World War Three Thread....

[Ryan Ruck]

Woah...

Air Force Preparing B-52 Bombers For 24-Hour Alert Status, Official Says

October 22, 2017

The U.S. Air Force is preparing to place its fleet of nuclear-armed B-52 bombers on 24-hour alert for the first time since 1991 amid escalating tensions with North Korea, the military branch's chief of staff said in a report Sunday.

Defense officials denied to Fox News that bombers were ordered to go on 24-hour alert, but Gen. David Goldfein told Defense One it could happen.

“This is yet one more step in ensuring that we’re prepared,” Goldfein said. “I look at it more as not planning for any specific event, but more for the reality of the global situation we find ourselves in and how we ensure we’re prepared going forward.”

Goldfein noted that in a world where “we’ve got folks that are talking openly about use of nuclear weapons,” it’s important to remain alert and think of new ways to be prepared.

“It’s no longer a bipolar world where it’s just us and the Soviet Union. We’ve got other players out there who have nuclear capability. It’s never been more important to make sure that we get this mission right,” Goldfein added.

Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, home of the 2d Bomb Wing and Air Force Global Strike Command, which manages the service’s nuclear services, is being renovated, Defense One reported, so that B-52s would be ready to “take off at a moment’s notice.”

The B-52, which can fly up to about 50,000 feet and at supersonic speeds, has the ability to release a variety of weapons, including cluster bombs, gravity bombs and precision guided missiles.

The long-range bomber can also unleash both nuclear and precision-guided conventional ordnance.

The 24-hour alert status for B-52s ended in 1991, in the waning days of the Cold War.

[Ryan Ruck]

Some expounding on the above by an ARFCOMmer I'd consider impeccable on the subject of nukes since he was heavily involved for his career:

Originally Posted By limaxray:

Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Agreed, but we can do both.

I don't believe this is directed solely at NK. Russia has been upping it's game lately, and Iran is being put on notice.

This is the only reason. Neither North Korea or Iran are enough of an existential threat to the US to start the MAJOR muscle movement of bringing back the alert birds (with the massive associated costs in manpower, resources, training, maintenance, and security). Alert ops tie up a LOT of planes, people and money to keep the airframes ready to fly at an acceptable availability rate (like, 90% or higher); even talking about it means someone's taking the Russian words and actions seriously.

On another website, the comment on this article was "If Moscow wants to behave like it's still 1983, they shouldn't be surprised when we react accordingly."

Here's something to consider--the only people left in the USAF who know how to do aircraft alert all have the first name of General. There's no corporate knowledge of how to do long term (more than the 7-10 day "alerts" during Global Shield) alert ops; everyone who does know are long retired, since it's been 26 years since Bush 41 stood the bombers down. So the USAF is going to have to reinvent the wheel on that...again.

"Peace dividend," my ass. [!]

Originally Posted By limaxray:
How serious is this? Consider: in a world where for the last 17 years the #1 actual priority of the USAF has been to have every tail available to fly combat ops over IRQ/AFG (hush, Sylvan ) to the exclusion of the nuclear mission, AF leadership is now not just talking about, but actually making preparations for, having a sizeable % of the bomber force fenced off for the nuclear mission, and therefore unavailable for conventional operations anywhere else in the world.

Oh, and bombers go exactly nowhere without gas, which is why about half the planes on alert were tankers, so those are off limits as well.

[Ryan Ruck]

US Fighter Jets Intercept Russian Nuclear Bombers Near North Korea

November 2, 2017

U.S. fighter jets intercepted Russian nuclear bombers approaching the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan off the coast of North Korea on Sunday.

Multiple U.S Navy F/A-18 jets were dispatched on Sunday to escort two Russian TU-95 bombers away from the ship currently stationed near North Korea and operating in the Sea of Japan, according to Navy officials who spoke with Military.com.

The Russian bombers, capable of executing a nuclear strike, were intercepted merely 80 miles away from the ship, said Navy officials.

Lt. Cmdr. Nicole Schwegman described the incident with the Russian air force on Sunday as “safe and professional,” according to Military.com.

The Russian Ministry of Defense acknowledged the situation on Monday, claiming the U.S. and Japanese aircrafts escorted their “missile-carrying Tupolev-95MS strategic bombers during their flights over international waters of the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Ocean,” according to TASS news agency.

“Two strategic bombers Tupolev-95MS of Russia’s Aerospace Force have carried out routine flights over international waters of the Sea of Japan and the western part of the Pacific Ocean,” Russian officials said.

