Explain how you let the man who’s fourth in line to the presidency go to a country ‘under bombardment’ on a stupid PR trip that includes him playing ‘Rockin’ in the Free World’ in some exclusive night club.Explain how you hold a democratic vote under bombardment. Explain how soldiers are to vote from the front lines. Explain how citizens of the occupied regions are to vote. You're a moron.
You're so mad about Blinken. It's hilarious.Explain how you let the man who’s fourth in line to the presidency go to a country ‘under bombardment’ on a stupid PR trip that includes him playing ‘Rockin’ in the Free World’ in some exclusive night club.
You’re too ignorant to realize you’re being played.
Deflection.You're so mad about Blinken. It's hilarious.
How will you have any hate leftover for Victoria Nuland?
"Russian authorities have decided unilaterally to change the country’s maritime borders with Lithuania and Finland in the Baltic Sea, according to a draft government decree published on the legal acts portal, reported The Moscow Times.
This could turn into a FAFO scenario..."Russian authorities have decided unilaterally to change the country’s maritime borders with Lithuania and Finland in the Baltic Sea, according to a draft government decree published on the legal acts portal, reported The Moscow Times.
The document, prepared by the Russian Defense Ministry, says that Russia intends to declare part of the waters in the eastern Gulf of Finland and territory near the cities of Baltiysk and Zelenogradsk in the Kaliningrad region as its internal waters.
To achieve this objective, Russia has changed the geographical coordinates of the points that define the baselines from which the width of Russia’s territorial sea and the adjacent zone along the coast and islands are measured.
According to an attachment to the government decree, the Russian government plans to adjust the coordinates in the area of the islands of Yagry, Sommers, Hogland, Rodsher, Maly Tyuters, Vigrund, and near the northern entrance cape of the Narva River at the border with Finland."
The Ministry of Defense proposes to partially “invalidate” the 40-year-old Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union decree regulating the borders in the Baltic, specifically the “Baltic Sea” section.
The document on the border revision, which the Finnish and Lithuanian foreign ministries have not yet officially commented on, was presented for public discussion almost simultaneously with the start of exercises on the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
The Russian Defense Ministry announced that these exercises began in the Southern Military District, with the participation of “Iskander” complexes and aircraft armed with “Kinzhal” missiles. The goal of the drills is to prepare personnel for the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons and to respond “to provocative statements and threats from certain Western officials.”
https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/05/21/the-moscow-times-russia-unilaterally-decides-to-redraw-maritime-borders-with-lithuania-and-finland-in-the-baltic-sea/#:~:text=Russian authorities have decided unilaterally,on the legal acts portal
Russia seems to be taunting and trying to intimidate the West. The tactical nuclear drills are just outrageous. What type of scum country does this?!This could turn into a FAFO scenario...
That's a video the "America First", and Ukraine is corrupt posters won't watch. The same for the weak willed politicians.
I was thinking about that yesterday. I wish we would, but we haven't seen much evidence of it.Couldn't they back-channel weapons?
Russia seems to be taunting and trying to intimidate the West. The tactical nuclear drills are just outrageous. What type of scum country does this?!
Both sidesI don't think anyone is getting left out in rattling the nuclear saber.
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2023/10/27/us-to-build-new-nuclear-gravity-bomb/
“The B61-13 is not a long-term solution, but it will provide our commanders, particularly in [the Pacific and European regions], with more flexibility against these target sets,” Rogers and Wicker said. “As the Strategic Posture Commission recently noted, China and Russia are in a full-on arms race, and the U.S. is running in place. Dramatic transformation of our deterrent posture — not incremental or piecemeal changes — is required to address this threat.”
The Pentagon said the creation of this bomb will not lead to an overall increase in the size of the military’s stockpile. The United States plans to lower the number of B61-12s it will produce by as many B61-13s it builds.
Kristensen said defense officials indicated very few B61-13s are expected to be produced, on the order of a few dozen. He doubted their creation, alongside the retirement of B61-7s, would lead to much, if any, decline in the number of gravity bombs in the United States’ arsenal, which he said is somewhere between 400 and 500.
If the B61-13 is approved and funded by lawmakers, the Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration will produce it.
The Pentagon said in its announcement that modern aircraft would be able to deliver this bomb.
In a follow-up statement, a Pentagon spokesperson said that will include the B-21 Raider stealth bomber the Air Force now has in development with Northrop Grumman. But the U.S. now does not plan to deploy it on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Pentagon said.
