Russia Will Not Use Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine

As the US attempts to set Russia up with a nuclear false-flag in Ukraine, it may soon find itself annihilated through unpunishable nuclear strikes from Russia.

Over the course of half a year, we have seen the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the destruction of the Russian-German Nord Stream project by the United States and its allies, and most recently, the partially-successful attempted destruction of Kerch Bridge in Crimea. Many commentators and even politicians are beginning to conclude that we are rapidly approaching what “could be the beginning of a nuclear war”, and even President of the United States Joe Biden has claimed that Russia intends to use “tactical nuclear, chemical or biological weapons” in Ukraine.

Needless to say, these speculations about first-use are utterly bogus as the Russians have made no such threat. They stem from either a fundamental misunderstanding or a dastardly misrepresentation of Russia’s nuclear program and policy. Furthermore, the claims disguises the asymmetry between the United States and the Russian Federation’s nuclear programs, history of use and policies, practically inverting the situation. The odd specificity of the supposed threat also reveals the true intent by the United States against Russia as we will see together. It is most likely that these repetitive and alarmist claims are a dangerous prelude to a nuclear false flag framing Russia.

In order to get the full reality of the world situation, we will follow a detailed historical recount of the world at war and at peace. Together, we will observe how the US and Russia came to choose two different paths after the cold war ended, and how these choices eventuated into completely asymmetric means and policies. Finally several war scenarios will be described, with the true conclusion and the future being left to the reader’s minds and in your hands.

Timeline Towards Nuclear Armageddon

The End of the Cold War and the New World Order

The 20th century’s penultimate decade of the 80s saw the competition between the two superpowers, the US and USSR, reach its peak. The US launched an expensive arms race program aiming to nullify the USSR’s nuclear advantage through the use of anti-ballistic missiles and other interception technology, named the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). It then conducted nuclear brinkmanship in the form of the Able Archer 83 exercise. Finally, it launched a series of small-footprint wars that strengthened its position over the world to the detriment of the Soviet Union. In turn, the Soviet Union under the leadership of Gorbachev conceded all its advantages through a series of treaties such as the intermediate nuclear force (INF) treaty which largely removed Europe as a theatre of concern for either party.

The cold war finally ended at the start of the 1990s. The USSR had been checkmated through a combination of intelligence operations, poor economic management, psychological operations and treachery. In a sharp contrast, the US was at the height of its military power and its alliances could not be any stronger. Using the casus belli of the invasion of Kuwait, the US demonstrated its absolute superpower status with a heavy footprint Desert Shield and the follow-on overwhelming large air campaign, Desert Storm.

There was no longer any question, the US was the one and only superpower in the world. Half a year after the desert storm campaign was over, on September 11 1991, the president of the United States, George H W Bush, declared the end of history. without any large clashes between nation but instead a “big idea” he called a new world order (NWO), which was to deliver “peace, freedom, security and the rule of law”. This represented the realization of his call exactly a year earlier while the war against Iraq was still raging.

The US was certainly no angel, and yet here it was at the height of its power seemingly offering the world peace… and the world had no choice but to accept. During the December of 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed and was no more, leaving behind the Russian Federation as its successor, seemingly defeated. A new world order (today called the “rules based order”) was finally here, whether people wanted it or not.

Unfortunately, America’s promise of peace never came to be.

America’s supremacy marked what could have been a peaceful time, albeit in a world filled with contradictions. The US had just large destroyed the Iraqi state, committing horrific war crimes along what was known as the highway of death. Half a century before, it had also been the only country to use nuclear weapons on Japan in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In the Korean war, the US attacked North Korea with biological weapons and inflicted a strategic bombing campaign on the Northern cities of Korea that saw the death of a fifth of their population.

Globalization and Infinite Wealth

The end of the cold war left much unfinished business for the United States. The George Soros operation to bring down the Chinese Communist government had failed in 1989, the clients of the USSR such as Yugoslavia, Syria, Libya and others were still around, and while the US was the economic powerhouse of the planet, its manufacturing was being off-shored internationally which many understood would leave it only with its technological, financial and service economies.

The US would however retain two important strengths: the ability to carry out covert and direct operations against nations that did not accept its new, global mandate. One of the most significant victims of this was the Russian Federation itself, with a coup against the deep state inside Russia which had attempted to restore order after catastrophic collapses of government policy. Largely supported by the US, Yeltsin brought in oligarchs who privatized the wealth of Russia under the guise of “economic shock therapy”. This was one of the US’s greatest successes and the damage to Russia is still very much apparent until the time of writing.

Riding the coat tail of this success, the US wasted no time and established the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 and used it to entrap many nations into debt cycles through financial entities like the World Bank and the IMF, sending out neo-liberal economist who would successfully advocate for disastrous policies like privatization of utilities and the export of natural resources. The looted wealth would never be fed back into the economy, instead it would go into the private accounts of those who betrayed their respective nation.

The idea behind globalization was for the US empire to act as the middleman between different classes of nations: the resource providers, the product consumers and the labor/manufacturing bases. Compartmentalizing existing nation by getting them to drop their tariff, lead to the “integration” of the world economy. In other words, there would be no room for further competition and development outside of the existing roles of nations, permanently freezing developing nations in their status and degrading the nations that had lost the cold war for the foreseeable future through unfavorable deals. The US would then become the primary middleman between nations, controlling research and development which it led (and still leads in some sectors of the economy), as well as advisory roles. Where necessary, when nations would not play ball, the US can apply kinetic action in the form of what would be known as “interventions”, previously known as wars. The latter word would be verboten, as the entire premise of the NWO was the end of history — peace!

The 1990s thus became the decade of America’s deep victory exploitation. A cultural explosion occurred, with the brand names of US companies becoming international phenomenon and its television shows, movies and music dominating the airwaves of nations around the world. The US launched the internet worldwide, in many nations, connecting them together into its globalized model — with it sitting in firm control of every lever and monitoring station. It would even later use the internet to bring down governments it wanted gone. With such pervasive power, and the international financial power of the USD still stronger than ever, many of the elite running the US felt comfortable in the strategic outlook for their empire even as manufacturing fell into rapid decline due to the very globalization policies that gave them power. They were happy enough to let the Chinese and other manufacturing bases toil as slaves to their empire. They only needed to finance deals between nations using control of international banking and with some issuance of currency the US can conjure up any object or resource onto its shores. One certain country, China was happy to play this game, undervaluing its currency and removing direct convertibility to ensure it would gradually soak up American manufacturing, which it eventually did in what was termed the China shock.

Though not without difficulties and contradictions, this international arrangement essentially gave the United States infinite wealth. This was so long as it could keep up the economic and political blackmail of smaller nations, kept dominant control of communications and had the ability to launch successful interventions should all other options fail. As the US printed money to buy anything it wanted, the created inflation would then be exported directly into other nations that accepted USD or convertible fiat currencies in general. In fact, no non-fiat currency remained by 1999, when Switzerland left the gold standard. Once a nation was integrated into this fiat system, it became completely increasingly susceptible to US intrigues with regime changes being as easy as a few television broadcast and a few jackals on the ground. Democracy was cunningly pushed as a panacea as it gave whoever controlled the media and finance system control of the government and its people. That kind of soft power rivaled what could be fielded by entire standing armies and indeed, the US fielded its intelligence not only against foe but also friend to maintain and extend its dominance. Drunk on power, and pushed by think tanks such as the Brookings institute, the US broke an important promise to its old foe, now the Russian Federation, and allowed Poland to join NATO in 1997. With all of this soft power, it cared not for verbal promises made when it was weaker.

