World War Three Thread....

[vector7]

World War III Is Breaking Out And We’re Without A Leader



Obama's weakness and unwillingness to take a stand against tyranny will lead us to another world war.

Recently, Ukraine reinstituted the draft and started mobilizing a large number of troops to refresh battle-weary soldiers on the front lines in the East, where the fighting is raging. The pro-Russian rebels have stated they too are bringing their forces to 100,000 men.

We now have the first real shooting war between European countries since World War II. Think about that and consider the carnage the first two world wars caused.
Russia is pouring in armor, sophisticated weapons, and supplies to their proxy army against the West in East Ukraine. Their forces are expanding their territory and may be about to cement a land bridge to Putin’s newest enclave, the Crimean peninsula. Putin is also actively courting Eastern European countries that are part of the EU and coaxing them back into Russia’s orbit.

Greece and Hungary are two examples; their leaders have made strong pro-Russian statements recently. These two countries are also part of NATO. Think about that.
Now Obama is making noises about providing weapons. Don’t bet on it – it’s just a ruse.

The alliance which held the peace in Europe is crumbling. It is crumbling because America has abdicated her leadership role in Europe that has kept the peace on the continent for almost a century.

There is truth to the age-old maxim from Machiavelli: “It is better to be feared than loved.” What if Russia had understood very clearly that there would be significant costs to their intervention in Ukraine from the start? I think we would be seeing a much different outcome. Totalitarian governments only listen to one thing—power.

In the Middle East, our pathetic president has withdrawn all U.S. forces, after years of spent blood and treasure. It is a travesty. It is sickening.

Now we see ISIS taking over large parts of Iraq and Syria, executing thousands along the way. Our Dear Leader will not even call these people terrorists. Either he is living in some type of alternate reality, or allowing ISIS to take over the Middle East is his agenda. Again, I say, look at the results of his actions, not what he says.

In either case, we have a serious global security threat mushrooming in historically violent parts of the world. The United States is weak, absent, pathetic. The mainstream media may not want to call this president on these facts, but I will. We are witnessing the beginnings of World War III. They will write about this weakness in the history books one day as we are without a leader who can deal with the situation. I fear for my children.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/world-war-iii-breaking-without-leader/#soIqAP55xIyw2K9M.97

[American Patriot]

I suspect this ISIS stuff is part of his agenda.

[Ryan Ruck]

'Russia's Growing Threat': After Ukraine, Fears Grow That Baltic States Could Be Vladimir Putin's Next Targets

February 8, 2015

The West must stand up to Russia over Ukraine or Europe could descend into a major war for the first time since 1945, diplomats warned today as efforts to negotiate peace hung by a thread.

As the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, prepared to brief Barack Obama in Washington on Monday about the state of the negotiations, a former US ambassador to Ukraine predicted that Estonia and the other Baltic states – all members of NATO – could be Vladimir Putin’s next targets if he is allowed to hold on to territory won by force.

Ms Merkel, who strongly opposes arming Ukraine, spent the weekend desperately trying to negotiate with Mr Putin. In a four-way phone call yesterday afternoon, the German and Russian leaders agreed with the French President, François Hollande, and his Ukrainian counterpart, Petro Poroshenko, that they would meet in the Belarusian capital, Minsk, on Wednesday.

The Estonian President, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, compared Western inaction against Russia with the appeasement of Adolf Hitler in 1938, when Nazi Germany was alllowed to seize parts of the former Czechoslovakia.

“We know from history that appeasement will never satisfy those that are being appeased,” he said. “Munich ’38 I think should be a lesson to all of us even today.”

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond accused Mr Putin of “acting like some mid-20th century tyrant”, while the French Foreign Minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, said he would “fear the worst” if peace talks this week failed.

Last night, reports put the death toll from the conflict at 50,000 – 10 times previous estimates.

The US has considered sending weapons to Ukraine, but the UK, Germany and France oppose arming Kiev’s forces, saying this could lead to an escalation of the fighting.

Writing in The Independent today, Lord Ashdown, the former Liberal Democrat leader, urges the West to use “military diplomacy”, while avoiding direct conflict.

“The right reaction to the Russian arming of the Ukrainian rebels is to make it clear we are prepared to do the same for the Ukrainian government,” he writes. “Start small, slow and unaggressively – with communications and intelligence equipment for example.”

But a hardline with the Kremlin over Ukraine should be matched with efforts to build a strategic partnership with Moscow in the fight against Isis and Islamist terrorism, Lord Ashdown adds.

The worst-case scenario facing Europe was outlined today by John Herbst, former US ambassador to Ukraine, who said it was time to send military help to Ukraine.

“I think that those who argue against helping Ukraine defend itself against a much bigger and stronger aggressor do not understand the strategic stakes,” Mr Herbst said.

“[Putin’s] statements, his provocations against the Baltic states, against Kazakhstan, indicate his goals are greater than Ukraine. If we don’t stop Mr Putin in Ukraine, we may be dealing with him in Estonia. I’m not saying we will, but he has given indication that this could happen. The most important national security challenge in the world today is a rogue Kremlin and we need to stop him and Ukraine is the place to do it.”

Mr Ilves told Sky News that while he was not yet afraid of a Russian invasion, action must be taken to halt its “reckless and irresponsible behaviour throughout our region”.