“At certain sections of the route the Tupolev-95MS crews were accompanied by a pair of F-18 fighters (of the U.S. Air Force), and a pair of F-15, F-4 and F-2A fighters (of the Japanese Air Force).”

Both Russia and the U.S. have sent their nuclear bomber near North Korea amid increasing tension between the rogue North Korean regime and the U.S. and its allies in the region.

Last weekend, an U.S. B-2 stealth bomber equipped with nuclear strike capabilities flew over undisclosed parts of the Pacific region ahead of President Trump’s visit to Japan and South Korea.

The bomber made rounds to “familiarize aircrew with air bases and operations in different geographic combatant commands, enabling them to maintain a high state of readiness and proficiency” and meant to show the “commitment to our allies and enhancing regional security,” according to a U.S. military statement.

Most incidents involving interception cause little trouble to the forces, but occasionally such incidents can be deemed confrontational.

Last June, a Russian jet came dangerously close to a U.S. Air Force reconnaissance aircraft, with U.S. officials slamming the encounter as “provocative” in its maneuvers and accused the Russian jet flying “erratically.”




Air Force Bombers Fly Near Korean Peninsula In Training Mission

November 2, 2017

Two B-1B bombers flew near the Korean peninsula on Thursday as part of a previously scheduled operation, the U.S. Air Force confirmed.

The Air Force, in tangent with Japan Air Self-Defense Force fighters and the Republic of Korea Air Force, conducted a planned, bilateral mission in the area, according to a statement from the Pacific Air Force.

The two B1-B Lancers reportedly took off from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam and flew south of Korea and west of Japan to join Koku Jietai, or the Japanese fighters. They then flew over the Korean Peninsula to meet with the Korean fighters in the Yellow Sea. After the mission was over, the jets all flew back to their original locations.

“The bilateral continuous bomber presence (CBP) mission was planned in advance, to include coordination with the JASDF and ROKAF, and was not in response to any current event,” the Pacific Air Force said.

Earlier Thursday, the North Korean regime acknowledged the flyover and said it was done to “threaten and blackmail” the government, Yonhap News Agency reported.

The state-run Korean Central News Agency reportedly claimed that the mission was to train for a nuclear strike on North Korea.




US Bombers From Guam Conduct Exercise Over Korean Peninsula

November 2, 2017

Two U.S. supersonic bombers have flown over the Korean Peninsula in bombing exercises that are also a show of force against North Korea ahead of President Donald Trump's first official visit to Asia.

A South Korean military official said Friday the B-1B bombers flown from Guam were escorted by two South Korean F-16 fighter jets during the drills Thursday at a field near the South's eastern coast. The official did not want to be named, citing office rules.

North Korea's state media denounced the exercise as a "surprise nuclear strike drill" and says "gangster-like U.S. imperialists" are seeking to ignite a nuclear war.

The United States has been sending its strategic assets to the region more frequently for patrols or drills as North Korea further advances its nuclear weapons program.

[Ryan Ruck]

Top Marine General: 'There's A War Coming'

December 22, 2017

The commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. Robert Neller, told troops Thursday that "there's a war coming" and urged them to be prepared.

"I hope I'm wrong, but there's a war coming," Neller told Marines stationed in Norway, during a visit there, according to Military.com. "You're in a fight here, an informational fight, a political fight, by your presence," he added.

The commandant pointed to Russia and the Pacific theater as the next major areas of conflict, predicting a "big-ass fight" in the future.

"Just remember why you're here," he said. "They're watching. Just like you watch them, they watch you. We've got 300 Marines up here; we could go from 300 to 3,000 overnight. We could raise the bar."

Neller's visit comes amid tensions between Russia and NATO allies. Russia warned neighboring Norway that the presence of American troops could hurt relations, after Norway decision to host a new unit of U.S. soldiers through the end of 2018.

The administration says the Marines are there to enhance ties with European NATO allies and train in cold-weather combat.

In a question-and-answer session with the troops, Neller said the U.S. could shift its focus after years of fighting in the Middle East to Eastern Europe, citing Russia's conflicts with Ukraine and Georgia.

On Monday, President Trump unveiled a new national security strategy that focused on the threats posed by Russia and China to U.S. interests.



Marine Leaders Highlight Norway Unit's Role as Deterrent to Russia

December 21, 2017

The stated goals of the Marine Corps' newest rotational force in Norway are to enhance partnerships with European allies and improve the service's ability to fight in cold weather.

