

Quick Take: What is the New Start Treaty and Why Hypersonics are not part of it?

Problem: -The New START treaty did not include hypersonic weapons, or its delivery platforms, in the original 2010 agreement. -As such, the U.S. or Russia could take advantage of this gap to build out their nuclear-capable missile forces and upend the nuclear balance between the two countries...

moderndiplomacy.eu

DEFENSE

Quick Take: What is the New Start Treaty and Why Hypersonics are not part of it?

Published 4 hours ago on February 25, 2023
By Waqas Jan

Problem:

-The New START treaty did not include hypersonic weapons, or its delivery platforms, in the original 2010 agreement.

-As such, the U.S. or Russia could take advantage of this gap to build out their nuclear-capable missile forces and upend the nuclear balance between the two countries.

-If Russia or the US believes that the other is cheating in an arms control agreement, it can potentially increase the chances that either country will break out and disregard the treaty as a whole, thereby making their relationship more adversarial, hostile, and ultimately, dangerous.

Timeline

-1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty was as an arms control treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union on the limitation of the anti-ballistic missile

-The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty required the United States and the Soviet Union to eliminate all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers

-Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START), was an arms control negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union (and, later, Russia) that were aimed at reducing their arsenals of nuclear warheads and of the missiles and bombers capable of delivering such weapons

-The Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), also known as the Moscow Treaty, commits the United States and Russia to reduce their deployed strategic nuclear forces to 1,700-2,200 warheads apiece

New START

-New START is a nuclear arms reduction treaty between the United States and Russian

-It was first signed on 8 April 2010 in Prague and is expected to last until 5 February 2026, after it was extended earlier this year.

-New START’s core articles addressed the complexities of nuclear weapons technology.

However, It does not directly limit the number of nuclear warheads either nation may possess, (largely because warheads are difficult to track and account for after a country has developed the ability to create nuclear weapons and in sizeable quantities)
INSTEAD, New START focuses on the nuclear warhead delivery systems—ground-launched missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and heavy bomber aircraft—by which these destructive payloads can be carried intercontinental distances.
New START limits the number of these systems each nation may possess (up to 800) and deploy (up to 700), as well as the number of warheads that can be mounted on them (up to 1,550).

Hypersonics

-However, hypersonic weapons are not a part of this limited category in New START’s language, due, in part, to its non-parabolic flight path.

New START limits apply to “a weapon delivery vehicle that has a ballistic trajectory over most of its flight path.”
Ballistic trajectories are determined by a projectile’s initial velocity and the force of gravity, which pulls the object down as it travels
This means that someone can track and reasonably predict the target of an ICBM based on its velocity and orientation.
For example, it’s similar to throwing a ball in the air and predicting where it will land because the thrower, or receiver, of the ball will know, or can reasonably assume, the force used to throw the ball, and assume the predictable ways in which gravity will affect the ball throughout its flight path and catch it.

-However, hypersonics are different, and do not have a traditional ballistic trajectory.

Once accelerated to high speeds via a host rocket into earth’s low atmosphere, hypersonic missiles take advantage of aerodynamic forces to generate lift, gliding through the atmosphere like an airplane—or a stone skipping across the surface of water
This difference in flight path (from parabolic to elongated and less predictable) is why it’s not considered a ballistic missile and therefore not covered by traditional clauses of New START.
To date, the only known hypersonic missile in deployment is Russia’s Avangard, but that uses an ICBM, so it falls within the treaty, but this is not likely to be the norm in the future as Russia and the U.S. continue hypersonic weapons research.

Hypersonic and New START Why Wasn’t it in the treaty?

-First, when New START was negotiated, hypersonics were still ill conceived as both Russia and the U.S. were researching it for military purposes.

-Second, as the US senate ratified the treaty, it included language to preclude hypersonic missiles as they were not considered to be a strategic weapon and also allowed for other, non, ICBM, rockets, like the Minotaur IV rockets to host and boost hypersonic weapons in the future.

