The U.S. Govt. Now Definitely Wants WW3 Against Russia

The U.S. Govt. Now Definitely Wants WW3 Against Russia

Eric Zuesse (blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/)

INTRODUCTORY NOTE:

The independent but highly respected scholar about Russia, Gilbert Doctorow, posted on August 27th at his blog, his article providing evidence that the U.S. Government is in the final preparatory stages of carrying out a blitz nuclear attack to decapitate Russia’s central command — annihilate The Kremlin.

Whereas most of the public discussions about the possibility of a World War Three (WW3) ignore the fact that all real WW3 planning focuses around annihilating the other side’s central command — its top leadership, especially Putin himself — in order to cripple if not eliminate the other side’s retaliatory capacity, and deals instead only with subordinate matters, such as by discussing the various stages building toward that (ignored) goal (as-if to ignore the goal when discussing the means toward it is not itself profoundly deceptive), the reality is instead remarkably like in chess, that trapping-capturing (eliminating) the opponent’s “king” is what “victory” really means in a war. 

Doctorow argues that the U.S.-controlled Ukrainian invasion into Kursk in Russia constitutes a crucial step forward toward that U.S. Government goal. Here, therefore, in order to give as wide distribution to it as possible, I post his commentary:

——

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/08/27/for-russia-recovering-kursk-is-no-walk-in-the-rose-garden/

For Russia, recovering Kursk is no walk in the rose garden

August 27th

In my last on Judging Freedom, Judge Napolitano asked me whether the Ukrainian invasion of the Kursk region appearance would be ended by the time of our next chat, two days from today. The implicit assumption behind this question is that the Russians were doing so well destroying all the NATO-supplied tanks, personnel carriers and other advanced equipment, they were killing and maiming so many Ukrainian troops by their carpet bombing and heavy glide bombing of the region, that none but a rag tag collection of invaders would be left to liquidate or take prisoner in the several days ahead.

This assumption was founded in the confident declarations of my peers in the Opposition or, shall we say, 'dissident' movement in the United States. And their certainty, which was reflected in the over-hyped titles given to the recordings of their interviews on YouTube came from back channels in Russia that my peers have been using for their public statements.

For example, the very widely watched Scott Ritter revealed in a recent interview that he has been in touch with the commander of the Chechen forces now engaged in Kursk, Alaudinov. Such contact is entirely credible given the fact that Ritter visited Grozny earlier this year, met with the republic's leader Kadyrov, participated in a review of the Chechen troops and certainly met with some of their military chiefs.

Indeed, in view of the seeming consensus that the Russian recovery of Kursk is proceeding apace, with 4,000 of the estimated 12,000 invaders having been killed up to last Thursday, I also foresaw an early end to the conflict, although not necessarily measured in one week . As I explained, the Russian Ministry of Defense only claims territorial gains when it has thoroughly combined the territory and assured itself there are no enemy forces hiding out here or there. The 1,000 square kilometers initially occupied by the Ukrainians are a lot of ground to comb.

However, I have had my reasonable doubts about the value of using such back channels as Alaudinov. Back in the days of the battle for Bakhmut, we saw a lot of Alaudinov on the Sixty Minutes news and talk show. Each day presenter Olga Skabeyeva warmly welcomed him on air and he handled himself very well, speaking optimistically of Russia's progress but giving no specifics that could be of use to the enemy. In short, his lips were sealed. I find it hard to believe that such a professional soldier and patriot would give anything of use to a foreigner, however friendly he or she might be to the Russian cause.

Last night's edition of the talk show The Great Game gave a very different picture of the state of conflict in Kursk from what my peers are saying and of where this proxy was may be headed NOW, not in some distant future.

See https://rutube.ru/video/f8abcf8a37c43568ef44089025726934/

The key personality in this discussion was Frants Klintsevich, identified on the video as leader of the Russian Union of Veterans of Afghanistan. His Wikipedia entry further informs us that after serving as a Duma member for many years he is now a Senator, ie, a member of the upper chamber of Russia's bicameral legislature. He has represented the city administration of Smolensk in the western part of the Russian Federation, where he is no stranger, having been born just across the border in what is now the independent state of Belarus.

For 22 years ending in 1997, Klintsevich was an officer in Russia's Armed Forces, serving primarily with the parachutists, meaning that he has guts and knows what it means to face battle. He retired with the rank of colonel, but continued his military education in the Military Academy of the General Staff, graduating in 2004. He also has a Ph.D. in psychology and is a gifted linguist, with command of German, Polish, and Belarussian. He is a member of the steering committee of the ruling United Russia party. I bring this out to make the point that Klintsevich is no garden variety 'talking head' but a very authoritative source.

