Ukraine has fired US-provided Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) into Russia’s Bryansk Oblast, marking a major escalation of the conflict that Russia has made clear risks nuclear war.
The escalation came as Russian President Vladimir Putin formalized changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine that lowered the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, a step he took in direct response to President Biden authorizing Ukraine to use ATACMS, which have a range of about 190 miles, in strikes deep inside Russia.
The Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement that Ukraine fired six ATACMS into Bryansk. “At 3:25 am this morning, the enemy struck a site on the territory of the Bryansk Region with six ballistic missiles. According to confirmed data, US-made ATACMS tactical missiles were used. As a result of an anti-missile battle, five missiles were shot down, and one was damaged by crews of S-400 and Pantsir missile defense systems,” the ministry said, according to TASS.
The ministry said missile debris fell on the territory of a military site, causing a fire, but no damage or casualties were reported. Russian Foreign Sergey Lavrov said the attack shows that the West seeks escalation, pointing to the fact that Ukraine cannot fire ATACMS without US-provided intelligence.
“The fact that multiple ATACMS were used last night against the Bryansk Region signals that they want escalation. You see, it is impossible to use these high-tech missiles without the Americans, and Putin has repeatedly said this,” Lavrov said.
Lavrov also said that he hopes Ukraine’s Western backers read Russia’s new nuclear doctrine, which considers an attack by a non-nuclear armed state that’s supported by a nuclear-armed power as a joint attack. The doctrine allows the use of nuclear weapons in response to a conventional attack against Russia or Belarus if it is deemed a critical threat to Russia’s sovereignty.
The nuclear doctrine states that Russia’s nuclear deterrence is aimed at “a potential adversary, which may encompass individual countries and military alliances (blocs, unions) that regard Russia as a potential enemy and possess nuclear and/or other weapons of mass destruction, or have substantial combat capabilities of general-purpose forces.”
Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, the current deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, wrote on X that the new nuclear doctrine means Russia can use Weapons of Mass Destruction against Ukraine and NATO.
“Russia’s new nuclear doctrine means NATO missiles fired against our country could be deemed an attack by the bloc on Russia. Russia could retaliate with WMD against Kiev and key NATO facilities, wherever they’re located. That means World War III,” Medvedev wrote on X in English.
The New York Times first reported on Sunday that President Biden had authorized Ukraine to use ATACMS in strikes on Russian territory even though US officials acknowledged the escalation wasn’t expected to alter the course of the war.
Who are the bozos on this bus?!
GENOCIDE JOE IS STEERING THE BUS TOWARD THE GUARDRAILS ON THE GRAND CANYON OF EURO-ASIA!! Will THE RAILS SAVE THE BUS OR WILL IT CRASH THROUGH TO SMOULDERING RUBBLE OF UKRAINE KILLING ALL THE PASSENGERS ON BOARD……?????
The old marasmatic man doesn't care.
We’re all bozos on this bus
The President is driving us
Not one of us will cause a fuss
This Bus Is Off To War
There a few in the GOP who are gung ho for confrontation.
The war is scheduled to end on Jan 21 as Trump said he will end the war in 24 hours, so both sides need to cool it for two months.
And if President Trump does end the War in 24 hours you'll still be whining that he sold UKraine down the river.
No matter when, Trump has no choice, Ukraine was lost before it started.
That depends. If he allows Russia to run over Ukraine or rewards Russia in any way than yes I will be "whining" about him. And why did you say "if"? Are you not confident that trump can keep his word? How that wall that he build and Mexico paid for working out?
Remittances could be taxed.
What makes you think that Putin will jump on Trumps orders and conditions just when Trump says so?
Until Jan. 21 the demented president is in chare or his proxy whoever that is, not Trump and in Kiev the clown is not in office anymore his term ended some time ago. What a Mad House. No one is really legally in charge, that includes a mentally disabled genocide Joe.
Are you saying that trump lied when claimed that he will stop the war in 24 hours once he becomes President?
Of course it is an empty promise, he can set up Ukraine for unconditional surrender, that is the only way to do it. It sounded great on the campaign trail, so he said it. Did he ever say how he was going to that, maybe like just walking away?
Yes, he lied he knows it is not that easy, the neocons have a thing or two to say. Trump is one of the donor class, he is like them just more unpredictable and more irrational, real, competent leadership qualities he has not. He has the charisma of a conman.