But on a brief visit to the 300-member unit ahead of Christmas, the commandant and the sergeant major of the Marine Corps both described the strategic role the small unit fills -- and the fact that a peacetime mission can be preface to combat if circumstances change.

The Norwegian Home Guard base near Trondheim that houses the Marine rotational force was the first stop on Gen. Robert Neller's annual Christmas tour.

The stop was a new one for the tour. The first Norway rotation, from 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines, deployed in January and was replaced by a new unit from 2nd Battalion, 2nd Marines, in late August.

Neller emphasized to the Marines that they should remain ready to fight at all times, predicting a "big-ass fight" on the horizon.

"I hope I'm wrong, but there's a war coming," Neller said. " ... You're in a fight here, an informational fight, a political fight, by your presence."

Neller later told the Marines that he expects the Pacific and Russia to be the service's operational points of focus as the nation looks beyond the fights in the Middle East that have stretched into the better part of two decades.

The United States' position that Russia presents a major threat was re-emphasized in the new National Security Strategy released Monday. The document discusses Russia's practice of "using information tools" to interfere with other nations' democracies and militant aggression that crosses borders.


"With its invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, Russia demonstrates its willingness to violate the sovereignty of states in the region," the strategy states.

Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Ronald Green put the Marines' role starkly.

"Just remember why you're here," he said. "They're watching. Just like you watch them, they watch you. We've got 300 Marines up here; we could go from 300 to 3,000 overnight. We could raise the bar."

The rotational force itself is much more circumspect about its role in the region. On a visit to the unit in May, Military.com found troops assigned to the unit had even been instructed not to use the word "Russia" in interviews with the media.

In large part, this is due to regional sensitivities.

The rotational unit is in Norway at the invitation of the Norwegian government, which maintains an economic relationship with Russia and shares a 120-mile border on its northeastern edge with the country.

While Norwegian feedback on the Marines' presence has been generally positive -- then-Norwegian Defense Minister Ina Eriksen Søreide announced in June that the rotation had been extended for a year, until 2018 -- others have cited misgivings.

In October, Norway opposition leaders asked Prime Minister Erna Solberg to explain exactly what the American troops are doing in the country.

Russian officials, for their part, have been outspoken in opposing the presence of Marines in Norway and warning of diplomatic repercussions.


Though Green did not name Russia, he referred to its displeasure at the Marines' presence nearby.

"They don't like the fact that we oppose them, and we like the fact that they don't like the fact that we oppose them," Green said. "Three hundred of us, surrounded by them, we've got them right where we wanted, right? We've done this before."

[American Patriot]

I'm not really seeing anything from the Russians these days. I don't think they are trying to be in conflict with us. They just want what they want. lol

[Ryan Ruck]

China and Russia Train For War With U.S. If Trump Invades North Korea

December 18, 2017

China and Russia may be devising a plan to attack U.S. forces in the event of an imminent war breaking out on the neighboring Korean Peninsula, according to two former military officials.

Lieutenant General Wang Hongguang, the former deputy commander of the western Nanjing Military Region, warned "the war on the Korean Peninsula might break out anytime between now and March next year"; his comments came during a conference hosted Saturday by ruling Communist Party newspaper The Global Times. The following day, the nationalist outlet expanded on the retired general's remarks with insight from Chinese military expert, commentator and author Song Zhongping, who said China could potentially engage U.S. forces if they posed a threat.

"China should be psychologically prepared for a potential Korean war, and the Northeast China regions should be mobilized for that," Wang said Saturday, according to The Global Times. "Such mobilization is not to launch a war, but for defensive purposes."

Song, himself a former member of the Chinese military's Second Artillery Corps, which was later transformed into the Rocket Force, told The Global Times on Sunday that such "defensive purposes" would likely include contingency plans to retaliate against any breach of Chinese sovereignty by invading U.S. forces.


Soldiers assigned to an air assault brigade of the 83rd Group Army under the People's Liberation Army Central Theater Command drive "leopard cat" all-terrain assault vehicles to engage in combat with simulated enemies under fire support by helicopters during an assault, capture and control training exercise at a field training ground in the hinterland of China's Taihang mountains on December 16.


