..
Pentagon alarmed at Russian satellite explosion
15 Nov, 2021 21:40
© Oleg Novitskiy/Roscosmos/Handout via REUTERS
After the Pentagon noticed a “debris-generating event” in orbit, the State Department condemned what they said was a Russian test of an anti-satellite missile, calling it “dangerous and irresponsible behavior.”
“US Space Command is aware of a debris-generating event in outer space,” the Pentagon said on Monday, saying the US military was “actively working to characterize the debris field.”
State Department spokesman Ned Price accused Moscow of using a direct ascent missile to destroy an orbiting satellite, creating over 1,500 pieces of trackable space debris.
“This test will significantly increase the risk to astronauts and cosmonauts on the International Space Station, as well as to other human spaceflight activities,” Price told reporters at Foggy Bottom on Monday afternoon.
The crew on board the ISS reportedly briefly withdrew into their modules due to some of the debris intersecting the station’s orbit, but there were no reports of damage.
“Russia's dangerous and irresponsible behavior jeopardizes the long term sustainability of outer space, and clearly demonstrates that Russia's claims of opposing the weaponization of space are disingenuous and hypocritical. The United States will work with our allies and partners to respond to Russia's irresponsible act,” Price said.
The Russian Defense Ministry and Roscosmos are yet to comment on the matter.
==========================================================================================
US reveals scale of ammunition shipments to Ukraine
15 Nov, 2021 15:39
By Layla Guest
Washington has handed over 80 tons of ammunition to Ukraine’s armed forces as part of the latest in a series of deliveries under the terms of a multimillion-dollar ‘security assistance’ package brokered by US President Joe Biden.
The load arrived on Sunday, according to the American embassy in Kiev. Praising the handover of the munitions, diplomats took to Twitter to proclaim that “it is a demonstration of US commitment to the success of a stable, democratic and free Ukraine”.
Good grief!
According to the officials, “this was the fourth delivery within the framework of additional security assistance in the amount of $60 million [€52.4 million], which President Biden” granted to Kiev in August. The budget is reserved for weaponry and services provided by the US Department of Defense, as well as military education and training.
And what about Hunter? What will he get out of this?
The latest batch of ammo landed as concerns in Washington rang out over a purported ‘Russian threat’ posed by Moscow to neighboring Ukraine amid an alleged buildup of troops in the region. At the same time, relations have frayed between the West and nearby Belarus in recent days over a sharp spike in illegal migration stemming from the Eastern European nation.
Last week, Moscow warned the US that a new plan to hand over lethal weapons to Ukraine would undermine the chances of peace in the country’s war-torn Donbass and escalate tensions with Russia, after Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Kiev’s foreign minister, Dmitry Kuyleba, signed a deal pledging to “deepen our strategic partnership” and increase “defense cooperation.”
Russia’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, said that the ‘Strategic Partnership Document’ signed by American and Ukrainian diplomats was merely “a set of slogans – harmful ones.” According to him, “in almost every line there is a geopolitical tool to oppose Russia.”
Antonov went on to argue that “plans to supply weapons to the regime in Kiev will only worsen the situation in southeastern Ukraine. We believe that another opportunity to encourage Kiev to stop the war has been missed.”
NATO applauds deployment of US nukes in Eastern Europe
19 Nov, 2021 12:10
The Secretary General of NATO has urged member states to remain committed to plans that could see deadly American nuclear weapons shared across the US-led military bloc’s eastern frontier, close to the border with Russia.
In a speech at the German Atlantic Association on Friday, Jens Stoltenberg said the move was necessary because of the threat purportedly posed by Moscow. “Our aim is a world free of nuclear weapons,” he said, “but as long as others have them, NATO must have them too.”
What madness! Putting them on Russia's doorstep dramatically increased the probability that they will be used, either intentionally or accidentally.
According to the veteran political figure, “Russia carries out aggressive actions, it interferes in other countries’ affairs” and the country has “invested significantly in military capabilities, including new, advanced nuclear weapons.”
“The nuclear weapons we share in NATO provide European Allies with an effective nuclear umbrella. This, of course, also includes our eastern Allies and they are an important signal of Allied unity against any nuclear-armed adversary,” he added. “So NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangements are of particular importance for Europe.”
Certainly, and if it does come to nuclear war, far better for western Europe if it takes place in eastern European countries.
The bloc’s internal weapons-sharing policy is a core part of its plans for nuclear deterrence against countries like Russia and China, expanding the coverage of its nuclear warheads without requiring supposedly non-nuclear nations to produce them themselves.
However, with Germany preparing for a new government after the imminent departure of Chancellor Angela Merkel, there had been fears Berlin would decline to purchase a new fleet of aircraft capable of launching atomic weapons, to replace its aging warplanes. However, Stoltenberg said he was confident the country would remain part of the pact because it offers Germany “a seat at the table.”
And that is what it's all about. Nothing to do with the danger of Russian aggression, it's all about selling weapons, weapons systems, and airplanes.
Responding to the NATO chief’ speech, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the country would refuse to turn a blind eye to major “provocations” by the bloc and by EU nations.
