Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

🇺🇸🇷🇺 U.S. intelligence has changed its assessment on Putin. For years the working assumption was that Russia was too bogged down in Ukraine to risk a direct confrontation with NATO. That view is now being revised. New reports detailed by U.S. officials warn that Putin could test the alliance...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,921,404 subscribers

103,527 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

32 Kommentare

Profilbild von Angelo Pérez ✞
Angelo Pérez ✞vor 2 Monaten

It’s sad that the USA, and Russia could not be allies.. NATO has become our Achilles heel, and to think. Hitler would be proud of the EU, and NATO alliance that desperately wants to finish the job Hitler started. 🤦🏻‍♂️ 🙏🏽✌🏽❤️🇺🇸✝️

Profilbild von DezVault
DezVaultvor 2 Monaten

One must be a complete idiot not to see that Russia has constantly been provoked by Nato and whoever presses for conflict it’s not russkies.

Profilbild von Nete Fela
Nete Felavor 2 Monaten

Strange how we were lead to believe they have nothing left. Stripping washer parts for IC’s. Fighting with spades and the economy is stuffed. Now they a threat. Someone wa lying or is still lying.

Profilbild von John
Johnvor 2 Monaten

More Western intel scare stories. Russia is fighting a defensive war against NATO-armed Ukraine, not planning to attack the alliance. Putin has zero interest in Article 5 suicide. These “hybrid probe” leaks are classic pressure tactics — keep Europe scared, keep the weapons flowing, and justify more militarization. Moscow has shown restraint for years while NATO expands and strikes hit Russian soil. The real escalation risk comes from the West, not the Kremlin.

Profilbild von Montecaldo
Montecaldovor 2 Monaten

Are your writers copying ridiculous content from the German Bild now? 🙈😂

Profilbild von Patrick Berzai
Patrick Berzaivor 2 Monaten

This is not true. It is pricing information to consolidate an already failing NATO. I don’t think anyone in the west can be trusted to tell you anything about Putin. They nearly always project motivations into him that don’t exist.

Profilbild von MakattackTDFAM
MakattackTDFAMvor 2 Monaten

They can't get their story straight. Couple weeks ago they were saying Russia was on the ropes, now they're getting ready to confront NATO? Someone is losing ground.

Profilbild von Zoo
Zoovor 2 Monaten

Short answer; nothing would happen. Reason, they don't want their cities to become Kiev. As for nukes; not one is taking a nuke for Ukraine except the UK or France, and then both would cry for the USA to bleed for them once again. The caveat, the USA can't even defeat Iran. Nor is the soft USA willing to take a nuke for Ukraine.

Profilbild von Lori107
Lori107vor 2 Monaten

Doesn't hurt that Russia is constantly violating German airspace for reconnaissance or just to be provocative.

Profilbild von pieromazz
pieromazzvor 2 Monaten

Please stop this bs propaganda

Profilbild von Marc Ash🇺🇸🇺🇦
Marc Ash🇺🇸🇺🇦vor 2 Monaten

It's not a Russian ground assault Europe fears, it's the long range fires.

Profilbild von Michael Robinson
Michael Robinsonvor 2 Monaten

"The goal would be to force NATO into the gray zone; where attribution is murky, the response has to be proportional" Goal? We've already been there for years now. Russia is the weakest relative to the West it's ever been, and getting weaker every month. Provoke away.

Profilbild von Mike Boyer
Mike Boyervor 2 Monaten

Deep State BS! No way Russia has the strength to make a move. Putin is in his final stages. Look for coup.

Profilbild von Aryan Sanatani
Aryan Sanatanivor 2 Monaten

Black reality of muslim

Profilbild von leo
leovor 2 Monaten

But if there is any accessment for the price of Nato expansion —- where it is probably the root why Russia resisted since 2022—- i guess people are also interested for any pease plan

Profilbild von oscarbobb
oscarbobbvor 2 Monaten

Putin saw the success that Iran had by simply expanding the conflict area. Trump is by proxy losing two wars

Profilbild von J B Mutabazi
J B Mutabazivor 2 Monaten

With chips from washing machine????

Profilbild von moksha
mokshavor 2 Monaten

*sabotage of critical infrastructure Yeah, like north stream, right?

Profilbild von #Marc
#Marcvor 2 Monaten

"Sabotage of critical infrastructure" ... Of course... That's why Liz Truss told Blinken "it's done" ... 🐭

Profilbild von Godie junior
Godie juniorvor 2 Monaten

They want to keep the war on nothing else!

Profilbild von Siakos Filaretos
Siakos Filaretosvor 2 Monaten

Uhmm.. Ok.. And why would Russia do such a thing? A complete analysis should include the motives and ultimate goals.

Profilbild von DefNotBiased
DefNotBiasedvor 2 Monaten

Intelligence in question

Profilbild von JusticeRGV
JusticeRGVvor 2 Monaten

Unless there's a real unprovoked attack or invasion, article 5 will NOT be activated. The Baltic states and other historical rivals of Russia need to keep that in mind before they provoke an unnecessary conflict.

Profilbild von Pompliano
Pomplianovor 2 Monaten

Putin stuck in Ukraine so he might poke NATO with sneaky cyber hits or sabotage instead of full war. Gray-zone tests to split the alliance.

Profilbild von Daniel Benson
Daniel Bensonvor 2 Monaten

Very soon, they’ll say intelligence failed them. If you anticipate Putin’s moves too much, you may get the opposite and end up caught off guard by the actual threat.

Profilbild von Linda
Lindavor 2 Monaten

L

Profilbild von Natureslave69
Natureslave69vor 2 Monaten

" Putin feeling cornered" ..of course if he feels the increase against him...after his invasion that is...sympathisers seems to keep forgetting this. All this mess ..and lives. .could be resolved if they ALL sat at table🌎...deluded ...that's because the world needs war..

Profilbild von Sadruddin Imran
Sadruddin Imranvor 2 Monaten

NATO makes up these stories to bolster weapon sales.

Profilbild von Rahul Kalla
Rahul Kallavor 2 Monaten

To understand Putin/Russia you need to understand ‘The Pony Problem’ that Napoleon had when he attacked Moscow. Putin calling the war an SMO was exactly that.. the ponies ran out of food..

Profilbild von Palm Beach
Palm Beachvor 2 Monaten

wrong

Profilbild von Linda
Lindavor 2 Monaten

Nice

Profilbild von Pieter
Pietervor 2 Monaten

But Ukrain was winning , Russia was using chips from dishwasher machines?