In a separate interview, Song also said that high-tech anti-missile drills held that same day by China and Russia in Beijing were actually a joint effort by the U.S.'s two leading military competitors to defend against a potential attack order by President Donald Trump, who has increasingly feuded with North Korean supreme leader Kim Jong Un since taking office in January. Both China and Russia have joined the U.S. in condemning North Korea's nuclear and ballistic weapons arsenal, which the country argued was necessary to defend against a U.S. attempt to overthrow Kim, but Beijing and Moscow have staunchly opposed an expansionist U.S. military in the Asia-Pacific.

"The main target of the joint drills between China and Russia is the U.S., which has both ballistic and cruise missiles that could pose a real threat to both Beijing and Moscow," Song told the South China Morning Post on Sunday.

"Both China and Russia wanted to use these joint anti-missile drills for strategic deterrence. They want to push the U.S. to withdraw its Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) from the Korean peninsula," he added.

The U.S's THAAD anti-missile system became fully operational in South Korea earlier this year. The Pentagon has argued such missile defense is necessary to shield the U.S. ally from a potential missile attack by its northern rival, but China and Russia have criticized the apparatus for apparently undermining their own national security. As Trump's stance toward North Korea grew more militant, the U.S. leader has sent more military assets and has conducted more drills in the tense region, further infuriating China and Russia.


Chinese armed police and Russian national guards take part in a joint counterterrorism drill in Yinchuan, Ningxia Hui autonomous region, China, on December 5. The leading military competitors to the U.S. have been growing closer in recent years and seek to limit Washington's influence abroad.


China and Russia previously backed North Korea when the newly-established communist state went to war with South Korea, supported by the U.S. and U.N., in the early 1950s. The three-year battle, widely seen as the first clash of the Cold War, ended with an armistice establishing a demilitarized zone (DMZ) roughly along the pre-war border, but no peace between the warring neighbors.

While Kim continued to expand his U.N.-sanctioned arsenal inherited by his father and grandfather, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin have both undergone their own historic initiatives to expand their military and political power across the globe. In Trump's "America first" national security strategy announced Monday, he denounced Kim's nuclear-armed "rogue regime," as well as China and Russia's attempts to "challenge American power, influence and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity."

[Ryan Ruck]

Russia Prepares for Nuclear War With U.S., Instructing Citizens to Buy Water and Gas Masks

April 11, 2018

Russian state-owned television is urging the country’s residents to stock their bunkers with water and basic foodstuffs because Moscow could go to war with Washington.

Warning that the potential conflict between the two superpowers would be “catastrophic,” an anchor for Russia’s Vesti 24 showed off shelves of food, recommending that people buy salt, oatmeal and other products that can last a long time on the shelves. Powdered milk lasts five years while sugar and rice can last up to eight years, the newscaster explained before showing videos of pasta cooking in a bomb shelter.

The channel's newscasters also displayed charts explaining how much water people need to store for drinking, washing their face and hands, and preparing food every day—and how that amount changes depending on the temperature of a person’s bomb shelter. The program also recommended that people stock up on gas masks and read guides on how to survive nuclear war.

The program aired just one day after sources told Newsweek that “there is a major war scare” in Moscow, as President Donald Trump prepares to strike Syria in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons against civilians over the weekend. The Trump administration has said it believes Syria’s Russian-backed President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the attacks, and it plans to ensure that Assad pays the price. Russian military forces have responded by saying that Moscow would meet fire with fire and said that it will shoot down any U.S. missiles.

"If there is a strike by the Americans, then the missiles will be downed and even the sources from which the missiles were fired,” warned Alexander Zasypkin, Russia’s ambassador to Lebanon, during an interview on Tuesday with a television station linked to Hezbollah.


The increasingly bellicose rhetoric has sparked fears that a conflict could break out between two nuclear-armed superpowers. On Wednesday morning, Trump took to Twitter to issue a stark warning to Russia, which he accused of partnering with “a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!”

But he later walked back the statement, calling for an end to the arms race with Russia.

[Malsua]

I'm not worried.

If I'm at work and they hit manhattan with a big one, I'm in the immediate blast zone or the dead within 24 zone, so it doesn't matter really.

If I'm at home, I'll survive. Either case, there's not much for me to do.

[American Patriot]

My engine is down for repairs. I'm 7 miles from Sunny Point...

[vector7]

How Russia Will Respond to America's Missile Strike in Syria



Dave Majumdar
April 7, 2017
TweetShareShare

Russia is furious about American cruise missile strikes against Syria, which came as a response to the Assad regime’s widely reported use of chemical weapons against civilians during that nation’s long civil war.