The peace summit due to take place in Minsk on Wednesday was described by Mr Hammond as “one of the last opportunities that Russia will have to avoid further significant damage to its economy” if the world is forced to increase its sanctions against the Kremlin.

He said any peace deal would have to include a Russian withdrawal from Crimea, which it annexed from Ukraine following a disputed referendum.

“Don’t make it sound like that is an outrageous thing for us to demand,” Mr Hammond said. “This man has sent troops across an international border and occupied another country’s territory acting like some mid-20th century tyrant.

“We do not see any reason to tolerate this kind of outrageous and outdated behaviour from the Kremlin.”

Mr Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President François Hollande are all due to take part in the Minsk summit. However, Mr Putin, who has repeatedly talked peace while his forces carry out attacks on the ground, suggested that the negotiations might not actually happen. “We will be aiming for Wednesday, if by that time we are able to agree on a number of the positions that we recently have been discussing intensely,” he said.

The mixed messages from Moscow continued with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov saying Russia expected “important decisions” would be made at the meeting.

Ms Merkel is expected to brief US President Barack Obama on the state of negotiations during a previously scheduled trip to Washington today.

Dismissing talk of a transatlantic rift, US Secretary of State John Kerry said today that America and its European allies were “united in our diplomacy” on Ukraine. “There is no division, there is no split,” he said.

US Senator John McCain, said “defensive arms” should be sent to the Kiev government as a matter of urgency. “The Ukrainians are being slaughtered and we’re sending them blankets and meals. Blankets don’t do well against Russian tanks,” he said.

Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung newspaper reported today that German intelligence estimated up to 50,000 soldiers and civilians had been killed during the conflict, nearly 10 times higher than Kiev’s estimate. “The official figures are clearly too low and not credible,” a source said.

[Ryan Ruck]

NATO Must Prepare For Russian Attack, Warns UK General

February 20, 2015

NATO forces must prepare for a large-scale conventional assault by Russia on an eastern European member state designed to catch the alliance off guard and snatch territory, the deputy supreme commander of the military alliance has warned.

Openly raising the prospect of a conventional armed conflict with Russia on European soil, the remarks by Sir Adrian Bradshaw, second-in-command of NATO’s forces in Europe, are some of the most strident yet from the alliance.

The warning comes as relations with the Kremlin worsen just days into a second fragile ceasefire aimed at curbing the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine between Kiev’s forces and Russian-backed separatists.

Speaking at the Royal United Services Institute think-tank in London on Friday, Sir Adrian said that as well as adapting to tackle the “hybrid” military tactics — a combination of conventional, irregular and cyber warfare techniques — being used by Russia in Ukraine, allied forces needed to be ready for an overt invasion.

“Russia might believe the large-scale conventional forces she has shown she can generate at very short notice — as we saw in the snap exercises that preceded the takeover of Crimea — could in future not only be used for intimidation and coercion, but to seize NATO territory,” he said.

Sir Adrian, a former commander of British land forces and the most senior UK officer in the alliance, added: “After which the threat of escalation might be used to prevent re-establishment of territorial integrity. This use of so-called escalation dominance was, of course, a classic Soviet technique.”

Deploying overwhelming force at short notice has become a hallmark of Russian military exercises. Russia’s 2013 “Zapad” (West) war game involved the rapid mobilisation of 25,000 troops in Belarus and the enclave of Kaliningrad for a conflict with a NATO state. A snap exercise in Russia’s eastern military district later the same year was the largest since the fall of the Iron Curtain — it involved 160,000 troops.

Russia could potentially seize territory in a NATO state using rapidly assembled forces — for example, the Russian-speaking enclave of Narva in Estonia — before the alliance had time to act, forcing leaders to either declare war or swallow their pride.

Such a course of action would raise the prospect of a “slide into strategic conflict”, which, “however unlikely we see that as being now, represents an obvious existential threat to our whole being”, Sir Adrian added, hinting at the potential for nuclear confrontation.

The prospect of a brazen Russian attack is one factor driving NATO moves to speed up its ability to deploy large military units in the event of a crisis.

The centrepiece of the alliance’s shift in policy following a summit in Wales in September is a “spearhead” brigade-sized rapid reaction force capable of deploying within 48 hours.

NATO is preparing to station “force integration units” in each of its eastern European member states to act as eyes and ears on the ground as well as prepare for rapid deployment of NATO forces.

[Ryan Ruck]

NATO Must Prepare For Russian Attack, Warns UK General

February 20, 2015

NATO forces must prepare for a large-scale conventional assault by Russia on an eastern European member state designed to catch the alliance off guard and snatch territory, the deputy supreme commander of the military alliance has warned.

Openly raising the prospect of a conventional armed conflict with Russia on European soil, the remarks by Sir Adrian Bradshaw, second-in-command of NATO’s forces in Europe, are some of the most strident yet from the alliance.

The warning comes as relations with the Kremlin worsen just days into a second fragile ceasefire aimed at curbing the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine between Kiev’s forces and Russian-backed separatists.

Speaking at the Royal United Services Institute think-tank in London on Friday, Sir Adrian said that as well as adapting to tackle the “hybrid” military tactics — a combination of conventional, irregular and cyber warfare techniques — being used by Russia in Ukraine, allied forces needed to be ready for an overt invasion.

