Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Tuesday said that statements made to the media by anonymous Pentagon officials amount to threats against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s life.
“There are some ‘anonymous officials’ from the Pentagon who have actually enunciated threats to deliver a ‘decapitating strike’ on the Kremlin, which is in fact an assassination threat against the Russian president,” Lavrov said, according to the Russian news agency TASS.
Lavrov appeared to be referring to a report from Newsweek that was published in September that cited anonymous US military sources who said the US was considering a “decapitation strike to kill Putin in the heart of the Kremlin” in response to the Russian leader’s warning that he could use nuclear weapons to defend Russia’s “territorial integrity.”
It’s not clear from the context if the unnamed sources meant the assassination plot was being considered as a potential response to Russia using nuclear weapons or if it could happen before that. Either way, US military officials discussing such a plan is extremely provocative, even if they’re speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Lavrov’s comments came after Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said the only way the war in Ukraine would end is if Russia “breaks” and someone “takes Putin out.” The Russian diplomat didn’t mention Graham’s remarks but said Western powers want to destroy Russia.
“It is no secret to anyone that the strategic goal of the United States and its NATO allies is to defeat Russia on the battlefield as a mechanism for significantly weakening or even destroying our country,” Lavrov said.
“How to win friends and influence enemies….”
US: “How to make enemies and lose influence.”
“Anonymity?”….. Why not sound the trumpets?….Lavrov makes some good points.
Imagine progressive democrats and their president are able to murder Putin;
Russia and its new President, Sergey Lavrov will be a pushover compared to Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam and Korea.
Some how i doubt that.
I have to say Garrett, I’m not so sure about that… Russia is a super power just like the US is and that paints a much bleaker scenario because we are talking about nuclear armed super powers…
I agree with you, Donna. My point is; If US officials don’t think Russia is a pushover why are they attacking it before they attack China and Iran?
I see.
I’m thinking sarcasm again.
Maybe I should keep it to myself.
Keep it up a-holes… If Russia really feels this way, they could launch an attack just because they feel threatened…
Wars can easily get started this way…
I have no desire to get my beautiful a– nuked over stupidity.
My own is a little on the small side; I have slim hips and long slender legs. But what the Goddess forgot to give me in back, she more than made up for in front, if you get my drift 😉
So, Donna, I have no intention of getting my “girls” nuked 😁
Well said fair Gypsy!
☺️
Lindsey Graham is a pawn and moral moron. I think those “in power” believe they are the elect, who will be swept up into a heaven with perhaps not 70 virgins, but harps, angels, and gold shoes, when the “rapture” of nuclear war occurs. They could care less about the rest of us.
The Israeli poet Itamar Yaoz-Kest wrote about this, “And yet, there is a right reserved only to us [Ashkenazim] (if indeed any human on Earth has this right): to be destroyed and to take the weary and sated world with us into non-existence, along with its wondrous libraries and heart-stirring tunes – just so, after we descend to the grave, while the ground emits radioactive rays to all four winds…”
Nicely said good Thomas but terribly depressing and that is good because we need to look at things cleanly and clearly and understand the possible repercussions…
Why purposely falsify the quote? He refers to Jews, not to “Ashkenazim.”
Because using that word would get my comment bounced on most sites, which you just did.
Because using the word “Jews” would get my comment bounced on most sites including this one..
On this site, quoting an Israeli poet accurately would not get the comment “bounced,” other than the wait for me to rescue it from the “have a human take a look at this” queue.
In fact, the change brought you closer to a guidelines problem in two ways:
1) Your false replacement term hints strongly at the “Jews I don’t like aren’t REALLY Jews” ethnic slur; and
2) Trying to get around our guidelines is a violation of our guidelines.
That seems like a catch 22, Thomas. Aren’t the brackets sufficient to indicate that the word was a substitution and not a deception?
You could have just used the accurate quote instead of altering it.
You could always allow people to state what they wish, but being a typical racial supremacist zionist evil pig, you cannot do so.
No, I could not “allow people to state what they wish.”
I have a job.
If that job was stocking shelves with cans, and I just “allowed the shelves to be empty,” I’d be fired and replaced.
In this particular case, if I don’t do my job, the store closes entirely. I came on as comment moderator because I was told that if the site didn’t find someone willing to do the job, commenting would just be eliminated.
That’s true regardless even if I’m a racial supremacist or a Zionist (I’m neither).
On this site, quoting an Israeli poet accurately would not get the comment “bounced,” other than the wait for me to rescue it from the “have a human take a look at this” queue.