Thus far, the Kremlin’s reaction has been angry rhetoric and suspension of an October 2015 channel that was established to deconflict U.S. and Russian military operations over Syria. Russia has also promised to bolster Syrian air defense capabilities as a result of the American strike. But Moscow is likely to take further retaliatory measures in Syria over the next few weeks.

“The President of Russia regards the U.S. airstrikes on Syria as an act of aggression against a sovereign state delivered in violation of international law under a far-fetched pretext,” the Kremlin said in an April 7 statement. “This move by Washington [the US airstrike on an air base in Syria] has dealt a serious blow to Russian-U.S. relations, which are already in a poor state.”

The Russians are almost certainly going to respond to the attack on Syria—but not directly against the United States. Rather, the Kremlin will channel its wrath against American-backed Syrian rebel groups. “My understanding of the likely response is: cut contacts and cooperation on Syria with the U.S.,” Russian defense and foreign policy expert Vasily Kashin, a professor at Moscow's Higher School of Economics (HSE) told The National Interest. “Specifically target and destroy pro-U.S. groups; bring additional forces there; maybe start some large scale exercise in Europe.”

By further weakening what remains of the pro-Western Syrian rebels, Russia would ensure Assad’s regime remains in power—protecting Moscow’s interests in the region.

“That will likely eliminate U.S. influence on Syria and will probably cause losses among the intelligence personnel,” Kashin said. “Basically, the response would be the same as after the incident with Turkey. No attack on Turkey itself, but pro-Turkish groups, Turkish special operations and intelligence assets were specifically targeted and their losses were huge.”

The problem becomes even more complicated if the United States decides that it wants to overthrow the Assad regime. Indeed, Trump’s UN Ambassador Nikki Haley warned Syria that America might be willing to expand its military campaign against Damascus. "The United States took a very measured step last night," Haley said at the United Nations Security Council. "We are prepared to do more. But we hope that will not be necessary. It is time for all civilized nations to stop the horrors that are taking place in Syria and demand a political solution."

That being said, the Trump White House has been sending mixed messages about whether it will expand the U.S. campaign against Assad—or if last night’s attack was a one off event. Earlier this afternoon, White House press secretary Sean Spicer seemed to suggest the Trump administration is not going to pursue a wider war in Syria.

If the United States does conduct a campaign to overthrow Assad’s regime, the Russians will likely respond more forcefully. Moreover, in the event that the United States were to directly engage the Kremlin’s forces in Syria to suppress Russian air defenses, Moscow is likely to respond militarily. “In this case, we will have a war and there will be cruise missile attacks against U.S. forces across the Middle East,” Kashin said. “Then it will escalate into a full scale war.”



A senior U.S. Air Force official agreed with Kashin’s assessment—a strike on Russian air defense assets such as the S-400 and S-300V4 batteries stationed in Syria would lead to war.

“You’re talking about having to destroy or suppress Russian assets, manned by Russian personnel, which would, of course, mean outright war between the United States and Russia,” the U.S. Air Force official told The National Interest.

Meanwhile, experts on the Kremlin’s foreign policy—both in the United States and Russia—said that any hopes for a rapprochement between the Trump administration and Moscow are fading fast as a result of last night’s cruise-missile strike. “I think the Russians are seeing this as a real blow to hopes for rapprochement. They will make a big deal of this being illegal,” Olga Oliker, director of the Russia and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) told The National Interest.

The Kremlin is making the argument that the U.S. cruise missile strike—which included fifty-nine Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from the destroyers USS Porter (DDG-78) and USS Ross (DDG-71)—did little damage. Indeed, U.S. defense officials have said that they not only warned Russia before launching the attack but also carefully made sure not to accidentally hit any of Moscow’s forces. Russian forces, in turn, likely warned their Syrian counterparts—meaning [Syrian dictator Bashar al] Assad’s forces had time to evacuate before the missiles hit their targets.

“Russians are also arguing that strike was ineffective. And, of course, warning the Russians means that the U.S. effectively warned the Syrians, too,” Oliker said. “Though also notable is that the Russians/Syrians did not use air defenses—they let the strike happen rather than risk escalation. Basically, they let it be symbolic; the question is where it goes from here. Russian withdrawal from deconfliction is very significant—it raises the hazard danger for any further U.S. action substantially.”

Thus, if the United States chooses to further escalate the conflict in Syria—especially toward the goal of regime change—there could be serious consequences. “Russia may have been willing to back away further from Assad, but if the U.S. prosecutes a military campaign against him, they have a tougher time doing that,” Oliker said.

Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for The National Interest. You can follow him on Twitter:@davemajumdar.

[Ryan Ruck]

We've been doing pretty significant economic damage to Russia via sanctions and the low price of oil. From what I've been reading, their military is definitely starting to feel it.

Between that and first taking out 200+ of their mercs and now walking all over their air defense in Syria, giving them a bloody nose on the global stage, they may start to act rashly in an attempt to save face.

[American Patriot]

I think they will stand down... but, I agree with you Ryan... acting rashly to save face is the last, desperate measure of any failing system.

[American Patriot]

Posted 8 hours ago.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-se...103537454.html

Russia sends warships laden with tanks towards Syria as Putin threatens 'chaos' if another attack is launched

Matilda Long
,Yahoo News UK•April 16, 2018

Russian President Vladimir Putin (Reuters)

More

Russia has sent two warships carrying tanks and military equipment towards the Middle East following co-ordinated military action in Syria.
The boats were spotted on The Bosphorus on Sunday, as Vladimir Putinwarned that the world would experience ‘chaos’ if Syria was attacked again.
The vessels are believed to be making their way towards the Russian naval base at Tartus on the northern coast of Syria.
Images of the boats and their cargo were posted on Twitter by a naval observer based in The Bosphorus.

Reinforcement for Russia’s campaign continues amid rising international crisis in #Syria: #ВМФ Project1171 #ЧФ BSF Tapir class LST Orsk transits Med-bound Bosphorus en route to #Tartus carrying BTR80 APCs, Ural4320tanker,ambulance,KamAZ trucks & AirborneTroops VDV’s IVECO 4WDLynx pic.twitter.com/rmfsRRVxnJ
— Yörük Işık (@YorukIsik) April 15, 2018

Nizhniy Novgorod based Arzamas Machinery Plant manufactured BTR80 is equipped with Pelena 6B jammer designed against radio controlled IEDs. 8×8 wheel amphibious armoured personnel carrier was carried above the deck of Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet’s LST Orsk en route to #Tartuspic.twitter.com/KBupul4e0C
— Yörük Işık (@YorukIsik) April 15, 2018

#ВМФ Project 1171 #ЧФ BSF Nikolay Filchenkov 152 carried above deck Arzamas Machinery Plant’s BTR-80 APC & GAZ Tigr infantry fighting vehicles during its Mediterranean-bound Bosphorus transit en route to #Tartus #Syriapic.twitter.com/gI9Cc88DcW
— Yörük Işık (@YorukIsik) April 13, 2018

A Russian military source claimed that the ships are ‘keeping track at a close distance of US and NATO assault ships and submarines in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea’.
Putin’s response

The Russian President has responded furiously to the strikes in Syria, which followed the deadly chemical weapons attack in the city of Douma that left dozens dead.
According to a statement released by the Kremlin, Mr Putin told his Iranian counterpart that the strikes had undermined chances of a political resolution to the conflict.

Russia has supported its ally Syria following co-ordinated air strikes.

More

The statement said: ‘Vladimir Putin, in particular, stressed that if such actions committed in violation of the U.N. Charter continue, then it will inevitably lead to chaos in international relations.’
Russia has argued that the chemical attack carried out by the Assad regime, which was in breach of international laws against the use of chemical weapons, was faked or staged.
The Assad government has denied responsibility.
UK defends its actions

Theresa May and other senior government figures have defended the decision to participate in the military action, after Labour questioned the legality of the bombing raid.
The Prime Minister is expected to face anger in the Commons later today after launching military action without securing the support of Parliament.
A Downing Street spokesperson said this morning: ‘The PM explained that the action the UK has taken with our American and French allies was limited, carefully targeted and designed to alleviate humanitarian suffering, degrade the Syrian Regime’s chemical weapons capability and deter their use in the future.
‘The response was not just to the Douma attack but to a series of devastating assaults on the Syrian people by their government.’