Not everyone was happy with this arrangement however, and some preferred to stick to their socialist vertically integrated economy. North Korea and Yugoslavia, were such nations with contrasting differences. In the case of North Korea, a terrible famine was afflicted against them and was used to try and get them to agree to nuclear disarmament — which for some time, they agreed to. In the case of Yugoslavia, a civil war was already being fomented by various ethnicities as well as some betrayal by Yeltsin who was leading Russia. Eventually, when it seemed that Serbs would retain the last of Yugoslavia, the US intervened under the broader label of NATO.

The NWO media successfully sold the war against Yugoslavia as a “good war” to its subjects, with horrific titles such as the one above pervading the tentacles of its media empire.

The bombing of Belgrade that followed was celebrated across the US empire as a “good war”, even as the US bombed bridges, infrastructure, murdered countless civilians and even bombed the Chinese embassy. Westerns were glued to their televisions celebrating the bombardment of cities, towns and civilian infrastructure, writhing with hatred for Serbs simply because the US-controlled media told them to hate. To the rest of the world watching in horror, the true form of a unipolar, unopposable power with infinite wealth became clear. Karen Talbot described the intervention in 2000:

“Burgeoning military alliances, with the U.S. at the helm, are now more likely than ever to try to intervene in a similar way against any country that refuses to be a new-world-order colony by allowing its wealth and labor power to be plundered by transnational corporations.”

Indeed, even the Russian Federation, corrupt and tired as it was, felt the need to intervene and rebalance what it feared could later become a runaway situation of regime change by force. Russian troops headed for Yugoslavia. This sparked an immensely significant incident, that some claim was close to starting a third world war: the direct contact between Russian and NATO forces in the same theatre, with the latter coming close to opening fire on the former. The action by NATO had already been blocked by Russia at the UNSC and Russia itself had full rights to intervene in defense of its friend, albeit being too late to oppose the objectives of the US to break off a region called Kosovo.

The threat of war immediately cooled off but the incident along with the entire war in Yugoslavia put actions in motion back in Russia which eventually led to Yeltsin’s ouster and the rise of Vladimir Putin. A former KGB agent, Putin began to tighten the screws on the oligarchs which the United States installed and started resurrecting the Russian industrial base and military prowess. The metamorphosis was not limited to the Russian side alone, however. Indeed some at home in the US were unhappy with the trajectory put forward by the NWO model, and saw the US soft power and financial dominance eventually being threatened by the hard power of rivals.

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC)

Around one year prior to the intervention in Yugoslavia, for one recently founded Straussian think tank, Russia’s entry into the war vindicated many of its concerns even if Yugoslavia was not its main focus. The PNAC think tank advocated for renewed and strong action against Iraq, as an appetizer to the main course of much larger wars fought by the US. PNAC wanted to extend the US victory beyond its soft power and to start utilizing its hard power to ensure that the US’s primacy as the sole unipolar power extended through to the end of the 21st century. This meant confronting what they perceived as the biggest potential adversaries to the United States, one of the most significant being the Russian Federation.

PNAC did not have the receptive audience in Washington DC that it wanted, however. Though President Clinton did bomb Yugoslavia, Iraq and Sudan, he was not prepared to commit the US to anything more than light footprint aerial bombardment, as its position as kingmaker and as financial lynchpin was secure. Furthermore, with the cold war wound down since the mid-80s, the US defense budget had been in a decade and a half of decline. Manufacturing had also begun to be exported around the world, with the US being converted into a so-called “tertiary industry”. PNAC, nevertheless, did not stop there or give up.

Publishing their seminal Rebuilding America’s Defenses (RAD) paper, in September 2000, PNAC advocated for much greater defense spending¹ and had the following goals or desired capabilities:

• The ability to fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars. These major wars would also be advocated for in conjunction with this paper.

• Address developments in ballistic missile technologies, with North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria being named directly as primary concerns. These were also presumed targets of said major wars.

• Leaving the ABM treaty and removing the focus of US-Russian nuclear weapon balance, instead focusing on protection against “limited strikes”. Small states wielding weapons of mass destruction were

• Dominance of space and the creation of a “Space Force”.

• The fixture of NATO in Europe, not to ever be replaced by a force wielded by the European Union.

• The absolute unrivalled dominance of the United States in all world affairs. No country could be let as a potential equal power to the US. This was to be pursued proactively.

PNAC, however, understood the limited appetite for what it desired and stated prophetically:

“… the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

PNAC would catch its first of several breaks, with the second Bush administration taking power over Washington DC at the start of 2001, and the assignment of two of its founding signatories, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, as the Secretary of Defense of the United States. The new Pearl Harbor they predicted would be necessary for their changes to be taken onboard happened that same year, on September 11, 2001, ironically eleven years after the NWO speech by Bush senior — ending that phase of the world and beginning the “new American century”. A tremendous vindication for the PNAC group.

The terrorist attack against NYC on September 11th 2001 would change the course of history forever.

The ensuing chaos that arose from this deeply horrific and world-change event will not be covered here, as entire books have been written on this subject and the ensuing energy wars that resulted. These large-scale theatre wars advocated by PNAC, with the exception of North Korea (which was likely nuclear armed — thus a suitable target for covert, not overt means), were named by General Wesley Clark prior to many of them being launched. All named nations were targeted through direct wars, covert operations or combinations of the two.

Some important events aligning with PNAC’s goals were missed by many historians however. The first event was on December 13th 2001, where Bush announced that the US was leaving the ABM treaty. On that day, Russian President Putin in a nationwide televised speech stated that the decision was not unexpected, but would prove to be a grave mistake. Indeed, as it will soon become apparent, in pursuing a hostile posture against Russia and because of the manufacturing decline in the US due to the contradictions of globalism, even the PNAC-aligned Carnegie Endowment for International Peace had to admit that pulling out of the ABM was a grave mistake exactly 20 years later to the day.

The second event was only a few weeks later, on December 31st 2001, the Bush administration completed a nuclear posture review, which contained two notable and significant changes. The US would develop tactical nuclear weapons (namely older weapons modified to have a “flexible yield”) to destroy “weapons of mass destruction” entrenched in deep bunkers of third party nations using earth penetrating weapons (EPWs). The report referenced the current stockpile as a relic of the cold war, that needed to be redirected to threats posed by smaller nations rather than superpowers. Further to this, the US would employ limited nuclear strikes in case of “surprising military outcomes” in the battlefield, quoting the declassified portions of page 12 of the posture review:

U.S. nuclear forces will continue to provide assurance to security partners, particularly in the presence of known or suspected threats of nuclear, biological, or chemical attacks or in the event of surprising military developments.

In essence, the US was willing to commit to a first strike, using nuclear weapons, should battlefield conditions not go to plan. We will revisit the two catastrophic decisions of the change in nuclear posture and the departure of the ABM treaty in great detail.

Confrontation with Russia

PNAC also had its advice heeded and the expansion of NATO to the Baltic states and the Vilnius Group in its totality was achieved. They would later pose as a spoiler in relations between the EU and Russia. Agitating the situation further, the stage was set for a serious confrontation with Russia and its allies with regime changes in Georgia (2003) and Ukraine (2004). The Russian state itself was not sitting on its hands, and began to unravel the oligarch network formed as a stay-behind force by the United States, with Mikhail Khodorkovsky serving as a center-stage example in 2003. The financiers took huge offense to this action as it undid much of the privatization against the Russian gas sector. This energy product was dangerous to the United States source of infinite wealth, as it was now under control by another state and could bypass the USD-based financial system.

It is on the background of all of these hostile moves that Putin gave a seminal speech at the Munich Security Conference on February 10th 2007. In his speech, Putin essentially summarized everything you’ve read here so far with supreme eloquence and also warned about the consequences of America’s ABM system. Rather than place these ABM systems next to the designated hostile nations, they had been placed in a ring around Russia’s border. Putin also quite accurately conveyed the Russian opinion that these defensive systems can be turned into offensive systems that launch nuclear-armed cruise missile at a moment’s notice and thus represented a clandestine first strike capability positioned by the United States against Russia.

