Nobody interested in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

Post Reply New Topic

Russian President Vladimir Putin formally lowered the threshold for his country's use of nuclear weapons Tuesday, days after the United States allowed Ukraine to strike inside Russia using American missiles.

The Kremlin announced that Putin had approved an updated nuclear doctrine — a document that governs how Russia uses its nuclear arsenal — including the declaration that Moscow could unleash a nuclear strike if subject to an attack by a non-nuclear country that has the support of a nuclear state.

“The nuclear doctrine update was required to bring the document in line with the current political situation,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told the TASS state news agency in comments published early Tuesday.

Peskov outlined Moscow's new threat in light of Washington's shift in policy: That the use of Western non-nuclear missiles by Ukraine's military against Russia under the new doctrine could lead to a nuclear response.

The changes had been formulated and will be formalized as necessary, he said. Still, the use of nuclear weapons would be a “last resort measure,” he added.

The changes mark the most significant saber rattling yet by the Kremlin, which has consistently warned about possible nuclear war throughout the now 1,000 days since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Putin had signaled the update to his country’s policy earlier this year as he sought to warn the West against loosening restrictions on Kyiv's use of long-range weapons to strike deep inside Russia.

Russia also reserved the rise to use the weapons even if Belarus was attacked, he said then. And the new doctrine matches that shift.

"Aggression against the Russian Federation and its allies by a non-nuclear country with the support of a nuclear state will be considered a joint attack," it reads.

The doctrine also says that “The Russian Federation may use nuclear weapons in the event of a critical threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of itself and Belarus,” a shift from previous language that said it may use nuclear weapons “when the very existence of the state is at risk.”

The changes follow Putin's warning to the U.S. and its NATO allies that any use of their long-range weapons supplied to the Ukrainians against Russian territory would mean NATO and Russia are at war.

But after the U.S. and others said that thousands of North Korean troops had joined the fight alongside the Kremlin's military, U.S. officials told NBC News that the Biden administration had relaxed restrictions on the missile systems it has supplied to its ally, authorizing use of the long-range ATACMS missile systems for limited strikes in Russia's Kursk border region.

Anyone have any insight into what Biden is doing here? Why is he making these decisions now? First the missiles, now the landmines. After years of resisting these things. I don't get it. It seems to me like the kind of decisions you'd make when Russia had been weakened in some way but with Trump incoming Russia seems to have the upper hand atm.

Given Biden’s cognitive decline I wonder who is making these decisions.

Anyone have any insight into what Biden is doing here? Why is he making these decisions now? First the missiles, now the landmines. After years of resisting these things. I don't get it. It seems to me like the kind of decisions you'd make when Russia had been weakened in some way but with Trump incoming Russia seems to have the upper hand atm.

Anyone have any insight into what Biden is doing here? Why is he making these decisions now? First the missiles, now the landmines. After years of resisting these things. I don't get it. It seems to me like the kind of decisions you'd make when Russia had been weakened in some way but with Trump incoming Russia seems to have the upper hand atm.

So , lots of advisors to help the President decide ? this is usually referred to as his cabinet , i think?
Now he is oavking those positions and homeland security and the head of the CI A. with his cronies( Yes Men).
People whom in wanting to keep their jobs will , A- ss kiss this President . So am not sure how unbiased his advisors will be ..?

( All Hail Trump) ....written with a eye towards extreme sarcasm.

In a stark warning to Western countries arming Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday he ordered an attack on Ukraine with a new intermediate-range ballistic missile in response to Ukraine’s firing U.S.- and British-supplied longer-range weapons to hit targets inside Russia.

Putin said in a televised address that the strike was a “test” of a new weapon and that Russia reserved the right to strike at countries that provide weapons to Ukraine for attacks on Russian territory.

Deputy Defense Department press secretary Sabrina Singh told reporters that the missile was a new, experimental type of intermediate-range ballistic missile based on the design of the RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile.

“This was a new type of lethal capability that was deployed on the battlefield, so that was certainly of concern,” Singh said.