Ähnliche Videos

JUST IN: 🇺🇸🇷🇺🇪🇺 U.S. Intel Warns Putin Could Test NATO With A Limited Attack New U.S. intelligence warns that Vladimir Putin could attempt a limited attack against a NATO member as early as this autumn, with the risk window extending through 2029. Scenarios range from cyberattacks and sabotage to a small scale military incursion on NATO’s eastern flank. Poland and the Baltic states are reportedly viewed as the most likely targets in related assessments, but no specific country has been officially identified by the U.S. The goal could be to test NATO’s unity and see whether Washington and European allies would actually respond under Article 5. A full scale invasion is NOT what the assessment predicts. The concern is a limited operation designed to stay below the threshold of a major war. If Putin crosses NATO’s border, the world could face its most dangerous military crisis in Europe since the Cold War. 👀
0:43

JUST IN: 🇺🇸🇷🇺🇪🇺 U.S. Intel Warns Putin Could Test NATO With A Limited Attack New U.S. intelligence warns that Vladimir Putin could attempt a limited attack against a NATO member as early as this autumn, with the risk window extending through 2029. Scenarios range from cyberattacks and sabotage to a small scale military incursion on NATO’s eastern flank. Poland and the Baltic states are reportedly viewed as the most likely targets in related assessments, but no specific country has been officially identified by the U.S. The goal could be to test NATO’s unity and see whether Washington and European allies would actually respond under Article 5. A full scale invasion is NOT what the assessment predicts. The concern is a limited operation designed to stay below the threshold of a major war. If Putin crosses NATO’s border, the world could face its most dangerous military crisis in Europe since the Cold War. 👀

War Radar

11,518 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚨🇷🇺⚠️ U.S. intelligence is reportedly warning that Putin could consider provoking a confrontation with NATO as early as this autumn. Analysts believe mounting pressure from the war in Ukraine may increase the risk of broader escalation. According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S. intelligence assessments suggest that Vladimir Putin could seek a confrontation with NATO in an attempt to demonstrate some form of military success as Russia remains bogged down in the war against Ukraine. The report says the window of heightened risk begins this autumn, with potential scenarios ranging from cyberattacks and hybrid operations to a limited cross-border ground incursion. While intelligence officials reportedly continue to assess the likelihood of a limited conventional military operation as relatively low, they warn that the risk could increase over time if the conflict in Ukraine continues to deteriorate for Moscow. The assessment underscores growing concern within Western security circles that Russia could seek to expand tensions beyond Ukraine if the Kremlin concludes that escalation offers greater strategic or political advantages. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

🚨🇷🇺⚠️ U.S. intelligence is reportedly warning that Putin could consider provoking a confrontation with NATO as early as this autumn. Analysts believe mounting pressure from the war in Ukraine may increase the risk of broader escalation. According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S. intelligence assessments suggest that Vladimir Putin could seek a confrontation with NATO in an attempt to demonstrate some form of military success as Russia remains bogged down in the war against Ukraine. The report says the window of heightened risk begins this autumn, with potential scenarios ranging from cyberattacks and hybrid operations to a limited cross-border ground incursion. While intelligence officials reportedly continue to assess the likelihood of a limited conventional military operation as relatively low, they warn that the risk could increase over time if the conflict in Ukraine continues to deteriorate for Moscow. The assessment underscores growing concern within Western security circles that Russia could seek to expand tensions beyond Ukraine if the Kremlin concludes that escalation offers greater strategic or political advantages. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

69,005 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🇷🇺🇺🇸 BREAKING | A direct Russia-NATO confrontation may no longer be a distant scenario. U.S. intelligence now assesses that Vladimir Putin could test the alliance with a limited attack, with the earliest risk window beginning as soon as this autumn. The Wall Street Journal says the assessment marks a shift from earlier U.S. assumptions that Moscow would avoid directly provoking NATO while still fighting in Ukraine. Possible scenarios range from cyberattacks and hybrid operations to a limited military incursion on NATO’s eastern flank. The most extreme scenario remains assessed as relatively unlikely, but the risk is believed to be increasing. The warning comes as Russia struggles to achieve its objectives in Ukraine while facing growing economic pressure and Ukrainian strikes deep inside the country. For Putin, a carefully calibrated confrontation with NATO could become an attempt to manufacture the strategic “victory” Ukraine has denied him while simultaneously testing whether Article 5 is as politically solid in practice as it is on paper. But it would also be an extraordinary gamble: even a deliberately limited incursion could trigger a military response from an alliance whose combined conventional and economic power vastly exceeds Russia’s. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
1:00

🇷🇺🇺🇸 BREAKING | A direct Russia-NATO confrontation may no longer be a distant scenario. U.S. intelligence now assesses that Vladimir Putin could test the alliance with a limited attack, with the earliest risk window beginning as soon as this autumn. The Wall Street Journal says the assessment marks a shift from earlier U.S. assumptions that Moscow would avoid directly provoking NATO while still fighting in Ukraine. Possible scenarios range from cyberattacks and hybrid operations to a limited military incursion on NATO’s eastern flank. The most extreme scenario remains assessed as relatively unlikely, but the risk is believed to be increasing. The warning comes as Russia struggles to achieve its objectives in Ukraine while facing growing economic pressure and Ukrainian strikes deep inside the country. For Putin, a carefully calibrated confrontation with NATO could become an attempt to manufacture the strategic “victory” Ukraine has denied him while simultaneously testing whether Article 5 is as politically solid in practice as it is on paper. But it would also be an extraordinary gamble: even a deliberately limited incursion could trigger a military response from an alliance whose combined conventional and economic power vastly exceeds Russia’s. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

25,711 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🇺🇸🇱🇻🇷🇺 NATO is ramping up preparations to protect the Baltics U.S. Navy Seabees are building boat ramps and Arctic huts on Latvia’s coast as part of major exercises to practice rapid reinforcement and logistics in case of Russian aggression. The Baltic Sea is a key choke point surrounded by NATO allies, and Western officials are warning Moscow could test the eastern flank sooner than expected. It’s a clear signal that the alliance is taking the threat seriously and getting ready for the worst. Source: The Telegraph / Writer: Lucas
1:54

🇺🇸🇱🇻🇷🇺 NATO is ramping up preparations to protect the Baltics U.S. Navy Seabees are building boat ramps and Arctic huts on Latvia’s coast as part of major exercises to practice rapid reinforcement and logistics in case of Russian aggression. The Baltic Sea is a key choke point surrounded by NATO allies, and Western officials are warning Moscow could test the eastern flank sooner than expected. It’s a clear signal that the alliance is taking the threat seriously and getting ready for the worst. Source: The Telegraph / Writer: Lucas

Mario Nawfal

54,985 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

‼️‼️🇺🇸🇷🇺⚠️ BREAKING | CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s surprise visit to Moscow this week had a stark and highly sensitive purpose: to personally warn Russia against attacking any NATO member state. According to The Wall Street Journal, Ratcliffe’s mission followed new U.S. intelligence assessments indicating that Vladimir Putin could attempt to test NATO’s resolve with a limited attack against an allied country within the next several years. Potential scenarios assessed by U.S. intelligence range from hybrid and cyber operations to a limited conventional incursion. Separate intelligence has also detected Russian preparations connected to possible mobilization, including readiness planning in Kaliningrad, positioned directly between NATO members Poland and Lithuania. The fact that Washington sent the CIA director directly to Moscow makes the warning particularly significant. The United States is signaling that even a limited Russian attempt to probe NATO’s defenses would risk triggering a confrontation with the entire Alliance. Coming amid growing concern over the Baltic region and NATO’s eastern flank, Ratcliffe’s mission suggests Washington is treating the possibility of a future Russian test of Article 5 as a serious security scenario rather than a distant hypothetical. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