Most importantly, during his speech, Putin warned that Russia would respond to all of these threats in an asymmetric manner — in sharp contrast to the strategy called for by the US nuclear posture review of 2001. His warnings were not heeded or even taken seriously by the PNAC crew, and a war was launched against Russian-aligned minorities in Georgia (2008). This was botched, and led to the destruction of the country’s military potential and Russian break-off regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia to form. Using the Kosovo precedent, Russia recognised these break off states much to the chagrin of NATO.

To make matters worse, the American ABM program was a source of consistent failure and embarrassments, and the Chinese beat the US to the first kinetic kill anti-satellite (ASAT) test in 2007. This already exceeded the US capabilities and the constant failures from the Aegis ABM system was rapidly undermining confidence in the direction the US was taking.²

It is here that PNAC’s strategy and influence began to recede, and the Democrats took back control of the DC, reeling things back to the soft power strategies that the US dominated with back in the 90s. A year after that, the US attempted to mend ties with Russia with a relations “Reset” and a promise to allow Russia into the WTO.

The Arab Spring and a New Cold War

The wars that PNAC failed to fight with its hard power strategy, the Obama regime hoped to prevail using 4th generational warfare and soft power through coups and regime changes. Through the launch of the Arab Spring, the state of Libya which agreed to disarm its nuclear weapons, but attempted to launch a Gold Dinar, was destroyed and its leader Muammar Gaddafi murdered. Russia’s closest ally, the Syrian state, was also almost destroyed via operation Timber Sycamore. These catastrophic wars revealed a disturbing truth: The United States was allied with Al Qaeda all along. Nevertheless, the US saw its influence expand into areas it had never been able to access before, with the complete destruction of entire civilizations and states being a price it was glad to “pay”.

What surprised the US however, was despite the diplomatic, economic and even military overtures to Russia, it still aligned with its staunch ally Syria, providing it with material, military and diplomatic support at the UN. Indeed, during the disastrous war in Georgia, NATO attempted to overpower the Russian navy in the Black Sea only to have President Assad visit Russia and propose the reopening of the base in Tartous to rebalance the naval power between Russia and NATO. Russia was glad to agree then, and in the events of the Arab Spring it hurriedly not only reopened its classic Soviet stronghold in Tartous but also expanded into the city of Latakia in Hamimeh, in effect setting up two of its most important overseas bases

President Assad and President Medvedev meet in Russia on August 2008 to sign a capstone agreement for deployment of Russian forces in Syria.

It was clear to the Obama regime that Russia was taking its strategic vision against a unipolar world seriously and identified Syria as a territory it must not lose. Indeed, the goal all along was to deprive Russia of the possibility of staging its forces there, in order for it to shrink away from the Mediterranean sea all-together and accept its role as an energy provider, receiving funds from the US which it could then use to consume what it was allowed to. Anticipating trouble in 2012, Obama signed an executive order classifying Russia’s highly enriched uranium stockpile as a national security risk.

The sides would continue to trade blows, with the US attempting to block supplies to Syria through a violent revolution in Ukraine empowering Nazis in 2014, which ended up backfiring with the loss of Crimea (the primary logistic port to Syria) with Russia again using the Kosovo partition as a legal precedent to the annoyance of NATO. To retain a foothold in Ukraine, Russia set up separatist groups in the Donbass which eventually evolved into Russian Oblasts in 2022. In 2014, the US illegally invaded Syria and attempted to dominate its airspace in the north of the country. In response, on the second half of 2015, Russia officially entered the war in Syria and disrupted the US plans to muscle out the Syrian army using covert airstrikes and provision of cover for Al Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist groups operating in the theatre. For the first time since war in Serbia, the US and Russia found themselves in the same theatre of war.

By this time, it seemed a cold war between superpowers was becoming reality. At the end of 2016, Putin pulled out from a arms control treaty which would have had Russia destroy tens of tons of weapons grade Plutonium, which could potentially serve as fissile material for hundreds if not thousands of warheads. In turn, the Obama regime recommended a $1 trillion program be undertaken to modernize America’s now obsolete nuclear triad, with new nuclear submarines, silos and cruise missiles. This actually sided with the US nuclear primacy school of thought that had been largely abandoned. The proposal was met coldly, with ideologues such as NATO Defense Secretary Ashton Carter clinging on to the “end of history” stating:

“The Cold War playbook … is not suitable for the 21st century.”

The naysayers ultimately got their way, with new replacement silo-based ICBMs being pushed out a further ten years, to 2029, and no new replacement for the aging Trident submarine launched ballistic-missiles SLBMs in sight. This meant that the US was relying on technology developed during the 50s and 70s as its primary means of responding or initiating a nuclear attack. When Trump took power, he was shocked at the state of the US arsenal and wanted an unrealistic ten-fold expansion in its size. Trump also wanted to return to testing, being aware of the uncertainty about the effectiveness of the US nuclear warheads which were in a state of deep disrepair. Indeed, some components that required replacement and maintenance had to be reverse engineered as no one alive even knew what they were for.

Instead of defense budgets being assigned to strategic nuclear weapons, the “end of history” ideologues in control of the US instead focused the US budget spending onto tactical nuclear weapons, stating that megaton-level nuclear bombs were a “cold war relic”. One of these bombs was the B61-Mod 12 variable yield (0.3-400kT) air-dropped precision nuclear bomb. Previously, in 2013, the military officer in command of the US’s strategic arsenal General Robert Kehler stated:

“We’re trying to pursue weapons that actually are reducing in yield because we’re concerned about maintaining weapons that would have less collateral effect if the President ever had to use them”

Meanwhile the assistance secretary of defense Madelyn Creedon stated quite revealingly:

NATO allies “have reaffirmed the need” for a forward-deployed tactical nuclear presence for as long as the alliance retains a nuclear mission

The US had still clearly envisioned an intervention-model to war. This low-foot print model was an ideal fit for the US’s rapidly deindustrializing manufacturing base which was quickly extending into the military sphere. The Russians, on the other hand, had other ideas.

Towards Russian Nuclear Primacy

Russia watched the decades go by with the unipolar world swallowing up past ally after ally and US interventions destroyed or enslaved entire civilizations around the world. With the end of the ABM treaty, and the violation of the NATO expansion understanding, it also saw itself surrounded by potential nuclear weapons and ABM interceptors. The US heavily invested in 4th generational warfare, using regime change to pull allies or neutral parties away from Russia, with the CIA’s budget exceeding that of the Russian Ministry of Defense’s (MoD).

Like Putin promised in 2007, Russia’s investments in asymmetric capabilities were beginning to pay off. In 2018, Putin gave a game-changing speech, announcing hypersonic air-launched missiles, nuclear-powered cruise-missiles, a brand new ICBM platform, a hypersonic glide-craft capable of carrying nuclear missiles, a terrifying doomsday device in the form of a torpedo known as Status-6/Poseidon and finally a mysterious anti-drone and anti-satellite laser system.

The US feigned disinterest and delusional dismissal towards the speech… but in Trump’s circles, there was concern. The US was caught behind not merely by years but generations in front of these weapons. In order to try and make headway out of the situation, Trump left the INF treaty and the Open Skies treaty — leaving only the New START treaty as the remaining arms control treaty between Russia and the United States. To make matters worse, the ABM treaty that the US had left had given Russia a free hand in developing a set of serious anti-ballistic missile capabilities:

• The S-400 anti-ballistic and anti-aircraft area denial weapon, deployed since 2007. Its range is 400km, detection range 600km and can track and shoot down any stealth object.