And his testimony on The Great Game is the kind of Open Source on which I rely to say what I do about current Russian affairs.

Klintsevich's commentary last night was intended to sober up the television audience and explain why the fight in Kursk is far more complicated and challenging than anyone is saying either on Russian or on Western news. It suggests that Russian casualties among its armed forces may be far more serious than anyone would suppose.

Klintsevich's commentary lays the foundation for a dramatic Russian escalation of the proxy war into a hot war threatening to become WWIII. Why? Because the so-called Zelensky gambit in Kursk is fully enabled by the United States and its NATO allies, using skills, satellite and airborne reconnaissance, command and control resources in real time that are superior to anything the Russians possess. It also has Western including US boots on the ground. And in conditions like this, the disadvantaged side faces a strong temptation to go for the great equalizer, nuclear arms, to defend itself and to assure its victory.

Klintsevich also said what I have not seen elsewhere, given the ubiquitous belief in opposition interviews that the Ukrainians in Kursk are cut off from sources of supply: that Kiev has now raised the number of its forces sent to Kursk from 12,000 to 20,000.

In short, the Zelensky gambit that is being activated fully by the United States is not a PR stunt but a full-blown invasion intended to be the vanguard of what will be an air assault on Russia's strategic assets far in the rear using JASSM, Storm Shadow and other long-range missiles launched from F16s.

Klintsevich has further intimated that the two US aircraft carriers and their escorts now in the Eastern Mediterranean may be there not to contain Iran but for an all-out attack on Russia using their jets to deliver nuclear strikes. I add to his analysis that this may explain the knock-out of Russia's early warning radar stations in the south of the country by Ukrainian drones acting on orders from Washington.

So far, the Russian response to these gathering storm clouds has been two days in succession of massive missile and drone attacks on critical infrastructure in Ukraine. But let us not have any illusions: if the Russians sense that the United States is about to pounce on them, to use the assets in Ukraine and beyond not just against Russian planes, which have been moved back beyond the 900 km range of the JASSM and Storm Shadows, but on critical civilian infrastructure to disable the war effort, then a preventive Russian attack on NATO, on the continental United States, not to mince words, is entirely conceivable. 

All of this is sure to play out in the weeks before November 4th and the US elections. The Biden administration is obviously committed to a struggle to death. Who wants to flinch? Who will “win” is an open question. Washington, you have been forewarned by Mr. Klintsevich, who is surely speaking on behalf of the Kremlin.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

——

INTRODUCTORY NOTE:

There might be too little time remaining in which to consider and to impement any strategy to prevent WW3 if it’s not already too late to prevent (other than by Russia’s wiping out all of the U.S.-Ukrainian invading forces in Kursk, which itself might be impossible to do). However, I have previously proposed two strategies that Russia should consider but which no one has responded to (much less started to implement), and so here I present a new article that summarizes both:

——  

Two New Strategies Russia Could Use to Prevent WW3

Eric Zuesse (blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/)

When America took over the Ukrainian Government in February 2014, its ultimate intention was to place a nuclear missile into position at the nearest border to Russia’s central command in The Kremlin in Moscow, which border-location is near the town of Sumy in Ukraine, which is only 317 miles — or 5 minutes of missile-flying time — away from The Kremlin, which would be like achieving a checkmate in chess, because to decapitate the opponent’s central command is what geostrategy is all about — without the “king,” the opponent can’t even issue a retaliation-order, much less control and adapt that retaliation. To decapitate the opponent is effectively to conquer it; and, if this decapitation happens within a mere five minutes from launch, it will almost certainly occur well before the “king” has even become informed that it had been launched. That’s why the U.S. Government has been planning ever since 1945 to win control over Ukraine — which long-term goal U.S. President Obama actually achieved in February 2014 (except that, even now, Ukraine still hasn’t yet become a NATO member, which would be a pre-requisite in order for the U.S. to post that missile there).

Consequently: on 5 April 2023, I headlined “Russia’s only safe response to Finland in NATO is to move Russia's capital to Novosibirsk.” Whereas Finland (Kotka) is only 507 miles or 816 kilometers from Moscow, it is 2,032 miles or 3,271 kilometers from Novosibirsk.