-Russia was largely upset at the US decision and “understanding” of hypersonic weapons. Nevertheless, Russia agreed to proceed with the treaty as it was believed beneficial in the grander context

-Ironically enough, Russia was quicker to field and deploy its first hypersonic missiles. So much in fact, that Mark Esper said wanted New START to include “new Russian strategic weapons”—likely meaning hypersonic weapons. But this did not happen.

-That said, there has been some transparency for US inspectors around the Russian Avant Garde hypersonic missile already.

-There are other discussions planned in the future to discuss

-However, if Russia were to change booster-systems, it would require a new understanding between countries. Meaning though they found semi-agreement today, because hypersonic missiles aren’t codified in New START or other arms agreements, it’s inevitable that Russia or the US will break out and develop hypersonic missiles at greater numbers.

Policy

-To help fix this issue, I propose that the US and Russia—should use New START’s Bilateral Consultative Commission to amend the treaty and include language on hypersonic weapons and delivery vehicles as a part of an arms control agreement.

-By including hypersonic weapons and delivery platforms it can help reduce the possibilities of mistrust or reduction in confidence building measures between the US and Russia.

-Alternatively, Russia and the US can pledge to not allow hypersonic weapons to be dual use weapons and instead keep it as a non-strategic weapon that can be subject to inspections and other transparency measures in the future.

Housecarl · Feb 25, 2023

Posted for fair use.....

Russians playing with Javelins: US Army, Russia display weapons yards apart in the desert - Breaking Defense

At IDEX, Russia's pavilion was just yards away from a US Army setup showing off the kind of anti-tank weapons used daily in Ukraine.

breakingdefense.com

(For images please see article source. HC)

LAND WARFARE

Russians playing with Javelins: US Army, Russia display weapons yards apart in the desert

At IDEX, Russia's pavilion was just yards away from a US Army setup showing off the kind of anti-tank weapons used daily in Ukraine.

By ASHLEY ROQUE and LEE FERRAN on February 24, 2023 at 9:25 AM

IDEX 2023 — If there is one weapon that has become synonymous with Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s invasion, it’s the Javelin — a US-made anti-tank weapon that has been so effective against Russian tanks that it has spawned a whole popular iconography.

So seeing a Russian weapons contractor hoisting one up at a US Army booth must have been a strange sight indeed.

So it goes at one of the world’s largest weapons shows. Here, under the hot Middle East sun, two countries on opposing sides of the ongoing war inside Ukraine stood virtually side-by-side at the Naval Defence & Security Exposition in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, the sister show to IDEX 2023.

Looming large near the end of a long cement dock was a dark blue building declaring “Russia” in bold letters on the side. Inside were Russian small arms, missiles and models of larger weapon systems. Outside, a variety of full-sized Rostec helicopters sat on display. The Russians weren’t officially listed as exhibitors for IDEX, but announced days before the show they’d have a “separate pavilion,” one larger than all the others outside.

None of it seemed to matter much to a few smiling US Army soldiers, who were manning their own, much simpler tent just a few yards down the dock, showing off a Javelin and an operational Patriot launcher. Over in the US Army’s makeshift display, a blue canvas sign, devoid of any US military insignia, listed the bullet points about the “fire and forget” Javelin launcher, while two soldiers donning 116th Cavalry Brigade unit patches fielded curious passersby’s questions about the weapon. Those interested in trying it out were invited to slide in and look through the weapon’s viewfinder.

In fact, one soldier told Breaking Defense, a large number of Russians had come over from their booth to check out the US stand — and the mood was, perhaps surprisingly, jovial. So much so, he said, that he traded patches with one Russian.

With dozens of countries and hundreds of exhibition areas at NAVDEX and nearby IDEX, it isn’t abundantly clear how these two foes ended up virtually next to each other this week — separated only by a Turkish boat display. But one US military official not at the event told Breaking Defense the Army’s tent was not planned to send a “strategic competitor” a message.

Col. Armando Hernandez, a public affairs officer with US Central Command, noted that the Army did not select where its display would be located this year, and for shows like this, US services show off capabilities fielded in the region.