• The S-500 anti-ballistic missile capable of bringing down hypersonic objects, which was still in development at the time. Its range is 600km and not only can it bring down incoming objects in space, it can also shoot down hypersonic objects.

• The S-550 (formerly A-235) anti-ICBM and anti-satellite weapon, which was also still in development. This was a game changing system that could bring down any satellite and is the fastest accelerating man-made objects in the world as can be seen in the video below.

• A secretive anti-satellite laser system that can allegedly blind satellites 1500 km in orbit after 5 seconds of exposure time. Putin correctly claimed that this would be based on new physical principles. This mirrors the initial idea behind SDI which was advocated by LaRouche in the late 70s.

It’s important to keep in mind that not only had Russia beaten the US to the punch on ABM, it had developed a suite of nuclear strike weapons which no plausible ABM system could stop. To make matters worse, PNAC’s dream of space dominance was shattered by the S-550 which was a Mach 25 missile capable of bringing down any space object. This weapon alone brings Russia absolute dominance and command of near space, including deployment of fractional orbit bombardment systems, and plausible space weapon and even ICBMs. The laser weapon, should it work, also suggested that Russia had advanced its physical model of the atom beyond the understanding of the west’s and is capable of waging space warfare below the threshold of all-out war. Should that threshold be crossed however, if Russia builds these advanced weapons in sufficient numbers, it would have both first and second strike capability.

Despite the revelations, the US did not change course and continued in its “end of history” delusions. It did not even attempt to reconcile with Russia given the clear advantage the Russians had should the two parties enter into an arms race. Instead of adapting to the new environment with a peer achieving nuclear superiority and eventually nuclear primacy, in 2020, the US announced its new weapon, in a most revealing manner. The US revealed the W76-2 5kT SLBM-based Mk4-compatible nuclear bomb, a submarine launched weapon with a yield it said was dialed in at 5kT while other sources citing a value of 7-8kT. This is much smaller a yield than the 100kT warhead it would replace (the W76-1) in a Trident launched reentry vehicle.

The new tactical SLBM nuclear warhead was immediately controversial, with some claiming that its existence would lower the threshold to first use and described it as a capability to “help counter any mistaken perception of an exploitable ‘gap’ in U.S. regional deterrence capabilities”. The idea stated at the time was that Russia would rely on a de-escalation strike in order to force victory in a theatre and the US needed a credible prompt response delivery system to immediately respond with a nuclear attack of its own. The Federation of American Scientists stated:

“Prompt response” means that strategic Trident submarines in a W76-2 scenario would be used as tactical nuclear weapons, potentially in a first use scenario or immediately after Russia escalated, thus forming the United States’ own “escalate-to-deescalate” capability. The United States has refused to rule out first use of nuclear weapons.

In fact the entire premise of Russia’s strategy being “escalate-to-deescalate” was fictional and contrived in the mind of think tankers, as stated by Kristin Ven Bruusgaard of Chatham house:

An exaggerated focus on limited, coercive nuclear use has led analysts to overemphasize one narrow scenario of nuclear compellence as the sole problem which Russian strategy poses.

Kristin follows with an vitally important and profoundly accurate point which has been repeated ad nauseam by Russian officials:

Russian officials continue to insist that Russia would only consider using nuclear weapons when the existence of the state is under threat – that is, when Russian territory is being attacked.

To the US’s credit however, in a similarly asymmetric move to Russia, it moved to secure its position as a communication superpower through the creation of the Starlink satellite constellation, which prevents any government inside its coverage from cutting off communication to any regular or irregular military force. This solidified the absolute pervasive power wielded by the United States — so long as these satellites remain in orbit.

In 2021, the US suffered some uncharacteristic instability after Biden took power in what was a disputed election. One of the first diplomatic actions he undertook was to get in touch with Putin and extend the New START treaty, the latest in a string of important treaties controlling arms production and stockpiling into the year 2025. Biden was clearly and acutely aware of Russia’s inevitable achievement of nuclear primacy, which would break any attempts to destroy the Russian state from the inside or outside. Schizophrenically however, Biden provoked Russia by supporting Ukrainian attacks on Donbass in an attempt to gain some nuclear leverage on Russia, due to the proximity of Ukraine (specifically Kharkov) to the Russian capital. The idea was, tactical nuclear missiles placed here could nullify much of Russia’s existing nuclear superiority. The Russians were not going to stand idly however, as by this time they had had enough.

On February 23rd, 2022, Russia launched its first intervention since 2008 and invaded Ukraine. The “history” so many claimed had ended, returned.

The New Arms Race and Nuclear Armageddon

With a hot war, provoked and indeed participated in by NATO raging in Ukraine, on August of the year of writing, Russia suspended the final piece of nuclear arms control and left the New START treaty. This left our planet with no treaty limiting the nuclear warheads available to each superpower or allowing a mechanism for them to be monitored. To make matters even more urgent, the US’s most powerful weapon and its source of infinite wealth, the USD, was under a very serious threat. During the last 2 years, the US has put into the money supply 40% of the existing dollars, crashing economies worldwide but shaking confidence in its system. Many countries like Saudi Arabia wanted an out, and utilized their relationship with Russia to put limits on the soft power wielded by the United States that can maintain compellence on policy objectives. Most recently, in response to an attempt to put a “cap” on oil prices, and with the confidence that Russia would stand up to US military machinations, OPEC+ banded together and cut production by two million barrels. Many countries, such as Indonesia, noticed the loss of confidence and began to make they way to the exit doors.

Al Mayadeen English @MayadeenEnglish

#Indonesia aims to ditch the #dollar to reduce #Indonesian financial markets' reliance on the currency amidst the emergence of a multipolar world. #USD

en.mdn.tvBank Indonesia calls against payments in US DollarsBank Indonesia proposes to employ a two-way payment system using national currencies.

The US was displeased, to say the least. To keep its now shaky currency afloat amid all the sanctions, bad economic policies and financial downturns, it had been forced to sell oil from its strategic reserves to buoy the USD and maintain convertibility with this strategic supply and suppress oil prices. At the current rate of consumption, only a year of supply remains, and should the Russian supply of oil to Europe be cut, the remaining reserves would be cut to just six month should the US compensate for it. It is unlikely that the US would allow its reserves to be drained to their limit, as it could even affect its ability to project hard power. Needless to say, time is running out for the NWO model. For the United States, something akin to a nuclear desert storm against Russia, is necessary to dial back the clock and cut down doubt in its system.

US strategic reserves of crude oil

In what can only be called a declaration of total war against Russia, an official US government think tank by the name of the Helsinki Commission, published a plan to “decolonize Russia”, essentially an attempt to repeat the success of cutting up the USSR except for Russia as a whole. Its resources are to be consumed and converted to feed USD convertibility, giving the NWO empire another decade of life. Ukraine’s defense minister, clearly close to the United States, even went one step further and demanded a nuclear first strike against Russia, claiming this would deter it from striking Ukraine with nuclear bombs, should its red lines be crossed. The primary think tank of NATO, the Atlantic Council, took an equally nonsensical approach demanding a nuclear strike against Russia as a scenario that is worth pursuing. It finally came to a head with President Biden claiming we were heading to “Nuclear Armageddon”.

In the background of this alarming rhetoric — much of it merely the tip of a larger ice berg of diplomatic traffic, the president of Russia called for mobilization. This included mobilization of Russia’s industrial capacity. The Russians have successfully created all the weapons systems they need to fight a high-order full scale nuclear war with the aim of winning by virtue of denying the US a second strike capability.

It is important however, to note the sharp contrast of Russia’s first use of nuclear weapons compared to the US. The Russians had two main thresholds upon which they would utilize nuclear weapons. In the latest directive on nuclear deterrence, the main thresholds were:

• Paragraph 4: Serious threats that arise against Russians sovereignty and territorial integrity.