It is that easy. The US should fully exit, and what happens next doesn’t matter any more than does a war in Africa.
Time will tell. It would help to end Ukraine before attacking Iran.
I thought exiting Afghanistan was positive, but apparently there must always be an ongoing war.
It is that easy. The US should fully exit, and what happens next doesn’t matter any more than does a war in Africa.
Thank you for mentioning that he is of the donor class.
However, there is a more powerful donor class than he.
Since the founding of the U.S. of A. there has always been a powerful donor class, to keep the "rabble" in line.
Trump shoots his mouth off constantly. Constantly.
To listen to him you would swear he was G-d, Noah and Jesus wrapped up into one.
Correct. He has some explaining to do with Putin.
WHY did he withdraw the U.S. from the INF and the Open Skies treaties?
King of like, why did Schrub withdraw from the AMB treaty with Russia???
Why the sanctions?
Why anything?
Does that include Israel?
It's almost like: the People threw us out and now the People must suffer.
"According to confirmed data, US-made ATACMS tactical missiles were used. As a result of an anti-missile battle, five missiles were shot down, and one was damaged by crews of S-400 and Pantsir missile defense systems."
What seems missing from discussion is that all six of these Teh Aw3shome US missiles were taken out by extant Russian ballistic defense systems.
Is the only winning strategy in Kiev, that of winning publicity stunts?
https://x.com/Gallup/status/1858868958142550461
If Yanukovich (or similar) could return to the Ukraine presidency that might affect a negotiated settlement. He was deposed 2o14 by the US for taking a favorable view of Russia's concerns.
If Russia can destroy these missiles with easy, why are they complaining?
Yeah, I mean, look at all the buildings in NYC that DIDN’T collapse on 9/11, amirit ?
You really cannot be this clueless, can you ?
That guy Silverstein was quite the mind reader, wasn't he?
Took out insurance policies on the Twin Towers. Cha-ching.
Sued American Airlines.
Got a three-fer with the "collapse" of building #7.
As I recall, didn’t he fail to convince the insurance company to treat 9/11 as two separate claims (WTC1, and WTC 2) to boost his Super Lucky Unexpected Winfall ?
All I know is, my home insurance provider raised rates in 2002 AND 2003, citing 9/11 both times. An event which, as I noticed, happened only once.
“Insurance companies are exactly like casinos – except that when your number comes up in a casino, they pay you what you’re owed.”
I just posted this comment in response to a Substack post by Ismaele's GeoPolitiQ Substack:
Well then why hasn’t Russia done that already ? What are they waiting for? You said this was gonna be over a long time ago but it’s raging on. Why hasn’t Ukraine surrendered like Japan did in the 40’s?
As far as I can tell, there are two reasons: 1) Ukraine has managed to dredge up a few more score thousands troops than I expected, and 2) Putin appears determined to not move much until every last Ukrainian soldier is dead in order to minimize casualties. Then and only then will he move on to Kiev.
There may be another reason: Ukrainians may be so brainwashed to regard their country as a higher value that they are willing to expend their entire manpower. There is "patriotism" and there is "fanaticism." Some of the latter may be involved.
If I understand correctly, Ukraine's draft age starts at 26 (or is it 27) YOA. And are thinking of extending it closer to our designated age. If they do, that opens up what I'd think to be at least a few hundred thousand more conscripts for the meat grinder. And another few years of potential conflict.
I think Putin is also rationalizing in his head that he doesn’t want to put his country through the headache of destroying Ukraine and its infrastructure and then having to build it back up like we did with Iraq and Japan. He doesn’t want any to subject his country to that. People are saying Kyiv is gonna get hit hard any day now but I predict western capitals will get hammered much harder before Kyiv does.
Re your first paragraph particularly, it interests me that BEHAVIORS have strongly entered into interpretations of what is going on. From the “enemies” we're getting cool responses, explanations and positions taken, warnings, as with from Lavrov, Putin, and from Iran. This factor seems to weigh into a view to cool it on being alarmed and hysterical over this latest Biden missile threat and end of it scenario. OTOH what's coming from the West is narrative spin and demonizing, as though one objective here is to evoke high-pitched alarmism. Is this over-confidence on my part, maybe it is. But right now it seems to me to be a case of in maturity we trust versus infantile posturing and hurling missiles around.