“Russia might believe the large-scale conventional forces she has shown she can generate at very short notice — as we saw in the snap exercises that preceded the takeover of Crimea — could in future not only be used for intimidation and coercion, but to seize NATO territory,” he said.

Sir Adrian, a former commander of British land forces and the most senior UK officer in the alliance, added: “After which the threat of escalation might be used to prevent re-establishment of territorial integrity. This use of so-called escalation dominance was, of course, a classic Soviet technique.”

Deploying overwhelming force at short notice has become a hallmark of Russian military exercises. Russia’s 2013 “Zapad” (West) war game involved the rapid mobilisation of 25,000 troops in Belarus and the enclave of Kaliningrad for a conflict with a NATO state. A snap exercise in Russia’s eastern military district later the same year was the largest since the fall of the Iron Curtain — it involved 160,000 troops.

Russia could potentially seize territory in a NATO state using rapidly assembled forces — for example, the Russian-speaking enclave of Narva in Estonia — before the alliance had time to act, forcing leaders to either declare war or swallow their pride.

Such a course of action would raise the prospect of a “slide into strategic conflict”, which, “however unlikely we see that as being now, represents an obvious existential threat to our whole being”, Sir Adrian added, hinting at the potential for nuclear confrontation.

The prospect of a brazen Russian attack is one factor driving NATO moves to speed up its ability to deploy large military units in the event of a crisis.

The centrepiece of the alliance’s shift in policy following a summit in Wales in September is a “spearhead” brigade-sized rapid reaction force capable of deploying within 48 hours.

NATO is preparing to station “force integration units” in each of its eastern European member states to act as eyes and ears on the ground as well as prepare for rapid deployment of NATO forces.

[Ryan Ruck]

Thomas Sowell: We Must Learn From Lessons Of WWII

February 20, 2015

When Alfred E. Neuman said "What me worry?" on the cover of Mad magazine, it was funny. But this message was not nearly as funny coming from President Barack Obama and his National Security Advisor, Susan Rice.

In a musical comedy, it would be hilarious to have the president send out his "happy talk" message by someone whose credibility was already thoroughly discredited by her serial lies on television about the Benghazi terrorist attack in 2012.

Unfortunately — indeed, tragically — the world today is about as far from a musical comedy as you can get, with terrorists rampaging across the Middle East, leaving a trail of unspeakable atrocities in their wake, and with Iran moving closer to producing a nuclear bomb, with an intercontinental missile on the horizon.

We will be lucky to get through the remainder of President Obama's term in office without a major catastrophe, from which we may or may not recover.

Iran has announced repeatedly that it plans to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. But you don't need an intercontinental missile to reach Israel from Iran. Teheran is less than a thousand miles from Jerusalem. As was said long ago, "Send not to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee."

It was painfully ironic to hear Ms. Rice tell us that the danger we face today is not as serious as the dangers we faced in World War II.

Anyone who has actually studied the period that led up to World War II knows that the Western democracies followed feckless policies remarkably similar to those that we are following today. And anyone who studies that war itself knows that the West came dangerously close to losing it before finally getting their act together and turning things around.

In a nuclear age, we may not have time to let reality finally sink in on our leaders and wake up the public to the dangers.

There was lots of "happy talk" in the West while Hitler was building up his Nazi war machine during the 1930s, as the Western intelligentsia were urging the democracies to disarm.

The dangers of Hitler's sudden rise to power in Germany during the early 1930s were played down, and even ridiculed, by politicians, journalists and the intelligentsia in both Britain and France.

A temporary political setback for the Nazis in 1933 was hailed by a French newspaper as "the piteous end of Hitlerism" and a British newspaper said even earlier that Hitler was "done for." Prominent British intellectual Harold Laski opined that Hitler was "a cheap conspirator rather than an inspired revolutionary, the creature of circumstances rather than the maker of destiny."

In other words, Hitler and the Nazis were the "junior varsity" of their day, in the eyes of the know-it-alls.

Today, when people can graduate from even our most prestigious colleges and universities utterly ignorant of history, many people -- even in high places -- have no idea how close the Western democracies came to losing World War II.

A nuclear war is not likely to last three years, so there is unlikely to be time enough to recover from years of glib, foolish words and catastrophic decisions.

[American Patriot]

We will be lucky to get through the remainder of President Obama's term in office without a major catastrophe, from which we may or may not recover.

So, like... what's going to happen here? This is America and all that. We're a melting pot, have open borders, our President is a lying sissy Muslim who either is the most incompetent human being that ever lived, or one of the smartest, well educated tyrants that ever held an office. I mean, you know, with this Socialist America, we should be getting along with everyone now, right?????

Who the hell doesn't like us now?


Geez, we're kissing everyone's ass, being flexible for Putin, letting ANYONE come to America.


What could go wrong?

[Ryan Ruck]

And when a guy like Thomas Sowell starts talking like this, it might be a good idea to start taking things seriously.

Yet plenty of people will continue not to...

[American Patriot]

When Sowell speaks, you're right, we should listen.

[vector7]

Gorbachev Says War With Russia Is Imminent

Ex Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev has said that he believes the United States is attempting to drag Russia into a war and is pulling the European Union into the situation too.