‼️‼️🇺🇸🇷🇺⚠️ BREAKING | CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s surprise visit to Moscow this week had a stark and highly sensitive purpose: to personally warn Russia against attacking any NATO member state. According to The Wall Street Journal, Ratcliffe’s mission followed new U.S. intelligence assessments indicating that Vladimir Putin could attempt to test NATO’s resolve with a limited attack against an allied country within the next several years. Potential scenarios assessed by U.S. intelligence range from hybrid and cyber operations to a limited conventional incursion. Separate intelligence has also detected Russian preparations connected to possible mobilization, including readiness planning in Kaliningrad, positioned directly between NATO members Poland and Lithuania. The fact that Washington sent the CIA director directly to Moscow makes the warning particularly significant. The United States is signaling that even a limited Russian attempt to probe NATO’s defenses would risk triggering a confrontation with the entire Alliance. Coming amid growing concern over the Baltic region and NATO’s eastern flank, Ratcliffe’s mission suggests Washington is treating the possibility of a future Russian test of Article 5 as a serious security scenario rather than a distant hypothetical. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

34,927 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Putin’s “little green men” could be the next threat facing NATO. Intelligence experts fear Russia could revive the Crimea playbook with a covert incursion into Estonia, using unmarked troops, staged incidents and deniable attacks to test the alliance’s response. The focus is increasingly on Narva, Estonia’s Russian-speaking border city, where fears of a manufactured crisis are growing. Could Moscow use a limited operation to test NATO’s Article 5 without triggering an immediate full-scale war? This video examines the reported warning from Washington, Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics, the Narva scenario, the Suwalki Gap, NATO’s Baltic defenses and the risks of a direct Russia-NATO confrontation. #Putin #NATO #Russia #Ukraine #Crimea #Estonia #Moscow #Washington #Europe #worldnews Aditi Singh
9:43

Putin’s “little green men” could be the next threat facing NATO. Intelligence experts fear Russia could revive the Crimea playbook with a covert incursion into Estonia, using unmarked troops, staged incidents and deniable attacks to test the alliance’s response. The focus is increasingly on Narva, Estonia’s Russian-speaking border city, where fears of a manufactured crisis are growing. Could Moscow use a limited operation to test NATO’s Article 5 without triggering an immediate full-scale war? This video examines the reported warning from Washington, Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics, the Narva scenario, the Suwalki Gap, NATO’s Baltic defenses and the risks of a direct Russia-NATO confrontation. #Putin #NATO #Russia #Ukraine #Crimea #Estonia #Moscow #Washington #Europe #worldnews Aditi Singh

The Times Of India

45,511 Aufrufe • vor 13 Tagen

BIG | 🇪🇺🇷🇺‼️‼️ Russia’s hybrid campaign across Europe is becoming increasingly aggressive and dangerous, with a person close to the Kremlin telling Bloomberg that Moscow intends to make life “hell” for Europe over its continued support for Ukraine. European officials increasingly link Russia to sabotage, arson, cyberattacks, attacks on critical energy and transport infrastructure, and repeated violations of NATO airspace. Bloomberg reports that the campaign has recently shifted toward defense-industrial and logistics targets directly connected to Ukraine, while Moscow continues operating below the threshold it believes would trigger a direct NATO military response. The growing danger is that Russia appears willing to test how far it can push NATO while exploiting uncertainty over where the alliance’s red lines actually lie. Europe has strengthened security and counterintelligence measures, but a unified strategy for responding to hybrid attacks still remains elusive. That ambiguity leaves Moscow room to increase pressure while simultaneously raising the risk that one increasingly reckless operation eventually triggers a much larger confrontation. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇪🇺🇷🇺‼️‼️ Russia’s hybrid campaign across Europe is becoming increasingly aggressive and dangerous, with a person close to the Kremlin telling Bloomberg that Moscow intends to make life “hell” for Europe over its continued support for Ukraine. European officials increasingly link Russia to sabotage, arson, cyberattacks, attacks on critical energy and transport infrastructure, and repeated violations of NATO airspace. Bloomberg reports that the campaign has recently shifted toward defense-industrial and logistics targets directly connected to Ukraine, while Moscow continues operating below the threshold it believes would trigger a direct NATO military response. The growing danger is that Russia appears willing to test how far it can push NATO while exploiting uncertainty over where the alliance’s red lines actually lie. Europe has strengthened security and counterintelligence measures, but a unified strategy for responding to hybrid attacks still remains elusive. That ambiguity leaves Moscow room to increase pressure while simultaneously raising the risk that one increasingly reckless operation eventually triggers a much larger confrontation. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

15,515 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

BREAKING | 🇨🇿🇺🇸🇷🇺‼️‼️ Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš has reportedly met with representatives of the CIA and Czech intelligence services for a high-level briefing on potential threats posed by Russia to Europe. Among the scenarios presented was a possible limited Russian incursion into the Baltic states, potentially conducted under a false flag and designed to test NATO’s unity and collective response. Separately, Babiš has publicly reaffirmed that Czechia would honor NATO’s collective-defense commitments in the event of an attack on a Baltic ally. The scenario is particularly dangerous because a deliberately limited and disguised operation could be intended to create uncertainty over attribution and force NATO governments to make difficult decisions under intense time pressure. In such a situation, Moscow would not necessarily need a large-scale invasion to test whether the Alliance can maintain a unified response. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BREAKING | 🇨🇿🇺🇸🇷🇺‼️‼️ Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš has reportedly met with representatives of the CIA and Czech intelligence services for a high-level briefing on potential threats posed by Russia to Europe. Among the scenarios presented was a possible limited Russian incursion into the Baltic states, potentially conducted under a false flag and designed to test NATO’s unity and collective response. Separately, Babiš has publicly reaffirmed that Czechia would honor NATO’s collective-defense commitments in the event of an attack on a Baltic ally. The scenario is particularly dangerous because a deliberately limited and disguised operation could be intended to create uncertainty over attribution and force NATO governments to make difficult decisions under intense time pressure. In such a situation, Moscow would not necessarily need a large-scale invasion to test whether the Alliance can maintain a unified response. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

24,707 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

BIG | 🇷🇺🇺🇦🇪🇺‼️‼️ European officials increasingly fear Vladimir Putin is preparing for a new phase of escalation, potentially combining a major expansion of Russia’s military manpower with intensified hybrid pressure against Ukraine’s NATO allies. According to The Telegraph, Western intelligence officials believe the Kremlin is laying the groundwork for another “covert mobilisation” after this weekend’s elections, potentially bringing hundreds of thousands more Russians into military service. European governments are simultaneously warning of increasingly aggressive Russian hybrid activity against NATO countries, including sabotage, cyber operations and drone incursions designed to remain below the threshold of conventional war. Poland has separately warned that Russia could use drones or missiles against NATO territory while attempting to portray such incidents as accidental. The warnings are emerging as Washington reviews the future of its military presence in Europe. Reuters confirms that withdrawing around 25,000 troops is among the possibilities under consideration, while reporting on a more extensive option has put potential reductions as high as 40,000. No final decision has been made, and the Pentagon’s review is still underway, but the prospect of a substantial U.S. drawdown is adding another layer of uncertainty to European security planning at precisely the moment pressure from Russia is intensifying. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇷🇺🇺🇦🇪🇺‼️‼️ European officials increasingly fear Vladimir Putin is preparing for a new phase of escalation, potentially combining a major expansion of Russia’s military manpower with intensified hybrid pressure against Ukraine’s NATO allies. According to The Telegraph, Western intelligence officials believe the Kremlin is laying the groundwork for another “covert mobilisation” after this weekend’s elections, potentially bringing hundreds of thousands more Russians into military service. European governments are simultaneously warning of increasingly aggressive Russian hybrid activity against NATO countries, including sabotage, cyber operations and drone incursions designed to remain below the threshold of conventional war. Poland has separately warned that Russia could use drones or missiles against NATO territory while attempting to portray such incidents as accidental. The warnings are emerging as Washington reviews the future of its military presence in Europe. Reuters confirms that withdrawing around 25,000 troops is among the possibilities under consideration, while reporting on a more extensive option has put potential reductions as high as 40,000. No final decision has been made, and the Pentagon’s review is still underway, but the prospect of a substantial U.S. drawdown is adding another layer of uncertainty to European security planning at precisely the moment pressure from Russia is intensifying. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