• Paragraph 19: Immediate first use should there be any type of kinetic attack against Russia’s nuclear forces, command and control or any object that threatens the existence of the state.

The Russians had and still have a clear high threshold on first use. But with this comes a consequentially massive use, as by the time the war reaches such a dire situation, a nuclear exchange would be a guaranteed inevitability.

The US however, is not satisfied by such assurances and cannot tolerate nuclear primacy from Russia as it would place the US under the prospect of unpunishable nuclear strikes. In a desperate response to the strategic advantage Russia was rapidly gaining against it, the US is attempted to scale up its manufacturing to catch up but has largely failed to meet the required effort due to the very globalist policies that gave it its power. Under the ideology of the NWO, history was over and the US had won — it had no need for manufacturing or maintenance of its expensive nuclear arsenal. Instead the resources would be spent on the service economy and extending the reach of the empire. With such a weakened stature the new arms race will prove to be far shorter lived than the one we witnessed in the cold war. Left on their own, the Russians along with their new allies, will first achieve nuclear supremacy, and eventually outright conventional military superiority.

Thus, the US has been sending its military arms, emptying out its warehouses of ammunition, sending “recently retired” soldiers, supplying Ukraine with intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR), provisioning the Starlink communication network to Ukraine for uninterruptable command and control, forming large alliances against Russia in the form of NATO and has now begun threatening to strike Russia with nuclear weapons, claiming that Russia itself intends to do the deed first. This is of course in complete contradiction with the two nations’ policies, with the US using nuclear weapons the moment it is “surprised” by battlefield outcomes and Russia only using nuclear weapons when its very existence is threatened.

It is thus unfortunate that actions in the form of terrorist attacks on young female philosophers, destruction of international pipeline infrastructure, destruction of critical transport infrastructure, sanctions and isolation, as well as a Russophobic hate campaign aims to sleep-walk the world into Russia’s threshold by attempting to destroy it from within and throughout. Yet, Russia has not responded with nuclear weapons. Even after being pushed very publicly by NATO mercenaries and Ukrainian soldiers out of Kharkov, Russia has kept its powder dry. These attacks span into Russia itself, and Russia does not currently consider any of them a threat to its existence. It is thus preposterous to even consider the idea that Russia will respond to any battlefield development in Ukraine with the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Russia after all, as we have now understood, is much stronger than it appears to the western news consumer which this propaganda about “Russia using tactical nuclear bombs” is aimed at. The most reasonable analysts of course, agree and instead are watching for preparations for a different kind of nuclear attack.

If this terrorist act by the Kiev regime does not inspire a nuclear attack, nothing in Ukraine will.

In the meantime, the US itself, having lived through the excesses of three decades of domestic peace finds itself divided and cornered. The globalist ideologues blocked many attempts by Trump to reindustrialise, mocking him for trying to save the strategic steel industry, then took credit for it when his reforms started working. When congress attempted to pump tens of billions of dollars into the US chip industry, the money was largely stolen by the chip companies which are facing the prospect of an impending economic apocalypse. Even as European industries are closed up and their steel and aluminium mills freeze, likely never to open ever again, the US is facing internal opposition in its attempts to reindustrialise, with a head of an influential think tank claiming bringing back manufacturing was merely a “fetish” that would “keep white males outside the cities in the powerful positions they are in”. It is thus likely that the US will not be able to bring back manufacturing in time to meet the threat of Russian nuclear supremacy and Chinese conventional dominance.

Matt Stoller @matthewstoller

Another astonishing clip from the Cato Institute event today, this one from the influential Adam Posen, head of the Peterson Institute. He says a focus on domestic manufacturing is simply a “fetish for keeping white males with low education in the powerful positions they are in.”

With all of its internal contradiction boiling to the surface, the US is in an extremely fragile position and seeks to impose its failing new world order by force in light of a resurgent China and Russia. Just a few days ago, the US has declared economic war on China in a move that would not only hurt China but itself. In Ukraine as we have outlined, it has brought the world to the brink of a nuclear war. It is clear that the chosen way forward for the Biden regime is an attempt to commit to a nuclear suicide bombing on the entire planet. If the United States cannot maintain its control, even with all of its contradictions, it threatens to take everyone with it — like a crazed terrorist with a detonator in his hands making demands in a crowded theatre, the threshold for the US is the permanent loss of its new world order empire. Only restoration through complete surrender is enough to satiate the senile imperialists in Washington DC.

We have thankfully not yet crossed either nation’s threshold, yet there is a very unstable situation on the ground that is unfolding very quickly. The US is readying a strategic nuclear exercise, Steadfast Noon, a bad remake of Able Archer 83. Meanwhile, the Russians are building up their forces in Belarus and around Ukraine. As both sides steadily raise their alertness levels, mistakes can be made and accidents can happen. Making things even more precarious, both sides declined to speak to one another.

Most seriously, with complete control over the internet and the mockingbird media, the US is pushing its nonsensical narrative of a Russian tactical nuclear strike and if we are unlucky, the US will create a self-fulfilling prophecy. This will not be in the manner that the US intends, which is for Russia to use nuclear weapons in light of surprising military outcomes in Ukraine. Instead, Russia will strike at the very core of the threat to its existence, which is the United States itself. Ironically, the same Matthew Kroenig who initiated the nuclear narrative against Russia, correctly deduced the intent behind Russia’s new strategic nuclear arms program:

[…] these new nuclear systems may be designed to conduct a decapitation strike against Washington, DC, and/or other decision-making centers. Maneuverable missiles or nuclear submarine drones may be able to strike US leadership and command-and-control targets in the US capital with little or no warning. Such a capability may be valuable in the event of a full-scale war with NATO.

It is only through appreciation of the very high threshold the Russian side has set towards this first and indeed final nuclear option, that we can correctly deduce Russia’s next moves and correctly interpret its high tolerance towards audacious terrorism committed against it. After all, what is in store is not some small tactical nuclear strike on an outhouse in the middle of a swamp in Ukraine, but total nuclear annihilation for the liberal western world and its dying cancer-ridden new world order empire.

Summary

The US came out of the cold war in the 90s wielding the strongest military on Earth, a formidable nuclear force, soft power in the form of a reserve currency and a large unopposed alliance spanning the entire planet. Through many wars and technological advancements, the US remained at the peak of its soft power, being able to fund wars and covertly change governments around the world as it pleased. To its great detriment, the US has been in a steady decline, resting on the laurels of its past victory and throwing away its industrial power. Making matters worse for the US, the kind of war it envisioned fighting, with tactical nuclear weapons held out against smaller nations that oppose it, has not eventuated. Internal struggles prevented any appreciable modernisation of the United States military or any move towards reindustrialisation after the China shock.

Instead, the US faces a resurrected Russian Federation in the 2020s, wielding generationally superior nuclear weapons and the potential to deny the US a second strike capability. The Russian nation had seemingly died, only to be resurrected 3 decades later in what can only be called a miracle from God. The Russians are also gradually eroding the US ability to influence events in other nations, saving Syria from regime change resulting in the culmination of the US empire’s growth and recently backing Saudi Arabia’s opposition to US proposed oil price caps. This situation that threatens the USD underpins the entire model of US hegemony. It unfortunately seems the US is not content with merely decaying away but will try and bring the world down with it.

It’s most important to reflect the asymmetry that arouse from the two nation’s strategies, with the US focused on tactical nuclear bombs that they perceive to be more “usable” in battle due to their low-yield and high precision, while the Russians focus on very large yields, extreme performance of delivery systems and eventual nuclear primacy. While the US is willing to use nuclear bombs to achieve victory and maintain its hegemony, as not to be “surprised” in battle, the Russians recuse themselves from a nuclear war until their very existence is threatened, upon which they will most likely carry out a strategic launch against the that core of what threatens them.