I agree. We have lunatics and schoolyard bullies running the West. The rest of the world appears to be more rational. Of course, this is something Martyanov also talks about incessantly – the complete lack of competent education in the West.
The headline and opening sentence of this report entirely miss the point.
"Ukraine" did not fire. The United States fired those missiles into Russia, according to the Russians (who are correct about that).
The point is that Biden has attacked Russia, a direct US attack on Russia. Not Ukraine.
The difference is about who the Russians shoot back at in return. THEY have warned they will shoot back at the US.
Russians are smarter and better educated than US Americans. They have maintained technological superiority and expanding good relations with most of the world despite US borrow and spend plus austerity war funding policies. US citizens will not do anything to stop the war until young eighteen year-old men and women are being drafted to serve upper class military personnel needs.
A few years ago, the Pentagon issued a statement that whereas we throw money in a Willy Nilly fashion, Russia has spent its money wisely.
One year Russia's military budget was just $54 billion.
Quite correct.
Elmendorf Air Base is 44 miles from Russia.
Donald John Trump speaks clearly about his views on foreign policy at 26:00 :
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1MYxNMploOpJw
Here's what he said linked from a "re-surfaced" video of Trump on the campaign trail (when not clear). Here's a printout leaving the question what percentage BS?
Trump:
“We have never been closer to World War III than we are today under Joe Biden. A global conflict between nuclear-armed powers would mean death and destruction on a scale unmatched in human history; it would be nuclear Armageddon.”
“We must be absolutely clear that our objective is to immediately have a total secession of hostilities. All shooting has to stop,” Trump added. “This is the central issue. We need peace without delay.”
In the resurfaced video, Trump warned that the “entire globalist neocon establishment” is continually dragging the United States into “endless wars” by “pretending to fight for freedom and democracy” around the globe while turning the United States into a “third-world country.”
Trump’s warning about World War III has resurfaced following confirmation by senior U.S. officials to The New York Times on Sunday that Biden had authorized Ukraine to launch U.S.-supplied missiles into Russia.
Trump also said the United States needs to reevaluate the purpose and mission of NATO and warned that the “foreign policy establishment” is attempting to create a worldwide conflict with a nuclear-armed adversary “based on the lie that Russia represents our greatest threat.”
Trump argued that the “greatest threat” is not Russia but is actually “ourselves” [he said "probably ourselves"] and the “horrible USA-hating people” that represent the United States.
“These globalists want to squander all of America’s strength, blood, and treasure, chasing monsters and phantoms overseas, while keeping us distracted from the havoc they’re creating right here at home,” Trump warned.
“These forces are doing more damage to America than Russia and China could ever have dreamed.”
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2024/11/viral-video-trump-issues-urgent-message-on-wwiii-in-resurfaced-video/
Trump is well known to pontificate anything that sounds good to him.
The "globalists" he speaks about consist of men like the founder of Blackrock. Hedge funds and investment firms, like Blackrock, will keep Trump in check, just like they did in his first administration, just like the have with every President since 1947.
President Kennedy was assassinated in a coup. Ron Paul has opined the same. That was a warning to future presidents who may have some altruistic ideas to improve things.
Mr. Trump will be that same old Trump, while furthering damage to the middle and poor classes, and another tax "reform" that the CBO has said would cause another trillions to be added to the deficit.
He wants to act fast before the provisions of the first "reform" expire next year.
He will take a wrecking ball to quite a few things that the middle and poorer class need. The military budget will continue to rise. Israel will keep killing (with our weapons).
The next four years will be quite a ride. I expect a recession by 2026. Big banks are holding more derivatives than then held in 2008.
One of the best reads is the daily rushes from Wall Street on Parade. On all matters financial.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/12921719/ukraine-russia-war-nuclear-missiles-escalation-ww3/
https://www.rt.com/russia/607871-russia-new-nuclear-doctrine/
Escalation is good. You can't win without it.
A pointless escalation, like the one we're seeing now, can cause us all to lose. Lose, as in a nuclear holocaust. The Pentagon has already said that supplying Ukraine with these missiles will not change the course of this war. Meaning that there is no possibility of a Ukrainian victory.
Worst: loose face in the world.