14,990 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

‼️‼️🇱🇻🇺🇸⚠️🇷🇺 Latvia and the United States are intensifying security consultations as concern grows across the Baltic states over the possibility of future Russian aggression against NATO’s northeastern flank. Latvia’s Foreign Minister held talks with a U.S. representative focused on the security challenges and threats facing allies in the region, including Russia-linked hybrid activities. The consultations come as Baltic governments strengthen their eastern borders and prepare for scenarios ranging from sabotage and provocations against critical infrastructure to broader military escalation. Lithuanian intelligence has recently warned that Moscow could potentially employ captured Ukrainian drones in a false-flag operation against Baltic infrastructure, although officials stressed there was no indication of an imminent Russian attack. For Latvia and the other Baltic states, the central challenge is ensuring that Russia never concludes NATO’s eastern flank can be tested without an overwhelming allied response. Moscow may initially rely on hybrid pressure rather than conventional invasion, but closer coordination with Washington, stronger regional defenses and a credible U.S. presence are intended to ensure that any attempt to escalate against the Baltics would immediately become a confrontation with the entire Alliance. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

‼️‼️🇱🇻🇺🇸⚠️🇷🇺 Latvia and the United States are intensifying security consultations as concern grows across the Baltic states over the possibility of future Russian aggression against NATO’s northeastern flank. Latvia’s Foreign Minister held talks with a U.S. representative focused on the security challenges and threats facing allies in the region, including Russia-linked hybrid activities. The consultations come as Baltic governments strengthen their eastern borders and prepare for scenarios ranging from sabotage and provocations against critical infrastructure to broader military escalation. Lithuanian intelligence has recently warned that Moscow could potentially employ captured Ukrainian drones in a false-flag operation against Baltic infrastructure, although officials stressed there was no indication of an imminent Russian attack. For Latvia and the other Baltic states, the central challenge is ensuring that Russia never concludes NATO’s eastern flank can be tested without an overwhelming allied response. Moscow may initially rely on hybrid pressure rather than conventional invasion, but closer coordination with Washington, stronger regional defenses and a credible U.S. presence are intended to ensure that any attempt to escalate against the Baltics would immediately become a confrontation with the entire Alliance. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

29,710 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

BIG | 🇷🇺🇪🇺‼️‼️ Against the backdrop of the suspicious restoration of an old railway line in Belarus near the Suwałki Corridor, along with the construction of a nearby road, it is worth recalling what happened in Georgia in 2008. Before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Georgia, Moscow restored a railway line in occupied Abkhazia, officially citing economic reasons. That railway was later used during the offensive on Georgia’s western front, allowing Russian forces and equipment to be moved rapidly into the area. Some will argue that Georgia was not a NATO member, unlike Lithuania, and that Russia therefore would not dare launch a reckless incursion into the Baltic region today. My response is that Russia was not then bogged down in a five-year unsuccessful war against Ukraine and its million-strong military. Today, Russia is stuck on the Ukrainian front, and Moscow may see a new escalation as a way to change the strategic dynamic. Such an escalation could also involve nuclear threats, with the Kremlin attempting to undermine NATO unity and weaken the credibility of Article 5. If such a gamble succeeded and Putin managed to fracture NATO unity, it could give him an opportunity to use the threat of a wider war and nuclear escalation to pressure European governments into ending their support for Ukraine. I will not even get into Trump’s position, which, in my view, has already involved attempts to normalize Russian attacks in Europe during the early stages of escalation, potentially creating political room to avoid confronting Russia if the situation deteriorates further. Moreover, Putin has a critically short window before the U.S. midterm elections, after which Trump could lose control of at least the House of Representatives and potentially the Senate as well. An escalation with the West could also be used by Putin as justification for a broader mobilization inside Russia. After five years of an unsuccessful war against Ukraine, launching such a mobilization solely for the Ukrainian war could be politically dangerous for the regime. Presenting the country as facing the threat of war with NATO, however, could provide the Kremlin with a much stronger pretext to mobilize Russia’s nationalist and imperialist sections of society. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇷🇺🇪🇺‼️‼️ Against the backdrop of the suspicious restoration of an old railway line in Belarus near the Suwałki Corridor, along with the construction of a nearby road, it is worth recalling what happened in Georgia in 2008. Before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Georgia, Moscow restored a railway line in occupied Abkhazia, officially citing economic reasons. That railway was later used during the offensive on Georgia’s western front, allowing Russian forces and equipment to be moved rapidly into the area. Some will argue that Georgia was not a NATO member, unlike Lithuania, and that Russia therefore would not dare launch a reckless incursion into the Baltic region today. My response is that Russia was not then bogged down in a five-year unsuccessful war against Ukraine and its million-strong military. Today, Russia is stuck on the Ukrainian front, and Moscow may see a new escalation as a way to change the strategic dynamic. Such an escalation could also involve nuclear threats, with the Kremlin attempting to undermine NATO unity and weaken the credibility of Article 5. If such a gamble succeeded and Putin managed to fracture NATO unity, it could give him an opportunity to use the threat of a wider war and nuclear escalation to pressure European governments into ending their support for Ukraine. I will not even get into Trump’s position, which, in my view, has already involved attempts to normalize Russian attacks in Europe during the early stages of escalation, potentially creating political room to avoid confronting Russia if the situation deteriorates further. Moreover, Putin has a critically short window before the U.S. midterm elections, after which Trump could lose control of at least the House of Representatives and potentially the Senate as well. An escalation with the West could also be used by Putin as justification for a broader mobilization inside Russia. After five years of an unsuccessful war against Ukraine, launching such a mobilization solely for the Ukrainian war could be politically dangerous for the regime. Presenting the country as facing the threat of war with NATO, however, could provide the Kremlin with a much stronger pretext to mobilize Russia’s nationalist and imperialist sections of society. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