Pravda.ru reports:“Now you can hear America and the European Union speaking about only sanctions against Russia. Have they lost their heads indeed? America got lost in the jungle and pulls us in there too,” Gorbachev told Interfax Thursday.

“If we call a spade a spade, America has pulled us into a new cold war, trying to openly implement its general idea of triumphalism. Where will it take us all? The Cold War is already on. What’s next? Unfortunately, I can not say firmly that the cold war will not lead to the hot one. I’m afraid that they might take the risk,” Mikhail Gorbachev said.
Advertisement

At the same time, Gorbachev noted that the state of affairs in the United States and the European Union is “not simple” at all. “Some countries in Europe live well, but other countries do not live well at all. They are too much dependent on the United States and Germany,” the former president of the USSR said.
“The situation is acute, one doesn’t need to simplify it – the split between politicians is too big. Unfortunately, it does not decrease, but only increases,” Mikhail Gorbachev said.

Previously, Gorbachev praised Russia’s move to reunite with the Crimea, noting that the referendum in March “successfully met expectations of the Crimeans.” Having returned the Crimea to Russia, Gorbachev added, Putin corrected a mistake of the Soviet Union. The former president of the Soviet Union also condemned Western sanctions against Russia.

In early 2014, Gorbachev urged presidents of Russia and the United States, Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama, to initiate talks on the situation in Ukraine and promote peaceful resolution of the conflict in the country.

“We can not allow the Ukrainians fight against the Ukrainians. This is terrible nonsense. But the situation has apparently taken the character that requires assistance from authoritative representatives of our two countries, otherwise it can lead to a disaster,” said Gorbachev in the beginning of 2014.

Mikhail Gorbachev earlier said that Europe may eventually face “terrifying massacre,” should the conflict in Ukraine spread to Europe. Gorbachev supports the policy of the Russian administration as far as the Ukrainian crisis is concerned. “One should do everything to stop the killings. This is one nation. If other countries get involved, and the scale of it grows, we can come to the worst massacre in Europe. This must not be allowed,” said the ex-president.

Mikhail Gorbachev believes the West should listen to what Putin says
At the same time, he noted that Russia must not interfere in the events in the south-eastern Ukraine. “If our country intervenes, a huge fire may spark, and the whole world won’t be able to put it out,” the former president of the USSR said.

The first Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev called on the West to lift sanctions and listen to the words that Russian President Vladimir Putin said during his speech at the meeting of the Valdai discussion club in 2014.

“Despite the severity of critical formulations against the West and especially the United States, I heard in his [Putin's] speech the desire to find ways to reduce tensions and create new grounds for partner relations in the long term,” Gorbachev said.
According to Mikhail Gorbachev, one must leave controversy and recrimination behind as soon as possible and take efforts to find common ground. “One should work towards the gradual dismantling of the sanctions that cause damage to both sides. First of all, one should lift so-called personal sanctions from politicians, so that they could join the search for solutions,” said Gorbachev. In his opinion, providing assistance to Ukraine in overcoming consequences of the war could be a way of cooperation.

Speaking at the meeting of the Valdai discussion club in Sochi on October 24, 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin urged the West to conduct equal dialogue and respect the positions of Russia. Putin compared the policy of the United States in the international arena with the behavior of the nouveaux riches (the new rich), “on whom enormous wealth – global leadership – has suddenly fallen.” Putin also said that the Americans, having “declared themselves victors in the Cold War,” sharply exacerbated imbalance in the world.

- See more at: http://yournewswire.com/gorbachev-sa....VR2QJv3y.dpuf

[Malsua]

Ole Gorby is a few synapses short of a thought. Obama doesn't want any wars except the internal federal police state war against the American populace.

[Ryan Ruck]

NATO and Russia hold rival military exercises on Estonian border

Joint shows of force highlight fears that Baltics may be next target for Kremlin land-grab

February 25, 2015

Russian and NATO troops took part in rival exercises on either side of the Estonian border on Wednesday, highlighting fears that the tiny Baltic state could be the next target of the Kremlin’s territorial ambitions.

NATO forces put on a show of strength within yards of Estonia’s Russian border, with armoured personnel carriers, tanks and 1,300 Estonian soldiers forming a military parade. The parade, which also included 100 troops from Britain and other European nations, followed warnings from David Cameron on Tuesday that the Baltics could be next in Russia’s sights for a Crimea-style annexation.

The parade took place in the snow-bound Estonian frontier town of Narva, where a majority of residents are ethnic Russians. The choice of location was a pointed warning to Moscow, which regards the Russian community there as de facto evidence that Estonia is part of Russia’s “back yard”.

The Kremlin responded with its own military drills, sending 2,000 paratroopers into Russia’s western Pskov region, which borders both Estonia and neighbouring Latvia.

The military exercises came amid fresh political wrangling in Britain over how to respond to Russia’s renewed assertiveness. Ken Clarke, the former Conservative Cabinet minister, attacked Mr Cameron’s plan to send 75 British troops to provide logistical advice to Ukraine’s beleaguered forces as pointless.



“Military conflict doesn’t help,” he said. “I don’t have strong feelings about retraining the Ukrainian army, but it’s not going to solve anything because no matter how well trained and equipped the Ukrainian army are, the Red Army could defeat them by the end of this week if they wanted to.”