Loose economically. BRICS may will the the wave that does the deed.
President Trump, as Commander in Chief", has the authority for continuing this order, but he also has the authority to go back to "before". Former President Biden cannot stop him.
Russia is not going to use nuclear weapons. Certainly not at this juncture. I agree with @richardstevenhack:disqus They can defeat Ukraine with conventional means. Putin has been playing escalation management pretty well. By January 21st some things will become clearer. However, what happens will not be in favor of the west. You can not stop Russia from wanting to dominate its own sphere of influence.
The reason the US is provoking Putin is because of its declining position militarily, economically and its dismal standing in the world
If Russian empire remnants is an indicator, the Russians will typically present a very tough position at the beginning of a negotiation, and they will offer tough responses to their counterparts even at the final stages of negotiations. They perceive negotiation as a “power game,” as a “сила” (force).
I think they will escalate to the point that Trump will be dealing with a hard choice. Either continue Biden's belligerence or negotiate a settlement that will see Russia take some of Ukraine and seek guarantees that Ukraine will not enter NATO.
We will have a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia that is definitely going to happen but Ukraine will have to basically unconditionally surrender like Japan did after we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Total submission. Never be a member of nato, concede all the territory they lost to Russia including crimea.
Will we have to lose a few cities here in the west to reach that settlement? I hope not.
By definition there is no negotiation in an unconditional surrender.
We bombed Japan during negotiations.
After the two nukes were dropped, we kept up the flights of B-29's, dropping more bombs on the population.
After all that, we allowed Hirohito to remain as supreme leader of Japan. Which was all Japan wanted.
Then we remained in Japan. Basically, an occupation.
Still there. Garrisoned Marines on Okinawa. Still there to this day.
"seek guarantees that Ukraine will not enter NATO." How can you guarantee that?
The “guarantee” will be made when Zelensky and the gang pack their bags as Kyiv no longer becomes a safe space for any domestic or foreign official.
If Zelenski does sign an instrument of surrender, the Azov boys will take him out. Simply put the man in an armored carrier, with his next exit being in a casket.
Zee wont sign Jack. He’ll be wisked away. before it gets to that stage. He is technically not even the “president” of Ukraine anyways.
The distance from Tehran to Jerusalem is some 1000 miles. It should be clear that the Russians might be able to send rockets and drones into Ukraine from bases well beyond the range of these ATACAM's
Russia has no need to use nuclear weapons. They have plenty of conventional weapons in their arsenal which can cause massive destruction. Russia can proceed with the total destruction of Ukraine's energy grid. Russia can and may well supply some of their most powerful weapons to the various groups resisting American presence in the region. So by carrying out this reckless and irresponsible escalation the Biden administration has put US personal stationed in the region at greater risk of harm or death. Good job, Genocide Joe.
Yes, at this point, this is the most likely response.
By any standards it was an act of war committed by U.S. against Russia. It is obvious that the situation changed drastically. However, the full scale nuclear war is very much unlikely. Any nuclear war is unlikely. It may happen only as a result of some error or miscalculation.
The problem is that, by heightening tensions every way possible, the Yankee Empire is increasing the likelihood of some error or miscalculation.
The human race was lucky during the first cold war in that none of the miscalculations resulted in thermonuclear Armageddon. But we came damn close a number of times.
It's like playing Russian roulette – you only have to lose once.
Whom do you attack if Russia gives nukes to Iran, and Iran hits Israel or USA etc. with hypersonic missiles?
MAD isn’t MAD if the attacker isn’t punished.
I have to agree with you there.
If we launch a missile that hits a commerce area, killing quite a few Russians, will Russia then launch a missile at the air base in Alaska?
Would that rattle the idiots in D.C.?
What I mean though, if Russia arms others as the US armed Israel with nukes, whom does the US hit if, 20 years later, the US is attacked?
Russia is threatened by its neighbors somewhat, but the US has no threats. The US is secure. But if suddenly Venezuela gets nukes, an autarkic economy built by oil profits, and a strong military; that changes. It needn’t develop anything if Russia supplies it, just as Israel didn’t develop its tech for the most part.
Russia can give hypersonic nukes to US adversaries. That could eventually lead to nuclear war with someone.