92,431 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

BIG | 🇵🇱🇺🇦🇷🇺‼️‼️ Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warns that Russia could dramatically expand its hybrid campaign in the coming months, potentially using drones and missiles against countries supporting Ukraine while attempting to keep the attacks below the threshold of an open Russia-NATO war. Tusk said Moscow could target road and railway crossings used to sustain Ukraine, including infrastructure on the Polish and Moldovan sides of the border, while presenting future drone or missile incursions into NATO airspace as accidental incidents. Poland has already deployed air-defense systems around six border crossings, amid fears that attacks on transport and energy infrastructure could make supplying Ukraine considerably more difficult during the winter. Tusk believes the broader Russian objective is to test NATO’s political cohesion and weaken allies’ willingness to invoke Article 5 or other collective-response mechanisms if pressure escalates against individual members. His warning makes the coming autumn and winter critical far beyond Ukraine, with Poland preparing for a confrontation in which Moscow could increasingly blur the line between hybrid pressure and direct aggression against NATO. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇵🇱🇺🇦🇷🇺‼️‼️ Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warns that Russia could dramatically expand its hybrid campaign in the coming months, potentially using drones and missiles against countries supporting Ukraine while attempting to keep the attacks below the threshold of an open Russia-NATO war. Tusk said Moscow could target road and railway crossings used to sustain Ukraine, including infrastructure on the Polish and Moldovan sides of the border, while presenting future drone or missile incursions into NATO airspace as accidental incidents. Poland has already deployed air-defense systems around six border crossings, amid fears that attacks on transport and energy infrastructure could make supplying Ukraine considerably more difficult during the winter. Tusk believes the broader Russian objective is to test NATO’s political cohesion and weaken allies’ willingness to invoke Article 5 or other collective-response mechanisms if pressure escalates against individual members. His warning makes the coming autumn and winter critical far beyond Ukraine, with Poland preparing for a confrontation in which Moscow could increasingly blur the line between hybrid pressure and direct aggression against NATO. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

31,174 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

‼️‼️🇺🇸🇷🇺 BIG | The story surrounding CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s highly unusual and unannounced visit to Moscow is getting bigger, with Washington reportedly delivering direct warnings to the Kremlin over both NATO’s eastern flank and Russia’s support for Iran. According to POLITICO, during his visit this week Ratcliffe warned Russian officials against any further escalation involving NATO member states, with particular attention focused on the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The warning comes amid new U.S. intelligence assessments that Vladimir Putin could attempt to test NATO’s resolve through limited aggression against an Alliance member. The Wall Street Journal separately confirms that warning Moscow against attacking NATO was a central purpose of Ratcliffe’s surprise mission. Ratcliffe also pressed Moscow to reduce its military and economic support for Iran. The combination of the two messages makes the visit particularly significant: Washington is drawing red lines directly with the Kremlin on two increasingly sensitive fronts, while signaling that any Russian attempt to test NATO in the Baltics would be treated as a serious threat to the Alliance as a whole. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

‼️‼️🇺🇸🇷🇺 BIG | The story surrounding CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s highly unusual and unannounced visit to Moscow is getting bigger, with Washington reportedly delivering direct warnings to the Kremlin over both NATO’s eastern flank and Russia’s support for Iran. According to POLITICO, during his visit this week Ratcliffe warned Russian officials against any further escalation involving NATO member states, with particular attention focused on the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The warning comes amid new U.S. intelligence assessments that Vladimir Putin could attempt to test NATO’s resolve through limited aggression against an Alliance member. The Wall Street Journal separately confirms that warning Moscow against attacking NATO was a central purpose of Ratcliffe’s surprise mission. Ratcliffe also pressed Moscow to reduce its military and economic support for Iran. The combination of the two messages makes the visit particularly significant: Washington is drawing red lines directly with the Kremlin on two increasingly sensitive fronts, while signaling that any Russian attempt to test NATO in the Baltics would be treated as a serious threat to the Alliance as a whole. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

54,963 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

BIG | 🇺🇸🇩🇪🇷🇺‼️‼️ Trump is downplaying the risk of a direct Russian attack on NATO even as Germany formally attributes the Leipzig/Halle drone operation to Moscow, exposing a widening gap between Washington’s political messaging and Europe’s growing concern over Russian hybrid warfare. Asked whether the explosive-laden drone incident at a German airport amounted to an attack on NATO territory, Trump repeated his view that Putin is not planning to attack NATO. He made a similar statement last week. Germany, however, has already blamed Russia for the August 4 Leipzig/Halle operation, while NATO officials acknowledge that Russian hybrid activity across Europe is intensifying even though they currently see no imminent conventional attack on the Alliance. The distinction matters: Putin may not be preparing a conventional invasion of NATO, but Russia is already testing the Alliance below that threshold through sabotage, drones and other hybrid operations. Trump is right that there is no current evidence of an imminent full-scale attack, but treating that as reassurance risks missing the actual problem Europe is facing now. Washington and European allies need a clearer collective response to repeated Russian hostile activity before Moscow concludes that operating below Article 5 carries little meaningful cost. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇺🇸🇩🇪🇷🇺‼️‼️ Trump is downplaying the risk of a direct Russian attack on NATO even as Germany formally attributes the Leipzig/Halle drone operation to Moscow, exposing a widening gap between Washington’s political messaging and Europe’s growing concern over Russian hybrid warfare. Asked whether the explosive-laden drone incident at a German airport amounted to an attack on NATO territory, Trump repeated his view that Putin is not planning to attack NATO. He made a similar statement last week. Germany, however, has already blamed Russia for the August 4 Leipzig/Halle operation, while NATO officials acknowledge that Russian hybrid activity across Europe is intensifying even though they currently see no imminent conventional attack on the Alliance. The distinction matters: Putin may not be preparing a conventional invasion of NATO, but Russia is already testing the Alliance below that threshold through sabotage, drones and other hybrid operations. Trump is right that there is no current evidence of an imminent full-scale attack, but treating that as reassurance risks missing the actual problem Europe is facing now. Washington and European allies need a clearer collective response to repeated Russian hostile activity before Moscow concludes that operating below Article 5 carries little meaningful cost. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

26,777 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

‼️‼️🇷🇺🇪🇺⚠️ Western intelligence is increasingly focused on the possibility that Russia could first test NATO’s eastern flank through false-flag and hybrid operations rather than launch an immediate conventional attack, with the Baltic states emerging as the central pressure point. According to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Baltic diplomats say intelligence collected throughout the summer pointed to Russian preparations for possible false-flag operations, although there were no indications of an imminent conventional invasion. Officials stressed that such operations might not necessarily be confined to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, pointing to suspected Russian-linked sabotage, drone incursions and other hostile activity elsewhere in Europe. The concern has become serious enough that CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Moscow this week to directly warn the Kremlin against escalating with NATO members, particularly the three Baltic states. The emerging picture suggests that the immediate danger to Eastern Europe may not be Russian armored formations crossing NATO’s borders, but a gradual campaign designed to probe the Alliance below the threshold of open war. False-flag incidents, sabotage, cyberattacks, electronic warfare and controlled military provocations could allow Moscow to test NATO’s reaction and political unity before deciding whether further escalation is possible. Washington’s decision to brief allies next week on Ratcliffe’s Moscow talks, combined with the fact that Baltic allies were informed about his mission beforehand, shows that the possibility of Russia testing NATO is now being treated as a serious collective-security issue rather than merely a Baltic concern. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:29