War Scenarios

We now leave the past and present and focus on our real interest: the future. In each of these scenarios, hypothetical events take place and elements of the nuclear capabilities and policies make themselves known. It’s almost certain that none of these scenarios will take place, as the listed scenarios are not exhaustive in breadth.

These scenarios aim to help the reader appreciate the two sides and also generate their own scenarios. By exploring these hypothetical situations, we may discover dangers, or even find a way to break the cycle of escalation and resolve the problem between the two asymmetric superpowers.

Scenario A: Détente and Multipolar Rebalancing

Despite many attempts to provoke Russia into going into war, the Russia side continues to play it slow in Ukraine, taking areas in the north and withdrawing from areas that allow it to stage a small footprint. The Russians intend not to give the US a large target for any kind of nuclear false flag, which would ultimately be pinned on the Russians via US media control. As the US gets frustrated by Russian inaction and high tolerance for its terrorist antics, it watches in horror as its allies begin to literally freeze, with Germany and France pulling out of the fight first and the rest of the minor allies around Europe including Italy, pulling out soon afterwards. Even without any prospect of receiving any additional energy from Russia, these countries decide not to risk internal riots and back off from public, expensive and visible support for Ukraine.

This leaves only the US, the UK and Poland as the tip of the spear against Russia. As the so-called “third world” turns against the US, it sees the reality of the NWO crumbling under its feet. Having lost the midterms in the November 2022 elections due to an economic collapse and soaring gas prices, the Biden regime itself finally taps out as civil war was only around the corner. Choosing to promote a white peace with Russia, Biden offers to pull out of Syria in trade for Russia freezing its war in Ukraine and returning to the status quo of a gray zone between NATO and Russia. This does not satisfy Russia who demands complete denuclearisation, demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine and independence for Kharkov. In return, Russia will look past all the terrorist attacks against it and the loss in material it suffered through three decades of US imperialism — and scale back its acceleration towards nuclear primacy, signing back onto a new arms treaty that takes into account the rise of new technologies. Though neither party is completely satisfied with the solutions, a more stable balance is achieved and the deal opens the door for a broader grand deal pertaining to the forging of a new security and financial world order.

The three sides, the US, China and Russia hold a peace conference, burying the hatchet of economic and nuclear war. Lines with spheres of influence are drawn around the world and a new, seemingly fairer UN is created. The USD, with its lost reserve status and now severely devalued, merely becomes one component of a basket of currencies. These are eventually backed by tangible national produce, removing the strangulating control of finance and returning it into manufacturers hands. The US resolves its internal contradictions by scaling back the mockingbird media, allowing enterprises to breath some air and flourish. With its rich base of resources and retaining core alliances, the US can easily weather the storm of its own making.

Though the USSR’s hard borders visibly shrunk after it collapsed, the US’s soft borders are not so clear, but definitely collapse. Rejection of degeneracy and return to faith takes the world by storm, and even empowers the faithful within the US. A resurgence of Christianity in the United States stands opposed to the atheistic coastal elite, who decide to bid their time by scaling back their excesses. The struggle of economic collapse is eventually overcome through work ethics and a positive outlook for the future — as well as help from a surprising party. Neither Russia, nor China want to see the US fall, as it serves as a balance between the two sides, and both offer it favorable deals in an attempt to buy influence there.

Though the US empire will never see a new America century now, it will participate in a new century in which it still has a chance to forge a path forward for humanity towards the stars.

Scenario Likelihood: Unlikely, due to heavy ideological biases and extreme ambitions on the US side. This scenario seemingly favors China and Russia but is the most peaceful end to this conflict and in the end creates three, somewhat equally strong sides. The US has an insatiable thirst for dominance and will continue to create hybrid threats for Russia until the latter party decides a line has been crossed, or an accident happens. Proactive measures would need to be committed by the populace of the US to counter the mockingbird media and bring their regime to heel for their own interest.

Lessons learnt: Through patience, a crumbling giant will eventually fall on its own large footprint. By waiting for the United States to come to it asking for peace, the Russians can achieve a major, but not total, victory while avoiding the unknown outcome of a destructive nuclear war. At the same time, too much patience will cause a breakout of a conflict, thus this scenario is not achievable through maintenance of the current equilibrium.

Scenario B: US Nuclear-Use Breakout

Continuing on its path to defeat Russia in Ukraine at all costs, the US sets up a two pronged strategy, attacking areas around Ukraine covertly using NATO’s rapid response group sandwiched around Ukrainian battalions. The ultimatum to Russia is straightforward: retreat and do not confront us, or we will strike you with nuclear weapons on the battlefield. When the Russians call what they thought was a bluff, defeat these formations with force, a tactical nuclear missile will be launched on the victorious Russian troops. The US had prepared for this earlier, using a non-serially produced ATACMS Block III missile, with a Mk4 reentry vehicle carrying a W76-2 5kT tactical nuclear warhead. Russian air defense is initially overwhelmed with HiMARS launched MLRS attacks saturating the field, allowing several ATACMS missiles to slip through the defense with one carrying the nuclear warhead. With a mushroom cloud visible over the horizon, hundreds to a thousand Russian troops die and are wounded by this attack. The US had targeting a largely open field and intended the attack to be just under what the US perceives to be Russia’s nuclear threshold — the Russians strategic nuclear forces, as the US predicted, stand down.

NATO immediately presented the nuclear attack as a Russian tactical nuclear strike to the world, carried out on victorious Ukrainian forces. Some internet sleuths immediately realized that, due to a mistake on the part of the CIA-linked media outlets, the nuclear attack was announced even before the attack took place. These people were immediately censored online, having all of their accounts banned simultaneously and even losing access to their bank accounts. To clean up the damage, “fact checkers” created a narrative to tie up all the loose ends.

The western world, and a few parts of the “third world” were convinced: Russia had carried out a nuclear attack, the genie was out of the bottle. The US called on a UNGA to gather and remove Russia from the UN altogether, and specifically remove its permanent seat on the UNSC. Though the UNGA does not have such a power normally, there is a controversial provision called “Uniting for peace” which was used earlier in the year of 2022 for the conflict in Ukraine, allowing the UNGA to override the UNSC. The Russians find themselves out in the street, outside of the UNSC now with no economic or diplomatic links to any major member state after wholesale sanctions are also passed on it the same day.

The US using back channels, tells Russia it is now willing to freeze the lines in Ukraine as they are. The Russians, in complete shock, accept the offer and NATO begins to pull out, put on a blue hat and become UN troops now assigned to the final demarcation line in Ukraine. Russia has been severely cut down to size and isolated diplomatically and economically.

The US declares a change to its nuclear posture, in light of what it presented to the world as Russia’s attack. It claims that now that Russia has created a precedent, it has no choice but to employ tactical nuclear weapons as part of its arsenal in order to resolve conflicts around the world, so that no one else would think of using them themselves. Though this is clearly nonsense, the world complies and shakes in fear from the US, now more powerful than ever and willing to use nuclear weapons on small states.

The US immediately uses its new powers and a far lowered threshold to resolve frozen conflicts in its favor. The “end of history” crowd is celebrated as being right, with tactical nuclear weapons being far more useful than strategic nuclear forces. It starts first in Syria, asking Assad to step down or face an immediate tactical nuclear strike. Seeing Russia fold in Ukraine, Assad complies. The US then brings the same threat to Yemen, which does not comply, and is then attacked using nuclear weapons in several locations to bring the Houthis to heel. They eventually surrender in order to protect the civilians in the areas they control.

If you fool enough Americans with Jingoism and hatred towards a target, it is easy to have them celebrate what they would otherwise consider crimes.