It's a future oriented pronouncment: not the attack on Bryansk that's already happened, but Russia's counter is what it speaks to. Russia, in the event, Washington attack on Russia proper, which has alredy happened, had already planned a list of targets. Top of this list is likely the nuke capable NATO missile installations in Poland and Romania. And they know that that would cause WWIII complete with nuclear exchange.
I think those will wait until Russia completes whatever it's going to do in Ukraine.
Good job, indeed.
Now, let us see if the "man who could fix everything" can wave his magical whatever and solve everything.
I am so excited about the promise. /s
I didn't see your sarcasm indicator at first. But I believe that people who think that Donald Trump is going to waltz into Moscow and "set Putin straight" are not very connected with reality. Russia has been very clear that their concern is their security, and that NATO being on their border poses a threat to their security. What would solve this problem is something that Donald Trump or the US deep state is probably not willing to do, which is roll NATO back to their 1997 borders. So Russia will have to settle Ukraine on the battlefield, and work on the rest after that has been accomplished.
Russia has moved critical equipment out of harm's way. The firing of the missiles is a nothing burger.
Trump boasted that he would end the war in 24 hours. It is well to remember that he is part of the reason for the war. He ignored what was going on in Donbas. He withdrew the U.S. from Open Skies and INF treaties with Russia. He provided Ukraine with Javelin anti-tank missiles. He did not dissuade NATO expansion, while at the same time saying that the U.S. should pull out of NATO.
Can I get fries with that, nothing burger?!
;-}
Russia's nuclear doctrine as stated does have a threat to their sovereignty threshold. It does not mean that they will respond with nukes right away, but very well may strike NATO directly with conventional weapons upon further escalation having such doctrine in place in case of a significant retaliation by NATO countries. A small number of ATACMS will likely not cause Russia to directly strike NATO countries, but they are paving the way for the SCALP or Storm Shadow missiles that Russia very may respond to directly against NATO countries depending on the damage they inflict.
Of course the Pentagon's assessment of what Russia will and will not do has a significant psychological factor in the calculation, something that is far from being an exact science, but the similar type of assessment they made when Kyiv attacked the Donbas pretty much all out starting on February 16th, 2022, assuming that Russia was bluffing and would not actually enter the war.
Overall, the problem is that there are too many paths that can trigger an all out nuclear escalation that collectively there is significant risk that not even the most brilliant collection of intelligence could ensure against while continuing the escalation path that we are on. For, as Daniel Ellsberg pointed out in his Doomsday Machine disclosure and decades long research, the United States’ strategic nuclear force capabilities have always been for a first strike force designed to be triggered by a far wider range of events than the public has ever imagined. One of those events that triggers a US first strike is a strategic warning that nuclear escalation is probably impending . There are also many US hands authorized to launch a nuclear attack not just limited to the President or the highest military officials. For example, Ellsberg even met an Air Force major commanding a small U.S. airbase in Korea who could have started a nuclear war simply because he assumed the USSR had attacked American bases when atmospheric disturbance cut off communications. He asserts that preemptive ‘launch on warning’ (LOW) has always been at the heart of our strategic alert . Moreover, the risk is even greater now because the of United States' aggression to develop what the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists described as otherwise bizarre as a strategy for reducing the chances of nuclear war with either Russia or China , but in fact exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike . Stationing US first strike and anti-ballistic missiles closer and closer to Russia's borders indeed aggressively threatens Russia's security leaving Russia only between six to eight minutes between detection and impact of a strike that would both decapitate and destroy the Russian's ICBM response to make and carry out a decision to launch everything , an issue that is a significant part to the causes of this war.
The Russians similarly have launch on warning systems. Thus any serious escalation can then trigger a launch on the warning that nuclear escalation is probably impending, and because of dead hand systems that delegate the ability to strike with a nuclear weapon down to Majors on each side, it only increases the chance of that warning of nuclear escalation. Thus, these escalations are highly reckless. Furthermore, when Russia starts to then consider for what is the United States escalating wildly for, they may very well conclude that the United States is committed to a fall scale war against Russia given that they are already risking nuclear annihilation.
If he really wants to get back, he’ll give hypersonic nukes to Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, Iran, Turkey, NK, etc. It’s foolish to pressure Russia when it could make the world dangerous (not something I want).
Same here.
Russia is not my enemy.
Iran is not my enemy.