Furthermore: Novosibirsk is 2,716 miles or 4,372 kilometers from Japan (Hokkaido). And it is 2,371 miles or 3,815 kilometers from South Korea (Seoul). Placing Russia’s central command in Novosibirsk (Russia’s third-largest city) would eliminate the danger from the U.S. regime and its colonies including the NATO countries (the danger of a blitz-fast annihilation of Russia’s central command). Finally, the ‘Cold War’ that U.S. leaders lied to say was against ‘communism’ when the U.S. regime’s real aim was to conquer or else coup the entire world — and especially the word’s largest nation, Russia — would then be over. The cost to Russia of terminating in this entirely peaceful way America’s constant war (ever since 25 July 1945) to defeat Russia, would be vastly less expensive than is the long-failed way that Putin has been trying.

Russians will need to recognize, very soon, that unless their capital city will become relocated far away from Moscow — toward which NATO has extended its borders closer and closer and will soon be less than a thousand miles away from with its missiles becoming posted in Germany — relocated to or near the center of Russia, such as to Russia’s third-largest city, Novosibirsk, which would be around 2,000 miles away from NATO or from any other U.S. colony (such as South Korea and Japan to the east) the U.S. is likely to become able fairly soon to post its missiles within less than a 30-minute missile-flying-time of blitzing and decapitating Russia’s central command — grabbing Russia. On 14 July 2024, I headlined “Why Russia will need to relocate its capital — perhaps to Novosibirsk” and listed 13 countries that have relocated their capitals. One of them happened to be Russia, in 1712 and 1918. Another was America in 1800.

Yet another reason why this would make sense is that Putin has long emphasized that Russia is not merely European but is very definitely EurAsian — and now is reorienting its focus eastward, into Asia. If those statements by him are serious, then what could even possibly be a better way of showing it, than by moving its capital away from Moscow in Europe, into Novosibirsk in Asia? 

Obviously, if Russia’s capital city becomes relocated to Novosibirsk, then the Cold War (the danger that the U.S. empire poses to Russia — the danger of conquering Russia) will effectively be ended. But Putin has initiated no new approach to addressing the problem.

Another possible new geostrategy for Russia — and one that could be simultaneously implemented — is this:

On 3 April 2023, I headlined “Putin’s Enormous Blunder”, and wrote that

Putin’s biggest-ever blunder has been his failure to have offered to Finland a guarantee of peaceful relations, and of favored-nation status on trade (including on energy-prices of oil and gas, which, prior to the 2022 U.S.-imposed sanctions against Russia, European countries had, for decades, been buying at lower prices from Russia than from any other country, even without any favored-nation status), if Finland will not join NATO.

If Finland’s Government would have turned down such an offer, then what excuses could they provide to their voters, for having said no to it? (And, if the offer had been made privately and then privately rejected, Putin would then have made the offer publicly, and might have been able to get the Finnish public to support it, and then the Finnish Government to support it.) If Finland would have accepted such an offer, then how much benefit would that provide to the Russian people?

[Russia similarly should] now make, to any U.S.-allied country, the type of deal that it inexplicably had failed to offer to Finland. A possibility exists — though perhaps only a slim one — that one or more existing NATO-member countries might say yes to such a deal. (The offer should be made only privately to each U.S.-allied country; and, then, if any such country privately says no, Russia should then offer the deal publicly to that country. Public opinion in that country might then force that Government — whose prior rejection of the deal would not be publicly known — publicly to say yes to it. Thus, there would then be two chances to obtain an agreement, instead of only one, and this would greatly increase the chances of success.)

Things are now moving ever-closer to the cliff’s edge of a world-annihilating nuclear WW3. Something new must be tried. It obviously won’t come from the aggressor since 1945, which is the U.S. It will have to come from Russia, starting right now.

The U.S. regime has always suppressed each of the facts that are stated in this article and documented in its links. The reader can, by means of these links, verify each of these facts by and for oneself, in order to get beyond the lies that, throughout the U.S. empire, drown-out historical truth about these matters and impose their lies instead.

If you want to know why you don’t see or hear, in the major ‘news’ media, articles or broadcasts that are like this, and history like this, the reason is not because those media don’t receive such information and submissions. All of those media have been receiving each of my submissions for many years but never published any of them nor replied to me to contest any fact that is alleged in any of them. The reason they reject and never reply to any such article is that my articles are true, not that they are false (i.e., stating the lies that they accept and ublish — such as that America is a democracy).

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.