In fact, the change brought you closer to a guidelines problem in two ways:
1) Your false replacement term hints strongly at the “Jews I don’t like aren’t REALLY Jews” ethnic slur; and
2) Trying to get around our guidelines is a violation of our guidelines.
On this site, quoting an Israeli poet accurately would not get the comment “bounced,” other than the wait for me to rescue it from the “have a human take a look at this” queue.
In fact, the change brought you closer to a guidelines problem in two ways:
1) Your false replacement term hints strongly at the “Jews I don’t like aren’t REALLY Jews” ethnic slur; and
2) Trying to get around our guidelines is a violation of our guidelines.
That poet is arrogant and offensive.
Bad idea, we want cool heads at the top. Maybe OK against some helpless adversary but Russia while not at our level can certainly muss our hair.
Russia and China who is apparently next in line for being.bullied can do a not more then muss the USs hair.The rulers and the MIC are acting.with.terminal.stupidity.
My new story is Surfer Manifesto. Seventeen year-olds realize the draft will have to start back up if the US is to prevail and they are to attack China through Russia, after Russia is broken into smaller US colonies.
President Phil Abuster gives luncheon speeches to corporate execs and gets paid 500K per half hour speech; he thinks it’s a good gig. Here’s the speech as reported to Howie from her notes (She had a homework assignment to listen the US president).
“Well,” Pam began, “He rambled on for a almost a half hour and here’s the summary as I wrote it that day. Keep in mind he’s trying to drum up support for his completely unprovoked war on Russia and China;”
“Big Bombers in Australia…
“Them dang Chinese enemies of the shining beacon of American freedom had better get the message to stay away from Russia and get it quick.
“The American people are sick and tired of their jobs being sent to China and are willing to bomb hundreds of millions of totally innocent moms, dads and their children to make their point absolutely clear. Do not forget, above all else, these united states are a brilliant light of democracy.
“Back off all of you pinko commies. The torch of American freedom can incinerate nonbelievers in white hot nuclear explosions before you know it. American democracy is clear on that. Pentagonian civilian morale handlers are grateful for all EuroAmerican people backing defensive war against China, Iran and Russia.
“Adversaries must quit what they are doing and do what they’re told or we will see their ashes on our teevees during dinner dispatches. Do the rules-based order two-step or else. We know what’s best,
There was a American plan to bomb Russia cites with nukes to kill as many Russians as possible , then break up Russian into 3 zones and put NATO bases all over Russia to stop any attempt by Russians to take back their country , that plan is very likely still on going.
Do you have any links to the publication of such a plan or evidence that it was ever a plan?
Read the news; It appears to be the current plan in the war against Russia, China and Iran.
Weaken and breakup Russia after regime change is what the US president has said.
Do you have any links to that news – I mean it would not be very strange if those were the goals, but for them to be made public that would be strange.
“For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden said.
Biden has hurled invective at Putin throughout the crisis in Ukraine, labeling him a “murderous dictator” and a “war criminal,” but has previously stopped short of calling for his removal from power.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/26/biden-says-putin-cannot-remain-in-power-in-sweeping-speech-on-russian-invasion-of-ukraine.html
Of course this was later “waked back.”
I’m very familiar with that one of Biden’s gaffs, but that is still a ver very long way away from:
I agree. Yet in the current war against Russia, China and Iran there must be some plan beyond setting up next year’s budget appropriation.
I think/hope that the plan is reactive – a proactive plan would very likely have them deeply engaged in Iran when they needed to make sure that Taiwan could remain ‘independent’.
This sounds very interesting. Well done.
America without the rest of the NATO lakey`s would not fair well on it`s own against Russia , just imagine the USAF was denied access to European air space , remember US Soldiers without air support are little short of useless .
NOT okay against some helpless adversary. If Russia had been Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, et al, we’d already be saying “bombs away”.
Helpless adversaries are the only ones our regime is willing and able to destroy. We don’t mess with the Big Boys.
Very, very true Gypsy…..
Yes, his flippancy is disturbing
How many times have the CIA tried to murder Fidel Castro? Can we please stop trying to murder other nations’ political leaders? Barbaric and useless foreign policy.
The supposed quote was in connection to:
So not as an assassination plot by itself but as part of a war plan if there was a major nuclear strike on the way anyway – so more like the attempt at Saddam Hussein and nothing like the assassination attempts on Fidel – those were not part of a war (in the making).