*******
In January 2024, the US Department of Defense announced plans to move some of its nuclear weapons to RAF Lakenheath, a United States Air Force base in Suffolk, England. The base is home to the 48th Fighter Wing, which operates the F-35A Lightning II combat aircraft, which can carry nuclear bombs. The US has awarded a contract to build defensive shelters and a "surety dormitory" at the base, with construction scheduled to begin in June 2024 and end in February 2026. This would be the first time in 15 years that US nuclear weapons would be stationed on British soil.
https://breakingdefense.com/2024/03/exclusive-f-35a-officially-certified-to-carry-nuclear-bomb/
EXCLUSIVE: F-35A officially certified to carry nuclear bomb
The designation marks the first time that a stealth fighter can carry a nuclear weapon, in this case the B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bomb.
March 8, 2024
WASHINGTON — The F-35A Joint Strike Fighter has been operationally certified to carry the B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bomb, a spokesman for the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) tells Breaking Defense.
In a statement, JPO spokesman Russ Goemaere said the certification was achieved Oct. 12, months ahead of a pledge to NATO allies that the process would wrap by January 2024. Certain F-35As will now be capable of carrying the B61-12, officially making the stealth fighter a “dual-capable” aircraft that can carry both conventional and nuclear weapons.
“The F-35A is the first 5th generation nuclear capable aircraft ever, and the first new platform (fighter or bomber) to achieve this status since the early 1990s. This F-35 Nuclear Certification effort culminates 10+ years of intense effort across the nuclear enterprise, which consists of 16 different government and industry stakeholders,” Goemaere said. “The F-35A achieved Nuclear Certification ahead of schedule, providing US and NATO with a critical capability that supports US extended deterrence commitments earlier than anticipated.”
Responding to follow-up questions from Breaking Defense, Goemaere said US disclosure policy prohibits the release of information on dual-capable aircraft among NATO partners. According to analysis by the Federation of American Scientists, as of 2023 approximately 100 older variants of B61 bombs are housed by NATO allies Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, who share the alliance’s nuclear strike mission. The first four nations are all planned F-35 operators, with the need to have a nuclear-capable aircraft a key reason for Germany signing onto the program.
The F-35A is certified to only carry the newer B61-12 variant, which will replace the older models. The certification additionally does not extend to the stealth jet’s sister variants, the short takeoff and vertical landing F-35B and carrier-launched F-35C. A delivery schedule of B61-12s to Europe is not clear, though Politico previously reported the bombs would be shipped out starting in December 2022.
I think initially their primary munition will be AGM-88’s. Really put a dent in Russian air defenses. The F-16 is sooo much better in the SEAD mission than anything the Ukrainians currently have…I was thinking about that yesterday. I wish we would, but we haven't seen much evidence of it.
Allowing limited usages inside Russian territory, and Germany throwing in Taurus missiles would be a big help.
Edit: Along these lines, I wonder what the F-16s will be armed with? Will they have a full range of weaponry from NATO allies that are supplying the jets, or will we kick in weapons? If so, the kind that can reach inside Russia. I assume there is some kind of a cruise missile that we employ that could be fitted on the F-16. Will we give them? They wouldn't go too far inside Russia, but why not allow Ukraine to hit marshaling yards just across the border to maximize the impact?
I don’t mean any disrespect but go **** yourself facist troll.Deflection.
It’s an insane foreign policy and they all endorse it…including Trump.
Little Mikey Johnson wouldn’t have backstabbed the American taxpayers without his stamp of approval.
Googles SEAD acronym. Nods approvingly at bins’ post.I think initially their primary munition will be AGM-88’s. Really put a dent in Russian air defenses. F-16 is sooo much better in the SEAD mission than anything the Ukrainians currently have…
Do you really think there would be no response to us moving nuclear weapons back to Britain after removing them 15 years ago?Both sides
😢I don’t mean any disrespect but go **** yourself facist troll.
I take it that wasn't your part of the Air Force?Googles SEAD acronym. Nods approvingly at bins’ post.
Nope. I was in USAF AFMC for the UEWR of the NMD.I take it that wasn't your part of the Air Force?
You guys do love your acronyms.Nope. I was in USAF AFMC for the UEWR of the NMD.
Other than the constant process of improving current weapons, those other actions were certainly reactions to what Russia had just done.Do you really think there would be no response to us moving nuclear weapons back to Britain after removing them 15 years ago?
It’s idiotic (never mind misleading) to look at these things in a vacuum.
You’d get an ‘F’ on your blue book test if you couldn’t explain why each side was doing what they were doing.
How do you have a discussion about the possible utilization of tactical nukes in Russia without observing we’re working to build smaller, more accurate ones? Or mentioning that two months ago we certified the F-35 to drop them? Or that six months ago we shipped tactical nukes to Britain?
Doubt the part about manpower but believe they are sending artillery shells and other arms.