Russia notified U.S. officials about the imminent attack, using nuclear risk reduction communication channels, she said. The missile can carry a conventional or a nuclear warhead.

In his speech, Putin warned countries sending weapons to Ukraine that Russia could target them, too.

“We believe that we have the right to use our weapons against military facilities of the countries that allow to use their weapons against our facilities,” Putin said, according to The Associated Press.

Russia has plenty of other less-sophisticated weapons that could have hit targets in eastern Ukraine without drawing on its strategic arsenal. By using an intermediate-range missile, a weapon able to strike far beyond Ukraine and can carry a nuclear warhead, Moscow was sending a warning signal to Ukraine, Washington and other NATO states, analysts said.

Intermediate-range ballistic missiles have a range of less than 3,500 miles. Intercontinental ballistic missiles, which have a larger range of over 3,500 miles, were developed during the Cold War by both the Soviet Union and the U.S. as part of each side’s nuclear arsenal.

Biden administration officials briefed Ukraine and other allies in recent days about Russia’s possibly using the new weapon to help them prepare, according to a U.S. official.

But the U.S. official said Russia would not be able to bully Ukraine, the U.S. or other countries helping Kyiv fend off invading Russian forces.

“Russia may be seeking to use this capability to try to intimidate Ukraine and its supporters or generate attention in the information space, but it will not be a game changer in this conflict,” the U.S. official said.

The administration will continue to send air defense systems, ammunition and other military hardware to Ukraine through the end of President Joe Biden’s term, officials said.

The news comes as Ukrainian forces used their first long-range U.S. and British missiles to strike Russian soil after Washington and its allies lifted restrictions on Kyiv — a move that Moscow had long warned would be met with a significant response.

’Using Ukraine as a training ground'
Earlier Thursday, Ukraine accused Moscow of launching an ICBM at the eastern city of Dnipro in an overnight attack, which would have been the first recorded use of an ICBM in an active conflict and the latest escalation by the Kremlin.

But a U.S. official disputed that account, and then Putin himself came out and identified the weapon as an intermediate-range ballistic missile.

Ultimately, analysts say, the likelihood of the Kremlin’s opting to use nuclear weapons in its war with Ukraine is very slim — particularly now, when its military is advancing and its opponent is worn down.

Russian forces have seized the momentum in recent months and eked out a succession of territorial gains, particularly on the eastern front lines. They have also been bolstered by thousands of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's troops in their quest to retake occupied land in Russia's Kursk border region.

The West’s relaxing restrictions on Ukraine's use of long-range weapons may boost Kyiv, but it is likely do little to transform the battlefield situation, analysts said, despite the dire nature of the Kremlin's rhetorical reaction.

“At this stage in the war, the risk of Russian nuclear use is lower than before. Political and battlefield developments favor Russia, so there is little to gain by escalating the conflict to the nuclear level,” said Alexander Bollfrass, head of strategy, technology and arms control at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank.

In addition to the unclear military benefits of deploying those weapons, there would also be diplomatic drawbacks.

“Nuclear weapons use would risk alienating China and other non-Western countries whose support or neutrality is key to maintaining the Russian war economy,” Bollfrass said in an email Wednesday. “It would also get the relationship with the incoming Trump administration off to a very dangerous start.”

A senior Russian general was killed in a bomb blast in a residential neighborhood in Moscow, Russian media reported early Tuesday, in what Ukrainian sources told ABC News was an intelligence operation.

Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov was killed by an explosive device that appears to have been hidden in a parked scooter and set off by remote control, Russian state-affiliated media TASS reported. The explosion also killed an aide accompanying him.

Kirillov was the head of Russia's radiation, chemical and biological protection troops. Sources told ABC News that the Security Service of Ukraine was behind the killing. Kirillov is the most senior Russian military official assassinated by Ukraine.