A child is treated in a hospital in Douma, eastern Ghouta in Syria, after what a Syria medical relief group claims was a chemical attack (White Helmets/Handout via Reuters)

More

Boris Johnson defended the strikes as he arrived for a summit of European Union foreign ministers in Luxembourg today.
‘The action that was taken by France, by the UK, by the United States in launching calibrated and proportionate strikes against Assad’s chemical weapons capabilities, was entirely right, entirely the right thing to do – right for the UK and right for the world,’ he said.
The Foreign Secretary stressed it was ‘not an attempt to change the tide of the war in Syria or to have regime change’ and ‘the Syrian war in many ways will go on in its horrible, miserable way’.
Criticism from Labour

Jeremy Corbyn and other Labour figures have spoken out to question the legality of the strikes, and to voice their opposition to the action.
Shadow attorney general Baroness Chakrabarti questioned the Government’s justification for the air strikes this morning, telling BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “You can’t use force under international law just to punish Syria for bad behaviour.
“You have to actually be using urgent, necessary and proportionate force. And you have to do it with the will of the world behind you.”

Today, I was interviewed about @Theresa_May’s legally questionable attack on Syria. pic.twitter.com/5jBJq2tPaq
— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) April 14, 2018

She added: “I think that Parliament should have been recalled before the strike. Some people will suspect that that didn’t happen because of governmental concerns that they couldn’t get the vote in Parliament. And that to me is not a good enough reason.”
Jeremy Corbyn, writing in The Guardian, said: “The military action at the weekend was legally questionable.
“The Government’s own justification, which relies heavily on the strongly contested doctrine of humanitarian intervention, does not even meet its own tests.
“Without UN authority it was again a matter of the US and British governments arrogating to themselves an authority to act unilaterally which they do not possess.”






0:06
1:43













Baroness Chakrabarti questions legality of Syria air strikes

[American Patriot]

https://www.msn.com/en-ae/news/world...ems/ar-AAvSkqF


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...structure/amp/

https://m.investing.com/news/world-n...5774?ampMode=1


Over the past few hours of news...

1) Russia and Syria deny Chemical Weapons Attack.




2) Russia visits site and possibly has interfered with the investigation.




3) Russia has launched several ships en route to the region carrying tanks and other armaments.




4) S-300 systems likely deployed (Russian defensive weapons)




5) Russia out and out BLOCKS OPCW inspectors from going in.




6) FBI and other intel agencies reporting Russia preparing cyber attacks on UK Infrastructure.




7) Putin predicts "Global Chaos" if west hits Syria again

[Ryan Ruck]

The ChiComs chime in. An "op-ed" from one of their state papers. Pretty clear where they stand.

US, Allies Risk Russian Retaliation In Syrian Attack

April 14, 2018

US President Donald Trump announced on Friday he ordered strikes on the Syrian regime in response to a chemical attack last weekend. He said the strikes were in coordination with France and the United Kingdom. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said his country is being "invaded" by the three countries. The Russian Embassy in the USA said in a statement that "insulting the President of Russia is unacceptable and inadmissible."

In a sensational statement, Trump asserted the Bashar Assad government used chemical weapons on civilians. He said "The evil and the despicable attack left mothers and fathers, infants and children thrashing in pain and gasping for air. These are not the actions of a man. They are crimes of a monster instead."Trump also warned "Russia must decide if it will continue down this dark path or if it will join with civilized nations as a force for stability and peace."

The facts cannot be distorted. This military strike was not authorized by the UN, and the strikes targeted a legal government of a UN member state. The US and its European allies launched strikes to punish President Bashar al-Assad for a suspected chemical attack in Duma last weekend. However, it has not been confirmed if the chemical weapons attack happened or if it did, whether government forces or opposition forces launched it. International organizations have not carried out any authoritative investigation.

The Syrian government has repeatedly stressed that there is no need for it to use chemical weapons to capture the opposition-controlled Duma city and the use of chemical weapons has provided an excuse for Western intervention. The Syrian government's argument or Trump's accusations against the "evil" Assad regime, which one is in line with basic logic? The answer is quite obvious.

The US has a record of launching wars on deceptive grounds. The Bush government asserted the Saddam regime held chemical weapons before the US-British coalition troops invaded Iraq in 2003. However, the coalition forces didn't find what they called weapons of mass destruction after overthrowing the Saddam regime. Both Washington and London admitted later that their intelligence was false.

Washington's attack on Syria where Russian troops are stationed constitute serious contempt for Russia's military capabilities and political dignity. Trump, like scolding a pupil, called on Moscow, one of the world's leading nuclear powers, to abandon its "dark path." Disturbingly, Washington seems to have become addicted to mocking Russia in this way. Russia is capable of launching a destructive retaliatory attack on the West. Russia's weak economy is plagued by Western sanctions and squeezing of its strategic space. That the West provokes Russia in such a manner is irresponsible for world peace.