The US then moves to dominate Iran and then parts of Africa using the same nuclear threats, now taken as a normal kind of attack by the US public, high on victory against Russia and in the middle east. The Chinese isolate and build up a nuclear program like Russia, while Russia bids its time to eventually rid the world of the nuclear monster it had created with its absent minded overly conservative decision making.

The US though has other plans. The US begins to transfer nuclear warheads to Ukraine, in compact form, to be snuck into important locations around Russia. These would be nuclear storage sites, important industrial areas and political decision making centers. Russia’s greatly weakened internal state allows many of these devices to slip through undetected.

After carrying out a demonstration strike using nuclear terrorism inside Russia, blamed on Ukrainians hungry for revenge, the Americans contact the Russians one final time and ask it for an unconditional surrender as its security has been compromised and nuclear bombs have been planted all over the nation. The US demands are nothing short of “decolonisation”, a total breakup of Russia. The Kremlin gets together one last time and makes their final decision.

Scenario Likelihood: Possible, parts are even probable. Though it is unlikely that the Russians would back off from such an attack, this is probably the operational plan of NATO as it is being led by the US. The obsession with tactical nuclear weapons of low-yield cannot be explained in any other manner than the intended use of these weapons for political and perhaps even covert purposes.

Lessons learnt: It’s important to have a high threshold on the use of nuclear weapons, accidents can happen and no defense is perfect. Nevertheless, failing to use them when it is called for can create an absolute nightmare for the planet. Sometimes, a rotten peace is far worse than a justified war.

Scenario C: Russian Surprise Nuclear Strike

The US continues to attack Russia inside Ukraine using a NATO force comprised of “recently retired” US soldiers alongside barely hidden Polish soldiers acting as mercenaries. Working on its success in Kharkov, and ignoring the partial decapitation strikes undertaken against the decision making centers in Kiev, the US launches a massive attack on Kherson.

The Russians, are able to fight back the very large attack at first, but immediately begin to evacuate the territory and also the city. The Russians are told to buy as much time as possible without confronting NATO directly and without triggering the US’s nuclear ultimatum.

Russia in turn launches probing attacks across the border of Ukraine from Kiev to Kharkov, a large frontline is opened, forcing NATO to commit even more troops (and more openly) in Ukraine. Russia also decapitates the Ukrainian regime further after several callous terrorist attacks are carried out around Russia cities while this battle unfolds. To the surprise of many people, this battle goes on to the spring of 2023. The Russians finally concede the city of Kherson, seemingly defeated in Ukraine, but hold on to Energodar and keep a defensive line across Crimea. By this time, much of Kiev is in ruins and the Russian army is still carefully keeping a small footprint in every area. Back at home, Russia announces a total war economy, provisioning a huge amount of resources for military production.

Nevertheless, the loss of Kherson and failure to contain the situation puts Putin under sharp criticism. The horrific images of civilians left behind in Kherson being brutally murdered by Ukrainian nazis was too much for Russians to bear. For the sake of the unity of the Russian Federation Putin resigns, handing control over to Medvedev, a hawk who advocated for much harsher measures against the west. Needless to say, this was largely a cosmetic measure as both men already shared control of the Russian decision making council, but the move is advertised as defeat by the mockingbird media, and proof that Russia was being thrown back in Ukraine.

High on its appearance of a victory, the US attempts to lure Medvedev into a false détente and draws up an IAEA deal to post UN “blue helmets” around the perimeter of Energodar. The plan is to covertly allow Ukraine to grab the nuclear facility and hold the entire region under the threat of a nuclear meltdown. Russia refuses. Instead Medvedev reinforces the frontline south of the Dnieper river. The war continued for another year and many months, with higher casualties and a far more concerned Russian public as even a change of leadership did not move the tides of the war. In retaliation for the continued war, Russia pulls its diplomats from western nations and recalls its citizens.

At home, the time had almost come. The US, the UK and NATO did not realise it, but Russia’s red line had already been crossed and the necessary decisions have all already been made. The only thing the Russians needed was time, time to plan and gather the necessary military resources to carry out the next phase of the war which will be outside Ukraine — and upon NATO itself.

Months pass and one day in the spring of 2025, Medvedev makes an unexpected call to Macron, with the details of the conversation kept secret but with the topic being an offer for peace. The US declines, happy with the status quo and busy planning the next phase. A few nights later, 2 AM Washington DC time, a CME passes the earth seemingly interfering with satellite communication… but technicians are puzzled as they never seemed to return back to their online status.

“I’m sorry Vladimir, it had to be done.”

Little did they realize, thousands of nuclear tipped Russian hypersonic missiles in the form of Kinzhals, Zircons and Avanguard, launched from jets and other platforms were making their way towards them. Before anyone can even anticipate it, the missiles strike NATO, NORAD and the US, with the targets being every decision center such as the Pentagon (with a low yield warheads) and most land nuclear silo facilities and ABM defenses, air bases, with only the executive branch being spared from direct decapitation. Simultaneously, many posted British and nuclear submarine are sunk by nuclear torpedoes.

Nevertheless, much of NATO survives. At this point, the civilian toll of these strikes were minimal, not even numbering in the 10s of thousands. But as protocol called for it, not wanting to face an enforced peace, NATO launches a second strike on Russia with hundreds of remaining nuclear warheads. Unfortunately for them, the Russians had spent the last two decades saturating their ABM defenses.

Almost every single missile launched at Russia is defeated. The cruise missiles launched from remaining ABM sites which double as cruise missile launchers are shot down by S-300 and S-400 missiles, posted in the hundreds around Russia’s perimeter. Silo-based missiles and Submarine launched ballistic missiles entering the stratosphere are shot down by S-550 missiles, before the MIRV warhead even deploys, destroying multiple nuclear missiles at the same time. When all else fails, the S-500 destroys REVs carrying nuclear warheads before they even land. In order to stop the launch of further missiles, NATO surface ships near Russia are destroyed through a large array of antiship missiles, in very short order.

Despite this valiant effort, Moscow and other cities around Russia do take a tens of hits by 100kT W76 warheads as well as a few hits from nuclear cruise missiles, with the total casualties being in the million to two million range. Fortunately, most of the civilians were already removed to bunkers nights before without detection helping to lower the overall tolls. With the curious exception of France which largely was left out of the fight and whose submarines never left their docks, NATO was not so lucky however. The Russian second strike finally arrive on NATO cities delivering total annihilation and destruction of NATO’s industrial base and ability to conduct war. Airports, ports and other facilities are completely destroyed. The casualties are unimaginably high numbering hundreds of megadeaths.

NATO however, is still undeterred and retains some command and control, with many refueling jets having survived the initial attack and jets armed with B61 and B83s on their way to Russia. They never make it however, being shotdown by Russian R37M beyond visual range, as well as the tight net of S-400 and S-300 A2AD.

In order to spare the world even more destruction and to demonstrate the folly of the continued war, Russia deploys two of its Poseidon nuclear torpedoes carrying a 200MT warhead near the eastern and western coastline of England. This creates two catastrophic 500 meter tall radioactive tsunamis which rips its way through the entire British island, killing two thirds of the population with the survivors largely being in the north and the countrysides. Even the underground bunkers housing the elite are drowned in radioactive water, despite the claims of being hermetically sealed. In the large cities, there are zero survivors and the land would be unusable for a century to come.

The Russian get in touch with the surviving executive class in the US and broadcast the destruction to them. It is then made known that countless of such torpedoes are posted around every coastline and a short time will be granted for a decision to be made. Facing the prospect of total annihilation by a weapon they have no response to, the elite in the US finally agree to a ceasefire and start negotiating surrender terms to Russia.

