Ah lovely 
Any chance the Crimea bridge thing is a leaf out of the nazi party playbook, ie to give Russia a fig leaf for a nuclear attack?
Something afoot in Moscow?
You’d imagine really only 2 explanations,
-
move against Putin & his operation ( Doubtful )
-
military caught out sabotaging own efforts?
I would be extremely sceptical anything is happening, ie. I don’t believe anything is happening at all. Hopefully I’m completely wrong…
It didn’t take them long to get the bridge back up and running again
Kadyrov and Prigizin the Wagner guy are not happy
Zelensky calling on NATO to bomb Russia to preempt Nuclear threat…
This fella is an absolute lunatic.
2016, the Obama administration carried out war gaming exercises to test its communications channels and decision-making process in the event of a Russian use of a tactical nuclear weapon. There were deep disagreements that led on some occasions to heated arguments.
“The debate broke down along two pretty important lines,” said Jon Wolfsthal, who was Barack Obama’s special assistant and senior director at the national security council for arms control and non-proliferation.
The first question was whether “the US or Nato needed to respond militarily”.
“In the game, the answer was no. The US was winning the conventional war,” Wolfsthal, who writes a Substack column titled BoomBoomBoom, said.
‘15 minutes to save the world’: a terrifying VR journey into the nuclear bunker
Read more
The counter-argument was that the US could not afford not to respond with nuclear weapons.
“There were those who said if you don’t use nuclear weapons, two terrible things will happen. One is: all of our allies will doubt our commitment,” he said. “The second is: if you don’t use a nuclear weapon in response, how do you deter Putin from going nuclear again? You needed nukes to re-establish deterrence.
“We never answered that. We never settled that debate,” Wolfsthal said.
The 2016 war game – first reported in The Bomb, a book by Fred Kaplan – was played twice, at the level of cabinet secretary, the “principals” and by their deputies. The principals voted to respond with a nuclear strike, but not on Russia, in the hope of avoiding an all-out planet-ending nuclear exchange. Instead they struck Belarus, arguing it was a “belligerent non-combatant”.
Avril Haines in July 2021. Photograph: Susan Walsh/AP
The deputies voted not to respond with nuclear weapons, arguing that the US could win with conventional weapons and that nuclear use would make it much harder to isolate Putin internationally. Two of the officials who pushed that option are now in senior positions in the Biden administration: Colin Kahl is the Pentagon’s policy chief, and Avril Haines is the director of national intelligence. After the war games were over, Haines suggested having T-shirts printed with the slogan “Deputies Should Run the World”.
The 2016 war game was set in a Baltic nation, so inside Nato and under its protective nuclear umbrella. Ukraine stands outside that umbrella.
Ernest Moniz, Obama’s energy secretary is reported to have voted for a nuclear response in 2016. He would not comment or even confirm the war game took place, but he said Ukraine was a very different case.
“I would say that if the line is crossed to nuclear use, there has to be a very, very strong response,” he told the Guardian. “But that response doesn’t have to be nuclear.”
The key question is more likely to be whether the US and its allies should respond with devastating conventional firepower, as Poland’s foreign minister, Zbigniew Rau, and the former CIA director David Petraeus have suggested. But that would transform the war into one between Russia and Nato, in which escalation to a nuclear exchange could become hard to stop.
According to Eric Schlosser, the author of a book about the nuclear establishment, Command and Control, the Pentagon’s Defence Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) conducted another war game in 2019 focused on Russian nuclear use in Ukraine. That wargame appears to have been updated, suggesting it is in constant use. The results in 2019 are top secret, but as Schlosser wrote in the Atlantic, one of the participants told him: “There were no happy outcomes.”
If Russia nuked Ukraine the ensuing radiation would only blow directly into the path of the very areas he is professing to liberate
2 Likes
When crackpot despots fall out
I’m not sure he’ll let those details stop him.
1 Like
It’s the end of the world as we know it
I know the minds behind them, they are riddled full of Holes
Not to be trusted with their hands at the controls
Their eyesight it is twisted by the glory of their Careers
The heaped praise and flattery is music to their ears
To listen to them talk about how it hasn’t happened Yet’s
Like playing Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Russian Roulette
1 Like
Those the body down front in white left their head right at the end? @carryharry ? The head certainly jerks up.
Definitely movement there.
Caused by impact of other body or actual body movement 
1 Like
He’s been asking for NATO to give him all sorts of help, that he would ask them to try help avoid a nuclear strike on his country is hardly a surprise.
By bombing Russia?