‼️‼️🇷🇺🇪🇺⚠️ Western intelligence is increasingly focused on the possibility that Russia could first test NATO’s eastern flank through false-flag and hybrid operations rather than launch an immediate conventional attack, with the Baltic states emerging as the central pressure point. According to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Baltic diplomats say intelligence collected throughout the summer pointed to Russian preparations for possible false-flag operations, although there were no indications of an imminent conventional invasion. Officials stressed that such operations might not necessarily be confined to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, pointing to suspected Russian-linked sabotage, drone incursions and other hostile activity elsewhere in Europe. The concern has become serious enough that CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Moscow this week to directly warn the Kremlin against escalating with NATO members, particularly the three Baltic states. The emerging picture suggests that the immediate danger to Eastern Europe may not be Russian armored formations crossing NATO’s borders, but a gradual campaign designed to probe the Alliance below the threshold of open war. False-flag incidents, sabotage, cyberattacks, electronic warfare and controlled military provocations could allow Moscow to test NATO’s reaction and political unity before deciding whether further escalation is possible. Washington’s decision to brief allies next week on Ratcliffe’s Moscow talks, combined with the fact that Baltic allies were informed about his mission beforehand, shows that the possibility of Russia testing NATO is now being treated as a serious collective-security issue rather than merely a Baltic concern. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

24,743 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚨🚨🚨WAKE UP EUROPE 🛎️🛎️🛎️ If You Still Believe That Russia Started This Conflict in 2022, Then You Are Ignorant, or Brainwashed. The END to NATO. The Ukraine war, which I will argue was provoked by the West and especially the United States. This war will be settled on the battlefield where the Russians are likely to win an ugly victory. Settling the war diplomatically is not possible because the opposing sides have irreconcilable differences. Instead, it's likely to be, as I said, an ugly victory, where Russia ends up occupying somewhere between 20 to 40% of pre-2014 Ukraine, while Ukraine ends up as a dysfunctional rump state covering the territory that Russia does not conquer. Ukraine has effectively been wrecked. It has already lost a substantial portion of its territory and is likely to lose more land before the fighting stops. Russian leaders recognized that the Ukrainian army, which was larger than the invasion force, I want to emphasize this, the Ukrainian army was larger than the Russian invasion force, it was armed and trained by NATO, and it was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Immediately after the war began, Russia, not Ukraine, Russia reached out to Ukraine to start negotiations to end the war and work out a modus vivendi between the two countries. This move is directly at odds with the claim that Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine and make it part of greater Russia. Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow began in Belarus just four days, four days after the Russian invasion. And that Belarus track was eventually replaced by an Israeli as well as an Istanbul track. The available evidence indicates that the Russians were negotiating seriously and were not interested in absorbing Ukrainian territory, save for Crimea, which they had annexed in 2014, and possibly the Donbass region. The negotiations ended when the Ukrainians, with prodding from Britain and the United States, walked away from the negotiations, which were making good progress at the time. The Russians did not walk away from the negotiations. In the months before the war started, Putin tried to find a diplomatic solution to the brewing crisis. On 17 October 2021, remember the war begins February 2022, this is 17 December 2021, Putin sends letters to both President Biden and to NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg proposing a solution to the crisis based on a written guarantee that does three things. Number one, Ukraine would not join NATO, number two, no offensive weapons would be stationed near Russia's borders, and number three, NATO troops and equipment moved into Eastern Europe since 1997 would be moved back to Western Europe. Whatever one thinks of the feasibility of reaching a bargain based on Putin's opening demands, it shows he was trying to avoid war. The United States, on the other hand, refused to negotiate with Putin. It appears it was not interested in avoiding war. In fact, the United States and its European allies provoked the war. Bringing Kiev into the European Union and promoting a color revolution in Ukraine, you all remember the Orange Revolution, which was designed to make Ukraine a pro-Western liberal democracy, are the other two prongs of the policy. Russian leaders across the board said repeatedly before the war. that they considered NATO expansion into Ukraine to be an existential threat that had to be eliminated. Putin made numerous public statements laying out this line of argument before 24 February, 2022. Other leaders, including the defense minister, the foreign minister, the deputy foreign minister, and Moscow's ambassador to Washington also emphasized the centrality of NATO expansion for causing the crisis over Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, made this point succinctly at a press conference on 14 January, 2022. Lavrov says "'The key to everything is the guarantee "'that NATO will not expand eastward.' Substantial number of influential and highly regarded individuals in the West recognized before the war that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, would be seen by Russian leaders as a mortal threat and eventually would lead to disaster. William Burns, who was recently Joe Biden's head of the CIA, but he was the American ambassador to Moscow in April 2008 when the decision was made to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, wrote a very famous memo that I'm sure some of you are familiar with to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. This is a quite remarkable memo, and I'm going to quote extensively from it. "'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest "'of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. "'In more than two and a half years of conversations "'with key Russian players, from knuckle draggers "'in the dark recesses of the Kremlin "'to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, "'I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine and NATO "'as anything other than a direct challenge "'to Russia's interests.' "'NATO,' he said, quote, "'would be seen as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. "'Today's Russia will respond. "'Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze. "'It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling "'in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.'" This was written by Bill Burns in 2008. Burns was not the only Western policymaker in 2008 who understood that bringing Ukraine into NATO was fraught with danger. Both Angela Merkel, who was then the German chancellor, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy adamantly opposed moving forward to bring Ukraine into NATO. Merkel said, "'I was very sure that Putin is not going "'to just let that happen."'From his perspective, that would be a declaration of war.'" Putin saw Ukraine joining NATO as a mortal threat that could not be allowed and was willing to go to war to prevent it from happening, which he did, of course, in February of 2022. Relations between Europe and Russia will not only be poisonous, they will also be dangerous. The possibility of war will be ever-present. In other words, the threat of a major European war will not go away when the fighting in Ukraine stops. Russian victory in Ukraine, would be a stunning defeat for Europe. Or to put it in slightly different words, it would be a stunning defeat for NATO, which has been deeply involved in the Ukraine conflict since it started. The political fights, some will question the future of NATO, given that it failed to check Russia, the country that most European leaders describe as a mortal threat. Threats to the EU aside, the great reduction in the flow of gas and oil to Europe since the war started has seriously hurt the major economies of Europe and slowed down growth in the overall Eurozone. General Observations The Ukraine war has been a disaster. It has had catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. It has poisoned relations between Europe and Russia for the foreseeable future. It has made Europe a more dangerous place. It has also caused serious economic and political harm inside Europe, and badly damaged transatlantic relations. Most European leaders, and I'm sure most people in the various European publics, will blame Putin for causing the war, and thus for its terrible consequences. But they are wrong. The war could have been avoided if the West had not decided to bring Ukraine into NATO, or even if it had backed off from that commitment once the Russians made their opposition clear. Had that happened, Ukraine would almost certainly be intact today within its pre-2014 borders, and Europe would be more stable and more prosperous. Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. ***Professor John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a globally recognized expert in international relations.
48:45