Meanwhile, Rory Stewart, the Chairman of the House of Commons Defence Committee, said it would be a “big mistake” for spending on Britain’s military to fall below the NATO target of two per cent of the national budget.

The Tory MP and former diplomat warned that Russia’s ongoing invasion of eastern Ukraine showed that spending needed to be maintained as a “symbolic” message to President Putin.

George Osborne, the Chancellor, is believed to have told Mr Cameron that spending was on course to fall below the target within two years, and that he was content for it to do so.

Mr Stewart told Radio 4’s Today programme: “The view of the Defence Committee is that that would be a big mistake, because that commitment came out of a NATO summit that was directed against what’s happening in the Ukraine.”

Meanwhile, a Russian newspaper claimed to have found a secret strategy document that advised The Kremlin to break up Ukraine and absorb its pro-Russian regions even before the country’s president fled in the wake of pro-European street protests a year ago.

Novaya Gazeta said the “plan” for annexing Crimea was passed to Vladimir Putin’s presidential administration between February 4 and 12, 2014, at least 10 days before Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine’s then leader, sought sanctuary in Russia.

The newspaper published parts of the document, which urged the Kremlin to “play on the centrifugal ambitions of different regions of the country with the aim, in one way or another, of initiating the joining of its eastern areas to Russia”.

The document also argues that the European Union wanted to take over Ukraine, and Russia must “intervene in the geopolitical intrigue of the European community” in order to maintain some control of gas pipelines through Ukraine and avoid losing energy markets in central and south Europe.

Novaya Gazeta said it believed the document was prepared with the help of Konstantin Malofeyev, a well-known pro-Kremlin businessman with links to the pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine, although Mr Malofeyev reportedly denies that.

On the ground in eastern Ukraine, there were signs that an internationally brokered ceasefire might finally be starting to hold, with the Ukrainian army saying on Wednesday that it had suffered no casualties in 24 hours for the first time in weeks.

The lull at the frontline came amid further economic meltdown for Kiev, with the central bank forced to intervene over a further collapse in the price of the Ukrainian hryvnia, which has already dropped by at least 40 per cent this year.

There were also signs of a renewed dispute over gas supplies, with energy companies reporting that their pre-paid shipments had been halted from Russia. There was speculation that it was in response for Kiev curbing gas supplies to separatist-controlled areas in the east last week.

[vector7]

Christopher Miller@ChristopherJM · 16m16 minutes ago Russian serviceman: 'We got our orders. We turned over all docs, then got in tank and we crossed border to #Ukraine.' http://www.novayagazeta.ru/society/67490.html…


gandalf greybeard@gerrydogma · 1h 1 hour ago RU Amb to NATO: "Moscow will take all measures, including military-technical, to neutralize possible threat from NATO (trainers) in Ukraine"


gandalf greybeard@gerrydogma · 1h 1 hour ago
@20committee "Moscow will take all measures...to neutralize possible threat from NATO (trainers) presence in Ukraine" http://tass.ru/en/world/780572




Russian warships in the Mediterranean (Russia Today)

Various unconfirmed reports are emerging indicating that there may be joint international action planned in Libya as early as next week.http://www.breitbart.com/national-se...tion-in-libya/



Navy ships off the coast of Libya , officially engaged in an exercise but - according to the newspaper La Stampa that he anticipated the news - "ready to intervene in case of need."The ships should stop at the border of the territorial waters of Tripoli. Italian naval group is part of the "San Giorgio", started from Brindisi, who has embarked in La Spezia the raiders of the battalion San Marco , the power elite army.According to the newspaper, the arrival of the Italian ship off the coast of Libya would be required to protect the strategic and commercial interests of Italy, beginning Greenstream, the underwater pipeline of 'Eni , which runs for 520 kilometers in the Mediterranean , from the compression station Mellitah up to the terminal of Gela, Sicily. So far, the structure is protected by 20 000 men of the guard loyal to the legitimate government of Tobruk but, given the precarious balance of the area, the Italian naval force would be ready to intervene.The government Renzi has ruled out any military operation and in fact the St. George and the convoy should stay in Italian waters but, concludes the article in the Turin daily, "in recent weeks the Navy is stepping maneuvers in the Mediterranean and from March 2 to return perform the ' Open Sea exercise in the waters of the Tyrrhenian and interrelated with , with the deployment of a large part of the available units. It will be an opportunity to flex its muscles in the face of a crisis very delicate. "For the General Claudio Graziano, Chief of Staff of Defense "exercise Offshore is repeated over time. Evidently exercises and training also play the role of deterrence. Other surveillance activities and protection are always in place - he said - then there is the readiness and preparation to execute policy directives and to ensure security. "http://www.si24.it/2015/02/28/la-nave-militare-san-giorgio-al-largo-della-libia-pronta-a-intervenire-in-caso-di-necessita/82144/

[vector7]

US military satellite explodes above Earth



A US military satellite exploded after detecting an unexplained “sudden spike in temperature”, sending dozens of chunks of debris tumbling into different orbits around Earth

A US military satellite exploded after detecting an unexplained “sudden spike in temperature”, sending dozens of chunks of debris tumbling into different orbits around Earth.