Still quite provocative as the article says – but not actually anything which we would not expect – if the Russians were to strike at the west they would be very incompetent if they did not also strike at our leaders to paralyze us after a strike – so though provocative to say, it does not reveal anything that was not known already.
Interesting perspective . But the lies of CIA don’t follow any rules . It might have chosen randomly what excuse to apply and what to ignore . Communism was an existential threat – -that position worked well against Cuba from 1962 .There was no need to add one more like WMD which could be used against some one else that isn’t communist .
Well the quote was quite specific moreover a decapitation strike – that is not slipping him a poisoned pill.
No place on the globe is so hardened as the Kremlin, … while the White House is defenseless against a submarine launched hypersonic strike. It would have to be Qasem Soleimani style, …. But Putin is not Fidel, or Soleimani, or Qadhafi, etc. -and even then they succeeded only to kill his 3yr old daughter.
The Newsweek piece is no doubt “sourced” from the very top, and is a good measure of the state of mind, despairing military success- in the corridors of power, and recurring to dime novel 007 adolescent fantasies.
Oh make no mistake, I do not for one moment believe that such a strike would work – it didn’t for Saddam Hussein either after all.
I could not speak as to their source, but I agree on the 007 stuff.
A couple of phrases come to my mind… “When hell freezes over” and it’s just another day in the Empire of dysfunction.
This reflects perfectly on the kind of people most Americans are.
The american people have almost nothing to do with the american government. They are tangentially related, because they both use the word “american”, but that’s about it.
They elect the people who are in charge of current US policy.
Democracy is a sham and always has been. We don’t vote on the policies our government holds. Most Americans care very little if at all about the war. About a third of americans don’t even vote at all. Of those who do, they vote about issues like inflation and abortion. Everybody lets vote! do you want the war hawk who is against inflation or the war hawk who is pro abortion?
Even the few americans who take an interest in foreign policy can’t be said to be a driving force in american imperialism, since all their information is curated by the regime in washington. It is washington manufacturing the votes to get the policy washington and the CIA wanted in the first place. The government tells us how we “ought” to vote, and most people do.
Again, the american people have almost nothing to do with the american government.
Except pay the bills and supply government issue cannon fodder.
The US war against democracy and Earth requires a willing population.
“Why did you allow the robber to rob you? you’re obviously complicit in his robbery because it happened!”
I don’t pay taxes out of a joy for paying taxes. And if I were drafted, it wouldn’t be because I love killing people.
The whole point of government is that it doesn’t require a willing population. It does things by force. If people were willing, the government wouldn’t need federal officers and tax collectors, etc.
Oh please. I think your view is overly simplistic. You’re painting with too broad a brush.
Could you be a little more specific? what exactly was to broad and simplistic?
This is ironically quite a broad and simplistic accusation.
Tell me something I don’t already know.
I don’t know how old you are, but I lived through quite a few years when people did vote on the basis of policy, which is why black people vote, why children in most places have a chance at education regardless of income, etc.
The part where we got careless is more recent, when we allowed through our representatives to hand over the power over making war to the executive. And more.
I never claimed that americans didn’t vote on the basis of policy. I claimed that when every politician is a mixed bag, you can’t be surprised when voters who primary care about inflation or abortion happen to vote in war hawks, and you can’t claim this is somehow indicative of a broader american culture towards war.
When it came down to it, America failed to implement the draft in afghanistan 1. that should tell you enough about how the average american actually feels about war.
My second claim has been true since before you were born: that american politicians see american votes as a thing to be molded and crafted to their will, rather than a law to be conformed to. This was the case in both world wars and every war since. You can’t blame the populous for voting based on the lies they’ve been fed by the government. You can put that blame squarely in Washington.
But read some comment sections elsewhere. I’d think a majority of Americans would be in favor of taking out Putin. Sadly.
Many americans “would be in favor of taking out putin”, meaning if they aren’t the ones to do it and there were no other consequences other than putin dying. Very few americans who understand the chaos that would throw the russian nation into, the innocent civilians who would die in the coming rush for power, no very few of the americans who understand this want him dead.
In other words, americans who want Putin dead don’t actually want anything other than what they’re told they’re supposed to want by MSM and government think tanks. But when it comes to their personal lives they want nothing to do with it. It’s not a problem with the american people or american culture. Its a problem with the american government.
“very few of the americans who understand this want him dead.”
And there you gave the very reason I said most Americans. Very few Americans will allow themselves to be informed and just read whatever is fed to them by our illustrious MSM. The headlines alone do the job. I wish I could believe differently, and that the majority believed like most here in this little echo chamber.