🚨🚨🚨WAKE UP EUROPE 🛎️🛎️🛎️ If You Still Believe That Russia Started This Conflict in 2022, Then You Are Ignorant, or Brainwashed. The END to NATO. The Ukraine war, which I will argue was provoked by the West and especially the United States. This war will be settled on the battlefield where the Russians are likely to win an ugly victory. Settling the war diplomatically is not possible because the opposing sides have irreconcilable differences. Instead, it's likely to be, as I said, an ugly victory, where Russia ends up occupying somewhere between 20 to 40% of pre-2014 Ukraine, while Ukraine ends up as a dysfunctional rump state covering the territory that Russia does not conquer. Ukraine has effectively been wrecked. It has already lost a substantial portion of its territory and is likely to lose more land before the fighting stops. Russian leaders recognized that the Ukrainian army, which was larger than the invasion force, I want to emphasize this, the Ukrainian army was larger than the Russian invasion force, it was armed and trained by NATO, and it was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Immediately after the war began, Russia, not Ukraine, Russia reached out to Ukraine to start negotiations to end the war and work out a modus vivendi between the two countries. This move is directly at odds with the claim that Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine and make it part of greater Russia. Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow began in Belarus just four days, four days after the Russian invasion. And that Belarus track was eventually replaced by an Israeli as well as an Istanbul track. The available evidence indicates that the Russians were negotiating seriously and were not interested in absorbing Ukrainian territory, save for Crimea, which they had annexed in 2014, and possibly the Donbass region. The negotiations ended when the Ukrainians, with prodding from Britain and the United States, walked away from the negotiations, which were making good progress at the time. The Russians did not walk away from the negotiations. In the months before the war started, Putin tried to find a diplomatic solution to the brewing crisis. On 17 October 2021, remember the war begins February 2022, this is 17 December 2021, Putin sends letters to both President Biden and to NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg proposing a solution to the crisis based on a written guarantee that does three things. Number one, Ukraine would not join NATO, number two, no offensive weapons would be stationed near Russia's borders, and number three, NATO troops and equipment moved into Eastern Europe since 1997 would be moved back to Western Europe. Whatever one thinks of the feasibility of reaching a bargain based on Putin's opening demands, it shows he was trying to avoid war. The United States, on the other hand, refused to negotiate with Putin. It appears it was not interested in avoiding war. In fact, the United States and its European allies provoked the war. Bringing Kiev into the European Union and promoting a color revolution in Ukraine, you all remember the Orange Revolution, which was designed to make Ukraine a pro-Western liberal democracy, are the other two prongs of the policy. Russian leaders across the board said repeatedly before the war. that they considered NATO expansion into Ukraine to be an existential threat that had to be eliminated. Putin made numerous public statements laying out this line of argument before 24 February, 2022. Other leaders, including the defense minister, the foreign minister, the deputy foreign minister, and Moscow's ambassador to Washington also emphasized the centrality of NATO expansion for causing the crisis over Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, made this point succinctly at a press conference on 14 January, 2022. Lavrov says "'The key to everything is the guarantee "'that NATO will not expand eastward.' Substantial number of influential and highly regarded individuals in the West recognized before the war that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, would be seen by Russian leaders as a mortal threat and eventually would lead to disaster. William Burns, who was recently Joe Biden's head of the CIA, but he was the American ambassador to Moscow in April 2008 when the decision was made to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, wrote a very famous memo that I'm sure some of you are familiar with to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. This is a quite remarkable memo, and I'm going to quote extensively from it. "'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest "'of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. "'In more than two and a half years of conversations "'with key Russian players, from knuckle draggers "'in the dark recesses of the Kremlin "'to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, "'I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine and NATO "'as anything other than a direct challenge "'to Russia's interests.' "'NATO,' he said, quote, "'would be seen as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. "'Today's Russia will respond. "'Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze. "'It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling "'in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.'" This was written by Bill Burns in 2008. Burns was not the only Western policymaker in 2008 who understood that bringing Ukraine into NATO was fraught with danger. Both Angela Merkel, who was then the German chancellor, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy adamantly opposed moving forward to bring Ukraine into NATO. Merkel said, "'I was very sure that Putin is not going "'to just let that happen."'From his perspective, that would be a declaration of war.'" Putin saw Ukraine joining NATO as a mortal threat that could not be allowed and was willing to go to war to prevent it from happening, which he did, of course, in February of 2022. Relations between Europe and Russia will not only be poisonous, they will also be dangerous. The possibility of war will be ever-present. In other words, the threat of a major European war will not go away when the fighting in Ukraine stops. Russian victory in Ukraine, would be a stunning defeat for Europe. Or to put it in slightly different words, it would be a stunning defeat for NATO, which has been deeply involved in the Ukraine conflict since it started. The political fights, some will question the future of NATO, given that it failed to check Russia, the country that most European leaders describe as a mortal threat. Threats to the EU aside, the great reduction in the flow of gas and oil to Europe since the war started has seriously hurt the major economies of Europe and slowed down growth in the overall Eurozone. General Observations The Ukraine war has been a disaster. It has had catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. It has poisoned relations between Europe and Russia for the foreseeable future. It has made Europe a more dangerous place. It has also caused serious economic and political harm inside Europe, and badly damaged transatlantic relations. Most European leaders, and I'm sure most people in the various European publics, will blame Putin for causing the war, and thus for its terrible consequences. But they are wrong. The war could have been avoided if the West had not decided to bring Ukraine into NATO, or even if it had backed off from that commitment once the Russians made their opposition clear. Had that happened, Ukraine would almost certainly be intact today within its pre-2014 borders, and Europe would be more stable and more prosperous. Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. ***Professor John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a globally recognized expert in international relations.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

374,394 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

BIG | 🇷🇺🇪🇺‼️‼️ Russia is already waging an aggressive hybrid war against NATO, systematically testing Europe while deliberately staying below the threshold that could trigger a direct Article 5 confrontation. Since the start of the full-scale invasion, more than 500 incidents have been recorded across Europe, including sabotage, arson, cyberattacks, attempted attacks, damage to critical infrastructure and other hostile activity. The pattern has intensified again in recent weeks: a fire at Milrem Robotics in Estonia on August 15, an attempted arson attack against Ukrainian drone producer Skyeton in Slovakia on August 25, deliberate sabotage at WB Electronics in Poland on August 31, and a series of attacks using improvised explosive devices against energy infrastructure in eastern Germany on September 1. De facto, this is already a form of war against NATO states, just one Moscow is trying to keep carefully below the threshold of open military confrontation. The objective is to intimidate, disrupt defense production, test response mechanisms and expose weaknesses without giving the Alliance an easy legal or political trigger for collective defense. Europe’s problem is no longer whether Russia is probing NATO, but how long the Alliance will tolerate repeated hostile acts before redefining what “below Article 5” actually means. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇷🇺🇪🇺‼️‼️ Russia is already waging an aggressive hybrid war against NATO, systematically testing Europe while deliberately staying below the threshold that could trigger a direct Article 5 confrontation. Since the start of the full-scale invasion, more than 500 incidents have been recorded across Europe, including sabotage, arson, cyberattacks, attempted attacks, damage to critical infrastructure and other hostile activity. The pattern has intensified again in recent weeks: a fire at Milrem Robotics in Estonia on August 15, an attempted arson attack against Ukrainian drone producer Skyeton in Slovakia on August 25, deliberate sabotage at WB Electronics in Poland on August 31, and a series of attacks using improvised explosive devices against energy infrastructure in eastern Germany on September 1. De facto, this is already a form of war against NATO states, just one Moscow is trying to keep carefully below the threshold of open military confrontation. The objective is to intimidate, disrupt defense production, test response mechanisms and expose weaknesses without giving the Alliance an easy legal or political trigger for collective defense. Europe’s problem is no longer whether Russia is probing NATO, but how long the Alliance will tolerate repeated hostile acts before redefining what “below Article 5” actually means. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