The world is horrified by this attack with many people shocked that Russia would carry out such a “barbaric strike”. An entire nation is erased from the planet in the span of minutes. The Russians themselves remorsefully ask for forgiveness and remind the world the pain and suffering the endured in order to survive. Having been attacked by the western world for hundreds of years and having suffered forty million casualties by western European hands in the second world war, Russia was not going to allow itself to bear the brunt of the world’s criminality one more time. Many understood, but also many understandably would live on to hold a grudge until the rest of their lives.

With NATO and the US gone as superpowers, their survivors attempt to rebuild and repair what can be salvaged. Russia, feeling remorseful, lends as big a hand as it can to the United States. China follows suit and the two compete for influence. The danger to the world was now seen as a potential conflict between two former friends and now primary superpowers, China and Russia. Many wished they had adopted the multipolar world solution at this point, but what was done was done and the people could only dream of a different world with tears in their eyes for what was lost.

Scenario Likelihood: Possible and likely. There is no telling when the Russians will attack and where their thresholds are. The more time that passes by in this conflict, the more likely the Russians will feel ready for this final option.

Lessons learnt: Recency bias can afflict the best of us. Watching Russia take blow after blow, it is very easy for people to dismiss it as a party that is bluffing. Nevertheless, we already learnt this wasn’t the case when Russia launched an invasion of Ukraine after claiming for days it had no intention to. Today, it tells us a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be launched. Why then, does it build exactly the weapons that would allow it to win such a war?

On the other end of the spectrum, the US is clearly in no mood to allow its empire to collapse, and has offered no diplomatic route for Russia to resolve the problem. Its constant threats to use nuclear weapons against Russia, disguised as concern for Russian nuclear use, will eventually leave Russians no choice but to destroy the United States and NATO in the span of just a few hours. When the attack happens contingencies must be in place to try and find a solution which spares the lives of civilians, as painful as defeat can be.

Scenario D: Human Extinction on Planet Earth’s Surface

Plays as scenario C, however, this time, through extreme pressure NATO takes Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) in Energodar, with the Russians being completely surprised by the development. Knowing NATO can now hold the entire region under nuclear blackmail, Russia does not stand down and continues to fight for control over the plant. In the ensuing conflict, a mistake happens and the plant has a meltdown and detonates catastrophically, contaminating much of Donbass, Europe and parts of Russia. Unlike scenario C however, this violates a deep red line for the Russians, as parts of its territory are now rendered exclusion zones much like Chernobyl. NATO did not mean to do this, but perhaps the Ukrainian nazis did, panic began to take hold and frantic calls to Moscow were made.

The calls were to no avail however. The soil was gone, the people affected were contaminated. The war in Ukraine was essentially lost by default, but there was nothing NATO could do to pay Russia back for what it had done. The UK nevertheless, could not help itself and blamed the ZNPP meltdown on Russia — the Russians were in no mood to argue. The contamination of one nuclear power plant creates more radioactive fallout than a complete nuclear war given in scenario C so any concern about habitat as rendered nil.

With quick preparation of their population and filling underground shelters, Russians begin their punitive retaliatory strikes with the aim of annihilating rather than defeating NATO almost immediately. To demonstrate the full depth of its resolve, a similar number of nuclear power plants make it to the target list with the aim of rendering an equal part of NATO an uninhabitable wasteland. Though not fully prepared to strike, Russia launches everything it can while with poorer performance in comparison to scenario C due to the lack of provisioned missiles and defenses for the attack.

The deaths on NATO numbered in the 100s of megadeaths and 10s of megadeaths on the Russian side thanks to its sparsity. This was nevertheless a complete disaster for Russia. NATO also followed suite and attacked Russia’s nuclear power plants. The war does not end, and is protracted over years with both sides suddenly attacking targets on the surface with nuclear bombs and no attempt at resolving the problem or taking ownership of the disaster being foreseeable.

Gradually with the protracted nuclear war and stalemate, the surface of the Earth is rendered inhospitable to human life, and in any case many remaining peaceful cities in the east would suddenly explode thanks to NATO’s tactical nuclear weapon doctrine. The remaining think tanks, now deep underground, had developed a new theory of US hegemony based on retaking the surface exclusively and repairing it using “AI-driven radiation consuming biology” and other hyped technologies. In reality, they were doing what they do best, retaining power for themselves and keeping humans fighting an unwinnable war for them.

Gradually, humanity disappears from the surface of the planet and the two sides sink back underground for centuries and perhaps millennia to come, having destroyed an irreplaceable home for their progeny. There was only one way forward, the search for a new home planet, but with so many resources destroyed it would prove to be an even more impossible dream than it is today.

Scenario Likelihood: Unlikely but extremely risky. As extreme as this scenario is, it’s important to understand the stakes by keeping the worst case scenario in mind.

Lessons learnt: No matter how bad things are, certain laws must be followed. No nuclear plant should ever be targeted in a nuclear war, no matter what opportune target is near it. The Kiev regime must be removed for its continual attacks on ZNPP and NATO must be made aware of the consequences that should arise should any of these attacks be successful, as unlikely as that might be.

This scenario must be made impossible by policy and decision-makers. World wide protests must be held asking NATO to back off and for Russia to increase security around the plant as well as to build a buffer around it even if Ukraine is now required to concede territory to make that possible. Ukraine has shown itself to be too barbaric to handle ownership of a nuclear power plant and thus requires regime change, many in DC are likely already aware of this, even if it plays to their current advantage.

Scenario U: Your Scenario

It’s quite likely that none of the above scenarios will take place, but perhaps we will be lucky or unlucky to see elements of them. Now it is your turn to think of a scenario, its likelihood and the lessons we can learn from it.

Can you find a way to get the world out of this dangerous deadlock? Can you satisfy the Russian pursuit for security of its homeland while avoiding the bloodlust of a dying US empire? Can you keep the nuclear genie contained without paradoxically inviting a nuclear attack and eventual worldwide blackmail? Can you do it fast enough to avoid a nuclear primacy scenario? Can you save the planet for our species who requires its habitat to exist in this universe?

The stakes are high, but all the priors have been laid out for you, complete with detailed reference hyperlinks so that no one can disagree with the facts and leaving little room for interpretation. Except of course, by ideologues who you must unfortunately take into account in your scenario.

You will be surprised, at how quickly just thinking through this conflict with hard facts can wake people up to both the dangers of the situations and the opportunity to live in a different and safer world. I wish I had a solution myself, but I don’t, yet the more this article spreads and the more people give it feedback especially in the comments, the greater the chance that one of us will have a solution. Do not underestimate the depth of the human mind, and please do not procrastinate over this as time is short and the end of the conflict is near. Share your scenario in the comments below or on any other platform you wish. You have my permission to copy this article as long as it is copied verbatim.

Conclusion

Just as the cold war ended in peace breaking out and a “new world order”, this conflict may soon come to a conclusion of its own. Whether it ends peacefully like it did before, or in war, is yet to be determined. The US’s geostrategy require complete compliance from nations, through covert and overt means. Should the nuclear genie be released from its bottle, it is possible that the US will also use nuclear blackmail against small nations to reestablish itself as a center of power and gain a new American century. It is also possible that a catastrophic nuclear war would be the end result, and indeed the end of our species.

Either way, the future is unwritten and the best thing we can do is to talk about it to each other with a realistic view of the situation, not distorted propaganda. In the end, we are going to have to act if we want to live in a different world. If enough people come to their senses we can move towards more ideas that can actually help bring this thing to an end.

1. Amusingly they correctly called for the cancellation of what became the F-35 and stated that “[The F-35] would absorb exorbitant amounts of Pentagon funding while providing limited improvements to current capabilities. Savings from these canceled programs should be used to spur the process of military transformation”

2. Albeit, the THAAD program had a much better showing.