Putin is lucky that its not CIA . Putin possibly knows that CIA was planning to kidnap or kill Assange on the friendly lap of a poodle .https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/julian-assange-cia-kidnap-plot-yahoo-news-b1930759.html
Senator Graham gave Russia a very large worldwide propaganda victory. Lavrov is just putting Senator Graham’s gift to Russia to good use.
Senator Graham is as nuts as his buddy Trump.
False propaganda from the Democrats. Putin never even mentioned nuclear weapons. He was replying to the threat of nuclear weapons from certain quarters in the U.S. establishment, and he said they should know that Russia also has modern weapons to defend itself with.
The Left: “Putin threatens to use nuclear weapons when Ukraine takes Donbass and Crimea!”
B.S.
Russia has a much stricter nuclear policy than Washington. Russia will only use nuclear weapons if the U.S. uses it first, or if Russia would be destroyed in some other way, without nukes, though an attack on Russia by nukes is really the only way that could be done. Russia’s nuclear policy hasn’t changed.
Decapitation strike is another name for a nuclear first strike. Openly threatening that invites them to do it first.
So, their response might be to take out DC.
Do us a favor.
Be sure they also take out the CIA.
Not just someone in the Pentagon, or Graham, but our own “rules-based” president, Joe Biden, said words to that effect.
Putin will likely have to be removed from power before there can be peace between Russia and Ukraine. Putin can’t accept the defeat of the Russian invasion. He has become irrational and delusional. Russia is now attacking, bombing and depopulating territory he claims to have annexed. The attacks on civilian infrastructure are only going to increase Ukrainian resentment against Russia and strengthen the resistence. Putin is beyond batshit crazy. But it would be a terrible mistake for the US to assassinate Putin. The removal of Putin is a question that only the Russian people should decide. Unfortunately, the decision to remove Putin may ultimately be made by the oligarchs, not the people. But any intervention by the US in Russia’s leadership crisis would backfire badly and likely prolong the war.
One of my favorite expressions is: Wars can get started this way… I have no desire to see that. We need to get people around a table to sort it out and propose reasonable alternatives…
What really concerns me is that if Russia truly feels this way, they could launch a first strike and from their point of view out of necessity…
Just more information as to the criminal enterprise that passes for the us govt.
It is quite remarkable in a very bad way, i.e. might makes right, that this enterprise sits amongst other nations which are civilized by comparison.
It should be branded a pariah that it is: murder, civilian bombing/killing, financial plunder, financial robbery of another sovereign country’s assets and diplomatic locations.
Senior political leaders calling for the murder of another country’s president has to go down in the history books as plumbing the low.
Yet, the world stands by, held at bay by this thuggish enterprise. How in the hell did the world get to this situation.
Anonymous. Ok. That’s huge.
Wars can get started this way: misinformation, disinformation, people trying to anticipate or manipulate the actual goings-on…
“Lavrov Says Pentagon Threatening ‘Decapitation Strike’ Against Putin Anonymous US military sources told Newsweek in September that killing Putin was an option being considered”
This would trigger an all out war between the US, UK, and Russia.
President Putin is well liked by over 70% of the Russian people and if anything he is more moderate than many hardliners who would not be so patient with the West.
Well said CT, well said. Let us hope that cooler heads will prevail….
They are drowning in their own propaganda.They have used Putin as a whipping boy for so many years that they know believe Putin is driving this war.
Putin is just the executor of Russia’s deep state. Killing Putin might even bring out the harliners who will gasify Ukraine and lead us all into Armageddon.
Bunch of evil fools think they can take Russia out. Putin is a boy scout compare to some next Russian leaders who’s even more hawkish.
Kennedy Peace Speech:
“Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy – or of a collective death-wish for the world.”
What a difference with today’s politicians. Totally bankrupt and completely ignorant of the danger.
I’m very much inclined toward Lavrov’s position and comments. I have no desire to see WWIII because it will probably be our last.
We need to think about how Russia could react, feeling as threatened as they do…. They could launch against us, being in such a position, total first strike… I am not getting my a– nuked over our ego-maniacal behavior…
What good does “killing Putin” do?! At the very least another person who takes his place can be even worse than Putin but more to the point we could be facing a brutal conflict that can go nuclear… I am in no mood for potential nuclear conflict. It should not even be a remote blip on our radar!!!
Killing Biden would not stop.this war either.His strings are being.pilled.
When will the Biden Nightmare end????