73,593 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

PUTIN GIVES THE SIGNAL: RUSSIA PREPARES THE STORM AND KIEV'S ENERGY HELL IS ABOUT TO BEGIN The message has arrived, and there's no room for doubts. In response to Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian refineries and logistics centers, President Vladimir Putin has ordered the Russian Armed Forces to prepare and carry out large-scale retaliatory strikes against Ukraine's energy infrastructure. The threat is real, and the geopolitical board is poised to catch fire. WHAT PUTIN'S ORDER REVEALS: ◆ Retaliation is imminent: Putin made it clear that Russia will not tolerate attacks on its territory. Every Ukrainian drone shot down on Russian soil will be responded to with a wave of destruction over enemy territory. ◆ The target: Ukraine's backbone: Ukrainian energy infrastructure - factories, substations, distribution networks is on target. The goal is clear: cut off the power that keeps Kiev's war machine going. WHAT PUTIN'S ORDER REVEALS: ◆ Retaliation is imminent: Putin made it clear that Russia will not tolerate attacks on its territory. Every Ukrainian drone shot down on Russian soil will be responded to with a wave of destruction over enemy territory. ◆ The target: Ukraine's backbone: Ukrainian energy infrastructure - factories, substations, distribution networks -is on target. The goal is clear: cut off the power that keeps Kiev's war machine going. ◆ The "winter of darkness": With the arrival of autumn, every blow on the Ukrainian electricity grid will be a step towards the humanitarian and military collapse of the Zelensky regime. ★ THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT: Putin's order is not a bluff. It's the continuation of a campaign that had already been running, but now gains a new chapter of intensity. Russia is ready to use all means at its disposal to ensure its safety in the face of the NATO threat. The question is not whether the attacks will happen, but when and with what intensity.
1:02

PUTIN GIVES THE SIGNAL: RUSSIA PREPARES THE STORM AND KIEV'S ENERGY HELL IS ABOUT TO BEGIN The message has arrived, and there's no room for doubts. In response to Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian refineries and logistics centers, President Vladimir Putin has ordered the Russian Armed Forces to prepare and carry out large-scale retaliatory strikes against Ukraine's energy infrastructure. The threat is real, and the geopolitical board is poised to catch fire. WHAT PUTIN'S ORDER REVEALS: ◆ Retaliation is imminent: Putin made it clear that Russia will not tolerate attacks on its territory. Every Ukrainian drone shot down on Russian soil will be responded to with a wave of destruction over enemy territory. ◆ The target: Ukraine's backbone: Ukrainian energy infrastructure - factories, substations, distribution networks is on target. The goal is clear: cut off the power that keeps Kiev's war machine going. WHAT PUTIN'S ORDER REVEALS: ◆ Retaliation is imminent: Putin made it clear that Russia will not tolerate attacks on its territory. Every Ukrainian drone shot down on Russian soil will be responded to with a wave of destruction over enemy territory. ◆ The target: Ukraine's backbone: Ukrainian energy infrastructure - factories, substations, distribution networks -is on target. The goal is clear: cut off the power that keeps Kiev's war machine going. ◆ The "winter of darkness": With the arrival of autumn, every blow on the Ukrainian electricity grid will be a step towards the humanitarian and military collapse of the Zelensky regime. ★ THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT: Putin's order is not a bluff. It's the continuation of a campaign that had already been running, but now gains a new chapter of intensity. Russia is ready to use all means at its disposal to ensure its safety in the face of the NATO threat. The question is not whether the attacks will happen, but when and with what intensity.

𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺 🇷🇸🇮🇪

54,786 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

I would like to remind you of several interesting factors about how Putin and Russia’s rhetoric about NATO has changed, as well as about Ukraine’s accession to NATO. In 2002, in Rome, when asked by a journalist about how Ukraine’s accession to NATO would affect relations between Russia and Ukraine, Putin replied that Ukraine is a sovereign state. And she herself has the right to freely choose her future, including the future of her security. And that Russia is not against if Ukraine and the Alliance decide that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. Now these liars are using NATO expansion as one of the reasons for their invasion. And this despite the fact that Ukraine has never been a member of this military bloc, and there were no plans to admit it there in the near future. And we all understand that all these reasons for the invasion are manipulation and lies in order to justify their aggression, terror and attempt to occupy Ukraine. Regarding the second part of the video, Putin says that NATO expansion is unacceptable in 2022. Some time later, when he is asked about Finland and Sweden joining NATO. He says he doesn't mind. NATO is the Defense Alliance. Even Article 5 of NATO implies collective security in the event of an attack on one of the Alliance countries. But this in no way obliges all NATO members to fight for a country that is itself an aggressor. Even if he is a member of NATO. Therefore, Putin’s manipulations that if Ukraine had joined NATO, it would have attacked Russia and started a war between NATO and Russia is a complete lie. Article 5 does not oblige one to fight for a side that itself is the aggressor. But only to protect a NATO member from attack and invasion by other countries. Against the backdrop of all this, all these fairy tales and Russian propaganda that Ukraine wanted to attack Russia is a lie. (I remind you that until 2014 Ukraine was not a member of NATO and there were no plans to admit it there, at least in the near future). And if Ukraine wanted to attack, why did it give up nuclear weapons? Why didn’t she carry out a massive militarization of the country, but, on the contrary, reduced the army? Why now, when the war is already going on, does Ukraine not enter Russian territory with its troops? After all, propaganda says that it was Ukraine that wanted to attack.
2:13

I would like to remind you of several interesting factors about how Putin and Russia’s rhetoric about NATO has changed, as well as about Ukraine’s accession to NATO. In 2002, in Rome, when asked by a journalist about how Ukraine’s accession to NATO would affect relations between Russia and Ukraine, Putin replied that Ukraine is a sovereign state. And she herself has the right to freely choose her future, including the future of her security. And that Russia is not against if Ukraine and the Alliance decide that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. Now these liars are using NATO expansion as one of the reasons for their invasion. And this despite the fact that Ukraine has never been a member of this military bloc, and there were no plans to admit it there in the near future. And we all understand that all these reasons for the invasion are manipulation and lies in order to justify their aggression, terror and attempt to occupy Ukraine. Regarding the second part of the video, Putin says that NATO expansion is unacceptable in 2022. Some time later, when he is asked about Finland and Sweden joining NATO. He says he doesn't mind. NATO is the Defense Alliance. Even Article 5 of NATO implies collective security in the event of an attack on one of the Alliance countries. But this in no way obliges all NATO members to fight for a country that is itself an aggressor. Even if he is a member of NATO. Therefore, Putin’s manipulations that if Ukraine had joined NATO, it would have attacked Russia and started a war between NATO and Russia is a complete lie. Article 5 does not oblige one to fight for a side that itself is the aggressor. But only to protect a NATO member from attack and invasion by other countries. Against the backdrop of all this, all these fairy tales and Russian propaganda that Ukraine wanted to attack Russia is a lie. (I remind you that until 2014 Ukraine was not a member of NATO and there were no plans to admit it there, at least in the near future). And if Ukraine wanted to attack, why did it give up nuclear weapons? Why didn’t she carry out a massive militarization of the country, but, on the contrary, reduced the army? Why now, when the war is already going on, does Ukraine not enter Russian territory with its troops? After all, propaganda says that it was Ukraine that wanted to attack.

Igor Kyivskyi

226,429 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren