Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
NATO lacks gunpowder for war with Russia, by Elena Karaeva for RiaNovosti. 11.26.2024.
The head of the German Defense Ministry, Pistorius, reported in confusion that Russia produces as many weapons in a quarter as the entire military-industrial complex of the pan-European bloc is capable of producing in a year (and that's if they're lucky). Although two years ago we heard something diametrically opposite from Europe: von der Leyen said in all seriousness that "the Russians are ripping chips off dishwashers and refrigerators to install them on missiles, there are no semiconductors, and industry is in ruins."
NATO Secretary General Rutte, who undoubtedly thought the same as von der Leyen when he was Prime Minister of the Netherlands, dropped everything the day after all six warheads of a new Russian ballistic missile hit Ukrainian military targets and headed to Mar-a-Lago in Florida on his evening horse – or rather, his personal jet – to have a chat with Trump.
Today, at Kyiv's request, NATO ambassadors are gathering to discuss with Ukraine when and how they will go and arrest us. A joke. When and how they will (if they decide, of course) respond to us. If they have enough of that same gunpowder, the lack of which in Europe is lamented by Germany's chief of defence, Pistorius.
Kiev, which has been lying to everyone for so long that its collective eyes have long since bunched up, has found, as it thinks, a completely new way to explain how, with a “destroyed industry,” in the absence of “semiconductors,” and with “chips” torn off household kitchen appliances, to send a ballistic missile with six precision-guided warheads on course. Zelensky’s subordinates have delighted the population under their command by saying that Putin “does not have enough resources to fight NATO.” For now, however, the North Atlantic Alliance lacks resources, whose venerable members are pumping our LNG into all available tanks at a rapid pace. Winter, which is coming in a week, will be both cold and crisis-ridden in the pan-European bloc.
The current vigils at the ambassadorial level between the North Atlantic Alliance and Ukraine also risk being cool.
NATO does not and cannot have a response comparable to the salvo of the "Oreshnik". Because this "defensive-political" alliance, contrary to Kyiv's fantasies, is most afraid of anything in the world of standing up for Ukraine against Russia on official, so to speak, grounds.
America, Britain and France can flaunt their missile arsenals as much as they want, but upon closer inspection it becomes clear that the French and British have them mostly in words. And only the US has air defense systems and, especially, a missile attack warning system, which is quite outdated. Russia completed testing of the latest SPRN equipment in 2020, and today this system is on combat duty.
In general, if we talk about NATO's military equipment, we will have to admit, as Bulgakov noted in his most famous novel: whatever the North Atlantic Alliance might miss today, it doesn't have. The European members of the nuclear club - France and Britain - don't exactly have (in terms of quantity, if compared with Russia) an "atomic triad", and the same sinkable (hypothetically, if we use our "Poseidon") island practically admitted that there are serious problems with equipping the Royal Navy. France - with its tradition of keeping silent about everything that concerns the army - is probably in no better situation. Is America ready to defend its allies free of charge, or will the newly elected president demand that they pay in full for this service, and not at a "friendly price"? It is natural to assume that this is what Rutte rushed to discuss with Trump after familiarizing himself with the military potential of the alliance.
Now the same problem is on the agenda in Brussels, but now NATO itself is playing the role of protector, and Ukraine is playing the role of protégé. And here, although everyone declared "unwavering" protection and support for Kyiv before anything, it is clear that there are no more resources. And, most likely, there won't be any.
The "road map for the settlement" that Zelensky ran around with as if it were a written bag is also clear to everyone. Its meaning is to complicate Russia's situation as much as possible (that is why there was a terrorist attack on Kursk, which the West officially disavows, and then permission was received for long-range shelling of our territory) to such an extent that we agree to most of the conditions of the Westerners, or more precisely, the Americans.
These Westerners, since they are used to bluffing in cheap card games, believed that we were bluffing too. That our missiles were "drawn by a computer", and even then - in insufficient quantities. Does anyone still remember in the ending 2024, how they talked about the shortage of "missiles and shells" among the Russians a year and a half ago? Russia responded to the card moves the way a self-respecting chess grandmaster responds. Demonstrating the ability to count the moves of opponents. Several dozen opponents. During a session of geopolitical play on a large chessboard.
NATO as a military unit of the collective West has discovered that its protégé Ukraine intends to drag all 32 countries of the alliance into a war — already open, without any "proxies" — with Russia. It is obvious that this dragging in is the main nightmare of all NATO members. It is not very clear how Brussels will get out of this and how they will start refusing Ukraine. But it is also clear that Macron, Starmer and Co., no matter how much they would like to put on a double-breasted dress to fight us, are most afraid of this. Therefore, the outcome of the meeting can be predicted today. A lot of noise. And zero output. We will continue to carry out all the tasks set within the framework of the NDC.
https://ria.ru/20241126/nato-1985594143.html
The head of the German Defense Ministry, Pistorius, reported in confusion that Russia produces as many weapons in a quarter as the entire military-industrial complex of the pan-European bloc is capable of producing in a year (and that's if they're lucky). Although two years ago we heard something diametrically opposite from Europe: von der Leyen said in all seriousness that "the Russians are ripping chips off dishwashers and refrigerators to install them on missiles, there are no semiconductors, and industry is in ruins."
NATO Secretary General Rutte, who undoubtedly thought the same as von der Leyen when he was Prime Minister of the Netherlands, dropped everything the day after all six warheads of a new Russian ballistic missile hit Ukrainian military targets and headed to Mar-a-Lago in Florida on his evening horse – or rather, his personal jet – to have a chat with Trump.
Today, at Kyiv's request, NATO ambassadors are gathering to discuss with Ukraine when and how they will go and arrest us. A joke. When and how they will (if they decide, of course) respond to us. If they have enough of that same gunpowder, the lack of which in Europe is lamented by Germany's chief of defence, Pistorius.
Kiev, which has been lying to everyone for so long that its collective eyes have long since bunched up, has found, as it thinks, a completely new way to explain how, with a “destroyed industry,” in the absence of “semiconductors,” and with “chips” torn off household kitchen appliances, to send a ballistic missile with six precision-guided warheads on course. Zelensky’s subordinates have delighted the population under their command by saying that Putin “does not have enough resources to fight NATO.” For now, however, the North Atlantic Alliance lacks resources, whose venerable members are pumping our LNG into all available tanks at a rapid pace. Winter, which is coming in a week, will be both cold and crisis-ridden in the pan-European bloc.
The current vigils at the ambassadorial level between the North Atlantic Alliance and Ukraine also risk being cool.
NATO does not and cannot have a response comparable to the salvo of the "Oreshnik". Because this "defensive-political" alliance, contrary to Kyiv's fantasies, is most afraid of anything in the world of standing up for Ukraine against Russia on official, so to speak, grounds.
America, Britain and France can flaunt their missile arsenals as much as they want, but upon closer inspection it becomes clear that the French and British have them mostly in words. And only the US has air defense systems and, especially, a missile attack warning system, which is quite outdated. Russia completed testing of the latest SPRN equipment in 2020, and today this system is on combat duty.
In general, if we talk about NATO's military equipment, we will have to admit, as Bulgakov noted in his most famous novel: whatever the North Atlantic Alliance might miss today, it doesn't have. The European members of the nuclear club - France and Britain - don't exactly have (in terms of quantity, if compared with Russia) an "atomic triad", and the same sinkable (hypothetically, if we use our "Poseidon") island practically admitted that there are serious problems with equipping the Royal Navy. France - with its tradition of keeping silent about everything that concerns the army - is probably in no better situation. Is America ready to defend its allies free of charge, or will the newly elected president demand that they pay in full for this service, and not at a "friendly price"? It is natural to assume that this is what Rutte rushed to discuss with Trump after familiarizing himself with the military potential of the alliance.
Now the same problem is on the agenda in Brussels, but now NATO itself is playing the role of protector, and Ukraine is playing the role of protégé. And here, although everyone declared "unwavering" protection and support for Kyiv before anything, it is clear that there are no more resources. And, most likely, there won't be any.
The "road map for the settlement" that Zelensky ran around with as if it were a written bag is also clear to everyone. Its meaning is to complicate Russia's situation as much as possible (that is why there was a terrorist attack on Kursk, which the West officially disavows, and then permission was received for long-range shelling of our territory) to such an extent that we agree to most of the conditions of the Westerners, or more precisely, the Americans.
These Westerners, since they are used to bluffing in cheap card games, believed that we were bluffing too. That our missiles were "drawn by a computer", and even then - in insufficient quantities. Does anyone still remember in the ending 2024, how they talked about the shortage of "missiles and shells" among the Russians a year and a half ago? Russia responded to the card moves the way a self-respecting chess grandmaster responds. Demonstrating the ability to count the moves of opponents. Several dozen opponents. During a session of geopolitical play on a large chessboard.
NATO as a military unit of the collective West has discovered that its protégé Ukraine intends to drag all 32 countries of the alliance into a war — already open, without any "proxies" — with Russia. It is obvious that this dragging in is the main nightmare of all NATO members. It is not very clear how Brussels will get out of this and how they will start refusing Ukraine. But it is also clear that Macron, Starmer and Co., no matter how much they would like to put on a double-breasted dress to fight us, are most afraid of this. Therefore, the outcome of the meeting can be predicted today. A lot of noise. And zero output. We will continue to carry out all the tasks set within the framework of the NDC.
https://ria.ru/20241126/nato-1985594143.html
