Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

🇺🇸🇮🇷 A nuclear bluff doesn't need to be true to stop a war, it just needs to move the odds. David Pyne, former U.S. Army officer, explains how Iran's nuclear signal is already reshaping the calculus inside the White House. When the assessed chance of a hidden weapon jumps...

32,013 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Washington celebrates a Hormuz deal as the Pentagon drafts a nuclear strategy for the wars America can no longer fight with missiles Everyone's watching the signing ceremony. David Pyne, former Army headquarters staffer and missile defense insider, is watching everything else, and his tour of the board will keep you up tonight. Start with the reported new Pentagon nuclear strategy leaning on tactical nukes for a regional conflict. Pyne spent a decade warning about this exact gap: by his estimate Russia holds FIFTY times America's tactical arsenal, China holds near-monopoly in the Pacific, and America's fallback rides on two submarines on station, carrying a weapon he calls "the most destabilizing nuclear weapon we probably have in our arsenal," because Beijing can't tell a small warhead from a decapitation strike until it's too late. Then his reporting on the room where the war began: which advisers warned against it, who called the five-day regime-change pitch what it was, and the one voice that wanted it. His Ukraine assessment cuts against everything you've been told, from his case that the real story of Kyiv 2022 is nothing like the legend, to the thousand kilometers of border almost nobody guards, to his read, sourced from Russia, on why Putin keeps overruling his own hardliners. And through it all, one credit he genuinely gives Trump: an iron refusal to war directly with nuclear peers. Brandon Weichert David Pyne 🇺🇸

Mario Nawfal

256,040 views • 3 days ago

Alastair Crooke: The US🇺🇸 may have signalled that it will resume nuclear weapons testing because Trump misunderstood a Russian missile test as a nuclear test ‘It seems to be based on a misunderstanding. Allegedly, Trump has proposed the idea of nuclear tests in response to Russian nuclear tests. But there hasn’t been a Russian nuclear test. The Burevestnik missile, that was publicised these recent days, like the Oreshnik. But this one has a nuclear power. It has got a propulsion system that is nuclear-based. Its warhead isn’t. There isn’t a nuclear warhead on it. It is a conventional warhead, but it is just instead of having a rocket propulsion, it has a nuclear drive that propels it. And this is why it’s able to stay aloft for a very long time, and in fact traverse the whole globe. But it’s nuclear propulsion, not a nuclear weapon. Did Trump understand that? Or did he just think this was a new nuclear weapon that Russia was testing? He probably didn’t understand that it wasn’t. It was just its propulsion mechanism that is nuclear, but not its warhead. Did Trump understand that? Or did he just think this was a new nuclear weapon that Russia was testing? He probably didn’t understand that it wasn’t. It was just its propulsion mechanism that is nuclear, but not its warhead. Now, whether the Russians have been testing underground before, I doubt it…I’m sure they would have taken every opportunity to say it if they thought they had detected Russian or Chinese underground tests.’ -Alastair Crooke, the former Middle East Advisor to the EU Foreign Policy Chief, on the latest episode of Going Underground FULL INTERVIEW BELOW IN THE REPLIES👇

Going Underground

52,238 views • 9 months ago