The situation is still fomenting. The Trump administration said it will sustain the strikes. But how long will the military action continue and whether Russia will fight back as it claimed previously remain uncertain. Western countries continue bullying Russia but are seemingly not afraid of its possible counterattack. Their arrogance breeds risk and danger.

[American Patriot]

Arrogance is a word oft used by those who are arrogant.

[American Patriot]

So... I'm not finding much about Russia today, but I'm hearing that some links to Twitter are being interfered with somehow. Perhaps attacks?

Russia is said to be going after some of UKs infrastructure with cyberattacks.

I'm thinking "escalation" on a small level.

Anyone else?

[American Patriot]

http://downdetector.com/status/twitter

[American Patriot]

https://nypost.com/2018/04/16/russia...-in-us-uk/amp/

Russia ramping up cyberattacks in US, UK

By Bob Fredericks
April 16, 2018 | 3:29pm
Vladimir PutinGetty Images



The US and the UK issued a vague but ominous joint statement Monday charging that Russia had in recent days ramped up its cyberattacks on American and British companies and government operations.


Russia was using compromised computer network equipment to launch the attacks, the countries warned in what Bloomberg called an unprecedented joint alert.


The warning came from the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and Britain’s National Cyber Security Center, and included advice about what companies can do to protect themselves.


The statement also warned about attacks on routers, the devices that channel data around a network.


“Russian state-sponsored actors are using compromised routers to conduct spoofing ‘man-in-the-middle’ attacks to support espionage, extract intellectual property, maintain persistent access to victim networks and potentially lay a foundation for future offensive operations,” according to a joint statement.


“Multiple sources including private and public-sector cybersecurity research organizations and allies have reported this activity to the US and UK governments.”


America’s and Britain’s relations with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin worsened following the strikes on Syria’s chemical weapons facilitiesFriday night and the use of nerve agent to poison a former double agent in Britain.


Over the weekend, the Pentagon said Russian “trolling” activity increased 2,000 percent in the wake of the Syria strike — but neither country identified any of the specific targets of the attacks.


“Russia is our most capable hostile adversary in cyberspace,” said Ciaran Martin, chief executive officer of Britain’s NCSC.
“Many of the techniques used by Russia exploit basic weaknesses in network systems.”

[American Patriot]

https://www.thewrap.com/russia-sputn...n-white-house/

Russia’s Sputnik News Casually Imagines ‘Nuclear Explosion Outside White House’ (Video)



“Modelled by experts,” teases news agency established by Kremlin-controlled Rossiya Segodnya

Jon Levine | April 17, 2018 @ 7:31 AM

YouTube

On Tuesday, Russia’s English-language news agency Sputnik decided to treat viewers to a video simulation of what a nuclear explosion might look like in Washington, D.C.
Ground zero? The White House — which the Kremlin-backed news agency tagged in the tweet for good measure.
WATCH nuclear explosion outside @WhiteHouse modelled by experts https://t.co/JrMUCx0E4Z pic.twitter.com/cVlgdr6cBs

— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) April 17, 2018

Also Read:Laura Ingraham Ratings Spike to Highest Ever Despite Advertiser Boycott
“What if a nuke, powered by five kilograms of highly enriched uranium, earlier acquired by terrorists , goes off near the White House?” asked an unbylined article which accompanied the tweet. “This question has bothered experts for a long time.”
Sputnik is owned by the Russian news service Rossiya Segodnya — which itself is controlled by the Russian government.
The article was based on a YouTube video uploaded by Science Magazine several days ago, which imagined the nightmarish scenario “modelled by experts.”

Also Read:Russian Trolls Increase '2,000 Percent' After Syrian Bombing, Says Pentagon
While the article was a basic aggregation from Science Mag, it’s hard not to suspect a bit of typical Kremlin trolling in the story choice.
While President Donald Trump has gone out of his way to pursue friendly relations with Russia, the relationship has continued to sour throughout his presidency.
After a former Russian spy was the victim of a nerve agent attack in Britain earlier this month, Trump, in concert with several European allies, united to expel dozens of Russian diplomats. Russia — of course — has denied any involvement in the strike that nearly killed Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia.
The president has also clashed with Russia and his counterpart there, Vladimir Putin, over the recent chemical weapons attack in Syria. Trump called out the country in a tweet, accusing him of supporting Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad — a man he also called a “Gas Killing Animal.”
Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 11, 2018