In this case, that meant the Javelin was positioned a stone’s throw from the kind of Russian kit it has helped kill in Ukraine. So was the M903 Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Segment Enhanced, with trainers mounted, “that is operational and provides [a] crucial air and missile defense capability in the USCENTCOM area of operations,” Hernandez added. The Ukrainians are scheduled to get Patriot in the future, explicitly to defend against the kind of weapons on display just yards away.

International arms expos mean forces on opposing sides of geopolitics can end up in the same place. It’s just not usually quite so striking that two sets of equipment, directly used against each other on the battlefield, would meet just yards apart, one year into the hottest war Europe has seen since 1945.

night driver · Feb 25, 2023

In re "IDEX", ALL of those guys knew that they were INTEL guys, for both sides. Jovial gets more info than cussin' n Fairbairn-Sykes comparin'.

I know both Carl and Jules, you understand that as one is considering a Tri-polar World, we need to draw a HUGE WIDE HIGH and BRIGHT line to separate the countries who used to be considered "Non-Aligned" from actually "Neutral" (or as neutral as possible in today).

Just a thought to bring this to top-of-mind.

Housecarl · Feb 25, 2023

night driver said:
In re "IDEX", ALL of those guys knew that they were INTEL guys, for both sides. Jovial gets more info than cussin' n Fairbairn-Sykes comparin'.

I know both Carl and Jules, you understand that as one is considering a Tri-polar World, we need to draw a HUGE WIDE HIGH and BRIGHT line to separate the countries who used to be considered "Non-Aligned" from actually "Neutral" (or as neutral as possible in today).

Just a thought to bring this to top-of-mind.

Yup.

WAR 02-18-2022-to-02-24-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

On TB every waking moment

(280) 01-28-2022-to-02-03-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****​

(281) 02-04-2022-to-02-10-2022__****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****​

End of two-way nuclear deterrence makes world more dangerous​

READ NEXT​

U.S. not ruling out North Korea's nuclear test before early March​

Putin plays long game with West over Ukraine: former U.S. diplomat​

Nuclear weapons enter South Korean political debate as threats grow​

Japan should discuss nuclear option: ex-Pentagon official​

Iran diplomatic strategy hits wall as Ukraine, Israel derail plans​

North Korea sustains high defense spending with new budget​

Japan's new security strategy will make China more mistrustful​

Collective power of developing nations creating multipolar world​

Tripolar world ushered in by the rise of 'neutral' powers​

On TB every waking moment

On TB every waking moment

N Korea fires missile after threatening retaliation​

On TB every waking moment

ISIS attack and US raid show terror group still dangerous - analysis​

ISIS continues to be a threat and the US and SDF continue to carry out raids to make sure it can’t make a comeback.​

Common threats faced in Syria​

On TB every waking moment

Syria ambush that killed at least 53 people blamed on ISIS​

MORE ON:ISIS​

ISIS senior leader killed, 4 US troops wounded in Syria raid​

NY stockbroker turned ISIS sniper found guilty of aiding terror group​

Melania Trump pitched ‘hero dog’ story after ISIS kingpin death: book​

Ex-Eagle Scout sentenced to 11 years in prison for trying to join ISIS​

On TB every waking moment

Ukraine invasion reshaped global alliances, renewed fears​

RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR​

Key moments in a year of war after Russia invaded Ukraine​

Tank plant in small Ohio city plays big role in Ukraine war​

AP PHOTOS: Fading graveside portraits of Ukraine's war dead​

​

passin' thru

US fumbling to close hypersonic gap with China, Russia​

passin' thru

(3rd LD) N. Korea fires 2 short-range ballistic missiles toward East Sea: S. Korean military | Yonhap News Agency​

passin' thru

The Kremlin’s Grand Delusions​

BACK IN THE USSR​

DISSUADABLE, NOT DETERRABLE​

passin' thru

On TB every waking moment

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?​

The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.​

How close is Iran to producing nuclear weapons?​

passin' thru

Navy’s hypersonic launcher is headed to flight testing next year​

passin' thru

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?​

The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.​

passin' thru

U.S. to Sanction Sinaloa Cartel Network of Fentanyl Suppliers Contributing to the U.S. Opioid Crisis​