"Kirillov was a war criminal and an entirely legitimate target, as he issued orders to use prohibited chemical weapons against Ukrainian troops," an SBU source said. "Such an inglorious end awaits all those who kill Ukrainians. Retribution for war crimes is inevitable" the source said.

An SBU source provided ABC News with a video of the attack filmed from what appears to be a nearby vehicle.

"The footage shows Gen. Kirillov and his aide exiting a building, with the infamous scooter standing nearby," the source said. "The moment they enter the blast zone of the explosive device, the scooter is blown into the air, delivering a 'verdict' to the war criminal."

On Monday, the SBU charged Kirillov in absentia with war crimes for alleged orders approving chemical weapon use against Ukrainian troops.

Kirillov, the SBU said on Telegram, "is responsible for the mass use of banned chemical weapons" on the Ukrainian front lines.

"By order of Kirillov, more than 4,800 cases of the enemy's use of chemical munitions have been recorded since the beginning of the full-scale war," the SBU said.

Among the delivery methods, the SBU said, were grenades equipped with toxic substances like CS and CN irritants.

Kirillov was known for making allegations against Ukraine's foreign partners. The British Foreign Ministry in October described the general as a "significant mouthpiece for Kremlin disinformation, spreading lies to mask Russia’s shameful and dangerous behavior."

Among Kirillov's claims were that the U.S. had built biological weapons laboratories in Ukraine, which was one of the many allegations used by the Kremlin to justify the 2022 full-scale invasion of the country. Kirillov also alleged that the U.S. helped Ukraine develop drone-launched "infected mosquitos."

Kirillov repeatedly suggested Kyiv was seeking nuclear escalation. He claimed that Ukraine was building a nuclear "dirty bomb" and this year suggested Kyiv's incursion into Russia's western Kursk region was intended to seize a nuclear power plant there.

Troll Farms and Botnets
One of the most prominent aspects of Russian information
campaigning in Western public consciousness is the ubiquitous activities
of trolls (online personae run by humans) and bots (run by automated
processes), interacting directly with readerships in a range of media. 135 A
substantial body of research on Russian troll campaigns has developed in
the West since early 2014, some of which is listed in “Further Reading”
below.
These false accounts can pose as authoritative information sources,
redistributing disinformation from sock puppet media outlets. But in
addition to this use of trolling as a direct injection method, the effect
can also on occasion be subtle and indirect, and contribute to the aim
described above of establishing a permissive environment. This can be
achieved by diverting or suppressing any debate that runs counter to
the Russian version of events, and thus creating an atmosphere and an
impression of consensus, rather than pushing specific disinformation
or narratives. 136 In addition, on occasion the intent of online trolling
can be indistinguishable from the original (internet) meaning of the
word – simply provoking argument and confusion. As described in one
Ukrainian study, “it is important to keep in mind that arguments with a
troll are not really discussions with a real person but with a virtual image
created specifically to sow discord.” 137 This remains true whether the troll
is acting on behalf of Moscow or not.
Factors like these leave mainstream media unsure as to whether the
sway of opinion reflected in their correspondence or comments pages is
genuine and should be publicised, reported or reflected in editorial lines.
Despite widespread experience of the hostile attentions of the Russian
social media armies over the course of more than a year, some sections of
the Western media require constant reminders of their intent and their
effect.138
This persistent amnesia also augments the effectiveness of troll and
bot intimidation of journalists, researchers and authors who are critical
of Moscow. Once their work is considered sufficiently important or
influential to pose a risk of discrediting Russia, they are subjected to a
broad campaign of harassment and intimidation of which troll and bots
constitute an integral part. The result is that writing about Russia entails
either compromise, or a significant degree of personal, reputational,
financial and social risk. While there are individuals who take this risk,
suffer the consequences and continue to write, others entirely blamelessly
decide that too much is at stake and retreat. This chilling effect represents
a victory for Russian information campaigning.139
The origins of what is casually referred to as the “Kremlin Troll
Army” can be traced to prototypes like the short-lived “Kremlin School
of Bloggers” in the last decade, which pre-dated today’s broad uptake