Civilian company CelesTrak was first to notice the explosion of the once-secret weather satellite and the US Air Force subsequently confirmed that it had been lost.

The satellite was an ageing component of the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program which the US military began developing the in the 1960s to help plan reconnaissance and surveillance missions.

In 1972 the system was declassified, and data made available to civilian scientists.

The lost satellite was the 13th to be launched as part of DMSP, designated DMSP-F13, and had been in Earth orbit since 1995.

Air Force Space Command confirmed to SpaceNews.com that the “catastrophic event” came after “a sudden spike in temperature” was detected, followed by “an unrecoverable loss of attitude control”.

While operators were deciding how to “render the vehicle safe” they detected a debris cloud which indicated that the satellite had been destroyed.

The explosion has caused at least 43 pieces of debris to scatter into orbit, which are now being tracked by the US Air Force.

Air Force Col. John Giles, the Joint Space Operations Center’s director, told SpaceNews.com: “While the initial response is complete, JSpOC personnel will continue to assess this event to learn more about what happened and what it will mean for users within this orbit."

Due to the age of DMSP-F13 it was no longer a critical part of the network, and the US government expects that its loss will cause only a “slight reduction” in real-time weather data.

Twitter: T.S. Kelso - It appears we've had another debris event with 26 new pieces of debris from DMSP 5D-2 F13 launch. Analyzing circumstances now.

TLEs suggest event occurred on Feb 3 at ~1715 UTC: pic.twitter.com/dpDnK058ze
— T.S. Kelso (@TSKelso) February 26, 2015

Event time appears closer to 1723 UTC. Debris plane does not align with planes of B, C, or E: pic.twitter.com/9NTx1D9lKn
— T.S. Kelso (@TSKelso) February 26, 2015

Like all DMSP satellites it orbited the earth at an altitude of around 500 miles in a “sun-synchronous orbit” – meaning that they flew in a path taking in the north and south poles.

On each path around the earth, which took roughly 101 minutes, they would see a slightly different part of the planet. This would give each satellite a complete view of the entire planet’s surface twice a day.

[American Patriot]

Israeli PM speaking. Congress is yelling and applauding.

Never thought I'd see the day.

lol

[American Patriot]

Can anyone explain to me those assholes on the Left who are WHINING their asses off about Netanyahu speaking????

[American Patriot]

So, Biden "boycotted" the speech. White House doesn't even send a representative there.

The Dummycraps got on television on their soap box crying about how this speech "damaged relations" between the two countries.

What the FUCK?

[American Patriot]

Wanted to point out that I'm only putting this stuff about Israel here because, well... this is where WW3 will really start, the ME.


Anyway.


Transcript: Netanyahu Speech to Congress


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Congress Tuesday about the emerging nuclear deal with Iran.

Here is the full transcript:

NETANYAHU: Thank you.(APPLAUSE)

Thank you…

(APPLAUSE)

… Speaker of the House John Boehner, President Pro Tem Senator Orrin Hatch, Senator Minority — Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

I also want to acknowledge Senator, Democratic Leader Harry Reid. Harry, it’s good to see you back on your feet.

(APPLAUSE)

I guess it’s true what they say, you can’t keep a good man down.

(LAUGHTER)

My friends, I’m deeply humbled by the opportunity to speak for a third time before the most important legislative body in the world, the U.S. Congress.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: I want to thank you all for being here today. I know that my speech has been the subject of much controversy. I deeply regret that some perceive my being here as political. That was never my intention.

I want to thank you, Democrats and Republicans, for your common support for Israel, year after year, decade after decade.

(APPLAUSE)

I know that no matter on which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

The remarkable alliance between Israel and the United States has always been above politics. It must always remain above politics.

(APPLAUSE)

Because America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope. Israel is grateful for the support of American — of America’s people and of America’s presidents, from Harry Truman to Barack Obama.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel.

Now, some of that is widely known.

(APPLAUSE)

Some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N.

Some of what the president has done for Israel is less well- known.

I called him in 2010 when we had the Carmel forest fire, and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid.

In 2011, we had our embassy in Cairo under siege, and again, he provided vital assistance at the crucial moment.

Or his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on Hamas terrorists.

(APPLAUSE)

In each of those moments, I called the president, and he was there.

And some of what the president has done for Israel might never be known, because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between an American president and an Israeli prime minister.

But I know it, and I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: And Israel is grateful to you, the American Congress, for your support, for supporting us in so many ways, especially in generous military assistance and missile defense, including Iron Dome.

(APPLAUSE)

Last summer, millions of Israelis were protected from thousands of Hamas rockets because this capital dome helped build our Iron Dome.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you, America. Thank you for everything you’ve done for Israel.

My friends, I’ve come here today because, as prime minister of Israel, I feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people: Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons.

We’re an ancient people. In our nearly 4,000 years of history, many have tried repeatedly to destroy the Jewish people. Tomorrow night, on the Jewish holiday of Purim, we’ll read the Book of Esther. We’ll read of a powerful Persian viceroy named Haman, who plotted to destroy the Jewish people some 2,500 years ago. But a courageous Jewish woman, Queen Esther, exposed the plot and gave for the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies.NETANYAHU: The plot was foiled. Our people were saved.