On TB every waking moment

Russia Plans to Deploy New Nuclear Missiles​

On TB every waking moment

Northrop Completes Wind Tunnel Tests on Future Sentinel ICBM​

Wind Tunnel Testing​

Future Developments​

On TB every waking moment

passin' thru

A New NATO: Common Data Sharing Systems Coming Soon​

On TB every waking moment

China’s New H-20 Stealth Bomber is Worse Than You Think​

On TB every waking moment

Officials Outline Strategy In Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review​

DoD News​

On TB every waking moment

DEFENSE​

Quick Take: What is the New Start Treaty and Why Hypersonics are not part of it?​

On TB every waking moment

Russians playing with Javelins: US Army, Russia display weapons yards apart in the desert​

At IDEX, Russia's pavilion was just yards away from a US Army setup showing off the kind of anti-tank weapons used daily in Ukraine.​

ESFP adrift in INTJ sea

On TB every waking moment

WAR 02-18-2022-to-02-24-2022__THEWINDSofWAR

(280) 01-28-2022-to-02-03-2022__THEWINDSofWAR

(281) 02-04-2022-to-02-10-2022__THEWINDSofWAR

End of two-way nuclear deterrence makes world more dangerous

READ NEXT

U.S. not ruling out North Korea's nuclear test before early March

Putin plays long game with West over Ukraine: former U.S. diplomat

Nuclear weapons enter South Korean political debate as threats grow

Japan should discuss nuclear option: ex-Pentagon official

Iran diplomatic strategy hits wall as Ukraine, Israel derail plans

North Korea sustains high defense spending with new budget

Japan's new security strategy will make China more mistrustful

Collective power of developing nations creating multipolar world

Tripolar world ushered in by the rise of 'neutral' powers

N Korea fires missile after threatening retaliation

ISIS attack and US raid show terror group still dangerous - analysis

ISIS continues to be a threat and the US and SDF continue to carry out raids to make sure it can’t make a comeback.

Common threats faced in Syria

Syria ambush that killed at least 53 people blamed on ISIS

MORE ON:ISIS

ISIS senior leader killed, 4 US troops wounded in Syria raid

NY stockbroker turned ISIS sniper found guilty of aiding terror group

Melania Trump pitched ‘hero dog’ story after ISIS kingpin death: book

Ex-Eagle Scout sentenced to 11 years in prison for trying to join ISIS

Ukraine invasion reshaped global alliances, renewed fears

RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR

Key moments in a year of war after Russia invaded Ukraine

Tank plant in small Ohio city plays big role in Ukraine war

AP PHOTOS: Fading graveside portraits of Ukraine's war dead

US fumbling to close hypersonic gap with China, Russia

(3rd LD) N. Korea fires 2 short-range ballistic missiles toward East Sea: S. Korean military | Yonhap News Agency

The Kremlin’s Grand Delusions

BACK IN THE USSR

DISSUADABLE, NOT DETERRABLE

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?

The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.

How close is Iran to producing nuclear weapons?

Navy’s hypersonic launcher is headed to flight testing next year

What does it mean that Iran got caught close to weaponized uranium?

The IAEA leaked on Sunday that Iran had enriched uranium up to 84% – dangerously close to the 90% threshold to weaponize uranium.

U.S. to Sanction Sinaloa Cartel Network of Fentanyl Suppliers Contributing to the U.S. Opioid Crisis

Russia Plans to Deploy New Nuclear Missiles

Northrop Completes Wind Tunnel Tests on Future Sentinel ICBM

Wind Tunnel Testing

Future Developments

A New NATO: Common Data Sharing Systems Coming Soon

China’s New H-20 Stealth Bomber is Worse Than You Think

Officials Outline Strategy In Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review

DoD News

DEFENSE

Quick Take: What is the New Start Treaty and Why Hypersonics are not part of it?

Russians playing with Javelins: US Army, Russia display weapons yards apart in the desert

At IDEX, Russia's pavilion was just yards away from a US Army setup showing off the kind of anti-tank weapons used daily in Ukraine.