(APPLAUSE)

Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei spews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated — he tweets. You know, in Iran, there isn’t exactly free Internet. But he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed.

For those who believe that Iran threatens the Jewish state, but not the Jewish people, listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran’s chief terrorist proxy. He said: If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.

But Iran’s regime is not merely a Jewish problem, any more than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. The 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in World War II. So, too, Iran’s regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also the peace of the entire world. To understand just how dangerous Iran would be with nuclear weapons, we must fully understand the nature of the regime.

NETANYAHU: The people of Iran are very talented people. They’re heirs to one of the world’s great civilizations. But in 1979, they were hijacked by religious zealots — religious zealots who imposed on them immediately a dark and brutal dictatorship.

That year, the zealots drafted a constitution, a new one for Iran. It directed the revolutionary guards not only to protect Iran’s borders, but also to fulfill the ideological mission of jihad. The regime’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, exhorted his followers to “export the revolution throughout the world.”

I’m standing here in Washington, D.C. and the difference is so stark. America’s founding document promises life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Iran’s founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad. And as states are collapsing across the Middle East, Iran is charging into the void to do just that.

Iran’s goons in Gaza, its lackeys in Lebanon, its revolutionary guards on the Golan Heights are clutching Israel with three tentacles of terror. Backed by Iran, Assad is slaughtering Syrians. Back by Iran, Shiite militias are rampaging through Iraq. Back by Iran, Houthis are seizing control of Yemen, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the Red Sea. Along with the Straits of Hormuz, that would give Iran a second choke-point on the world’s oil supply.

NETANYAHU: Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That’s just last week, while they’re having nuclear talks with the United States. But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran’s attacks against the United States have been anything but mock. And the targets have been all too real.

Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, D.C.

In the Middle East, Iran now dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa. And if Iran’s aggression is left unchecked, more will surely follow.

So, at a time when many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations.

(APPLAUSE)

We must all stand together to stop Iran’s march of conquest, subjugation and terror.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, two years ago, we were told to give President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif a chance to bring change and moderation to Iran. Some change! Some moderation!NETANYAHU: Rouhani’s government hangs gays, persecutes Christians, jails journalists and executes even more prisoners than before.

Last year, the same Zarif who charms Western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh. Imad Mughniyeh is the terrorist mastermind who spilled more American blood than any other terrorist besides Osama bin Laden. I’d like to see someone ask him a question about that.

Iran’s regime is as radical as ever, its cries of “Death to America,” that same America that it calls the “Great Satan,” as loud as ever.

Now, this shouldn’t be surprising, because the ideology of Iran’s revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that’s why this regime will always be an enemy of America.

Don’t be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America.

Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the region and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire.

In this deadly game of thrones, there’s no place for America or for Israel, no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don’t share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone.NETANYAHU: So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy.

(APPLAUSE)

The difference is that ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember — I’ll say it one more time — the greatest dangers facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can’t let that happen.

(APPLAUSE)

But that, my friends, is exactly what could happen, if the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran. That deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. It would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons, lots of them.

Let me explain why. While the final deal has not yet been signed, certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record. You don’t need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. You can Google it.

NETANYAHU: Absent a dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran.

The first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short break-out time to the bomb. Break-out time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb.

According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected, but not destroyed.

Because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largely intact, Iran’s break-out time would be very short — about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel’s.

And if — if Iran’s work on advanced centrifuges, faster and faster centrifuges, is not stopped, that break-out time could still be shorter, a lot shorter.

True, certain restrictions would be imposed on Iran’s nuclear program and Iran’s adherence to those restrictions would be supervised by international inspectors. But here’s the problem. You see, inspectors document violations; they don’t stop them.

Inspectors knew when North Korea broke to the bomb, but that didn’t stop anything. North Korea turned off the cameras, kicked out the inspectors. Within a few years, it got the bomb.

Now, we’re warned that within five years North Korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs.

Like North Korea, Iran, too, has defied international inspectors. It’s done that on at least three separate occasions — 2005, 2006, 2010. Like North Korea, Iran broke the locks, shut off the cameras.

NETANYAHU: Now, I know this is not gonna come a shock — as a shock to any of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, it also plays a pretty good game of hide-and-cheat with them.

The U.N.’s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught — caught twice, not once, twice — operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn’t even know existed.

Right now, Iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we don’t know about, the U.S. and Israel. As the former head of inspections for the IAEA said in 2013, he said, “If there’s no undeclared installation today in Iran, it will be the first time in 20 years that it doesn’t have one.” Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. And that’s why the first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. That concession creates a real danger that Iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal.

But the second major concession creates an even greater danger that Iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. Because virtually all the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade.

NETANYAHU: Now, a decade may seem like a long time in political life, but it’s the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It’s a blink of an eye in the life of our children. We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran’s nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could product many, many nuclear bombs.

Iran’s Supreme Leader says that openly. He says, Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount — 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.

My long-time friend, John Kerry, Secretary of State, confirmed last week that Iran could legitimately possess that massive centrifuge capacity when the deal expires.

Now I want you to think about that. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy.

And by the way, if Iran’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program is not part of the deal, and so far, Iran refuses to even put it on the negotiating table. Well, Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reach corners of the Earth, including to every part of the United States.

NETANYAHU: So you see, my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb; it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.

So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse?

Well, I disagree. I don’t believe that Iran’s radical regime will change for the better after this deal. This regime has been in power for 36 years, and its voracious appetite for aggression grows with each passing year. This deal would wet appetite — would only wet Iran’s appetite for more.

Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it’s under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which to fund more terrorism?

Why should Iran’s radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both world’s: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?

This is a question that everyone asks in our region. Israel’s neighbors — Iran’s neighbors know that Iran will become even more aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled and it’s been given a clear path to the bomb.

NETANYAHU: And many of these neighbors say they’ll respond by racing to get nuclear weapons of their own. So this deal won’t change Iran for the better; it will only change the Middle East for the worse. A deal that’s supposed to prevent nuclear proliferation would instead spark a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the planet.

This deal won’t be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox.

If anyone thinks — if anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road, we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare.

Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve come here today to tell you we don’t have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don’t have to gamble with our future and with our children’s future.

We can insist that restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second…

(APPLAUSE)

Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world.

(APPLAUSE)

And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you.

If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires.

(APPLAUSE)

If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn’t change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted.

(APPLAUSE)

If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: My friends, what about the argument that there’s no alternative to this deal, that Iran’s nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn’t get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can’t drive. A pilot without a plan can’t fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can’t make nuclear weapons.

(APPLAUSE)

Iran’s nuclear program can be rolled back well-beyond the current proposal by insisting on a better deal and keeping up the pressure on a very vulnerable regime, especially given the recent collapse in the price of oil.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, if Iran threatens to walk away from the table — and this often happens in a Persian bazaar — call their bluff. They’ll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do.

(APPLAUSE)

And by maintaining the pressure on Iran and on those who do business with Iran, you have the power to make them need it even more.NETANYAHU: My friends, for over a year, we’ve been told that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well, this is a bad deal. It’s a very bad deal. We’re better off without it.

(APPLAUSE)

Now we’re being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That’s just not true.

The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal.

(APPLAUSE)

A better deal that doesn’t leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and such a short break-out time. A better deal that keeps the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in place until Iran’s aggression ends.

(APPLAUSE)

A better deal that won’t give Iran an easy path to the bomb. A better deal that Israel and its neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally. And no country…

(APPLAUSE)

… no country has a greater stake — no country has a greater stake than Israel in a good deal that peacefully removes this threat.

Ladies and gentlemen, history has placed us at a fateful crossroads. We must now choose between two paths. One path leads to a bad deal that will at best curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions for a while, but it will inexorably lead to a nuclear-armed Iran whose unbridled aggression will inevitably lead to war.NETANYAHU: The second path, however difficult, could lead to a much better deal, that would prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, a nuclearized Middle East and the horrific consequences of both to all of humanity.

You don’t have to read Robert Frost to know. You have to live life to know that the difficult path is usually the one less traveled, but it will make all the difference for the future of my country, the security of the Middle East and the peace of the world, the peace, we all desire.

(APPLAUSE)

My friend, standing up to Iran is not easy. Standing up to dark and murderous regimes never is. With us today is Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: Elie, your life and work inspires to give meaning to the words, “never again.”

(APPLAUSE)

And I wish I could promise you, Elie, that the lessons of history have been learned. I can only urge the leaders of the world not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

(APPLAUSE)

Not to sacrifice the future for the present; not to ignore aggression in the hopes of gaining an illusory peace.

But I can guarantee you this, the days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over.(APPLAUSE)

NETANYAHU: We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend our home have boundless courage. For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves.

(APPLAUSE)

This is why — this is why, as a prime minister of Israel, I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.

(APPLAUSE)

But I know that Israel does not stand alone. I know that America stands with Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

I know that you stand with Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

You stand with Israel, because you know that the story of Israel is not only the story of the Jewish people but of the human spirit that refuses again and again to succumb to history’s horrors.

(APPLAUSE)

Facing me right up there in the gallery, overlooking all of us in this (inaudible) chamber is the image of Moses. Moses led our people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land.

NETANYAHU: And before the people of Israel entered the land of Israel, Moses gave us a message that has steeled our resolve for thousands of years. I leave you with his message today, (SPEAKING IN HEBREW), “Be strong and resolute, neither fear nor dread them.”

My friends, may Israel and America always stand together, strong and resolute. May we neither fear nor dread the challenges ahead. May we face the future with confidence, strength and hope.

May God bless the state of Israel and may God bless the United States of America.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you all.

You’re wonderful.

Thank you, America. Thank you.

Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

END

[vector7]

Benjamin Netanyahu Speech to Congress 2015 | The New York Times

Streamed live on Mar 3, 2015

Go here 00:21:59 for the start of the speech.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel used one of the most prominent platforms in the world on Tuesday to warn against what he called a “bad deal” being negotiated with Iran to freeze its nuclear program, culminating a drama that has roiled Israeli-American relations for weeks.

Read the story here: http://nyti.ms/18K0u6z

[vector7]

NO JOKE: Pelosi Says She Was So Outraged With Netanyahu’s “Condescending” Speech That She “Near Tears”…


Drama Queen.



ZIP | March 3, 2015 12:44 pm