In December last year, Lavrov’s deputy, Sergey Ryabkov, blasted the arrangements, saying that they make conflicts more likely to happen. According to him, Moscow “hopes that the US will stop ‘sharing’ nuclear weapons with its allies, and stop deploying nuclear weapons in countries that do not possess such weapons… Obviously, this leads to destabilization and, in addition, new risks appear.”
However, he was optimistic about the prospect of avoiding atomic armageddon, emphasizing that “a nuclear war cannot be won… Russia is ready to cooperate in reversing this state of affairs.”
UK defence chief gets massive bonus despite tank failure
It appears stupidity and incompetence are highly regarded in the UK military.
That explains a lot!
22 Nov, 2021 13:44
A top defence chief has received £120,000 ($161,306) in bonuses since 2018 despite having overseen the spending of millions of pounds on tanks that can’t be used and left hundreds of soldiers needing medical attention.
Sir Simon Bollom, who serves as the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) head of defence equipment and support, was handed the significant bonus on top of his £280,000 ($376,381) per year salary. Bollom oversaw the spending of £5.5 billion ($7.39 billion) on the tanks that caused hearing problems in soldiers.
And, if I remember correctly, they can't shoot while moving!
According to government figures, reported by the UK’s Daily Star newspaper, the military chief was paid an extra £120,000 since 2018 despite significant failures and delays in multiple projects.
Currently, the MoD is believed to be running behind on 13 significant projects, including the delivery of the new Ajax tanks, on which the ministry has already wasted billions.
The too-loud tanks have been barred from use until they can be redesigned due to the impact they’ve had on soldiers’ hearing. Excessive noise and vibration caused by the vehicles are believed to have left over 300 soldiers in need of medical attention.
The Daily Mail newspaper reported in September that the issues surrounding the Ajax tanks could end up costing the British Army hundreds of thousands of pounds in compensation claims. If soldiers can prove their careers were cut short by the issues arising from the Ajax tanks, lawyers have claimed the MoD could face legal action for exposing “them to an unreasonable risk of harm.”
The MoD defended its decision to hand Sir Simon the bonus, telling the Daily Star that “performance-related payments are based on meeting a number of challenging targets alongside assessment from the DE&S Board Chair and MoD Permanent Secretary.”
I wonder if those challenging targets have anything to do with his work?
NATO submarine caused Kursk sinking that killed 118 Russian sailors,
ex-admiral claims
22 Nov, 2021 11:27
By Layla Guest
The catastrophic sinking of the Russian nuclear-powered Kursk submarine more than two decades ago was the result of a collision with a stricken NATO vessel in the Barents Sea, a former high-ranking navy chief has insisted.
The ‘Kursk’ sank on August 12, 2000 at a depth of 108 meters, claiming the lives of all 118 crew members and sparking the first major international crisis of Vladimir Putin’s presidency. An official investigation commissioned by the Russian government ruled two years later that the incident was the result of a torpedo explosion, which then triggered the detonation of ammunition on board.
However, in an interview with RIA Novosti, aired on Monday, former Northern Fleet commander Vyacheslav Popov offered a theory on how the incident might have happened. According to him, a vessel operated by a NATO power got too close to Moscow’s vessel, colliding with its bow and damaging the torpedo tube, which was followed by an explosion. The compartment then flooded, sending the sub to the depths of the sea.
“The submarine that collided with ‘Kursk’ was following it, apparently, but failed to ensure safety in the sea’s environment and all other conditions, approached too close, or the Kursk maneuver led to a loss of contact,” he said.
Popov claimed he knew the name of the sub belonging to the US-military led bloc “with a 90% probability.” However, he admitted he did not have sufficient available evidence to make the case publicly at present.
According to the former naval chief, who served until 2001, the vessel was in the region where it collided with ‘Kursk’. He also noted that SOS signals were sent from special equipment that Russian boats were not equipped with, implying another submarine must have been present.
Viktor Kravchenko, a former chief of staff of the Russian Navy, later agreed with Popov’s theory, remarking he was “also inclined to believe this version” of the demise of the Kursk, based on circumstantial evidence.
Three NATO vessels, the British ‘Splendid’ and American subs ‘Toledo’ and ‘Memphis’, were reportedly in the vicinity of Russian military exercises in the Barents Sea at the time. Neither Washington nor London provided documents on the condition of their vessels after Moscow requested the information.
However, the Russian government maintains that the official investigation’s conclusion is the most likely, with many analysts pointing out the period was a challenging time for the Russian military. A combination of underfunding, aging Soviet hardware, and low morale could all have contributed to the incident.
Putin, then only months into his first term as president, took the brunt of much of the criticism for the Kursk tragedy, with the large-scale loss of young Russian sailors sparking sorrow and outrage. Failed rescue efforts caused anger and frustration both domestically and worldwide.
Popov’s claims come amid heightened concerns over NATO’s activity around Russia’s borders. On Friday, the bloc’s top official, Jens Stoltenberg, proposed deploying American nuclear warheads around Eastern Europe to counter a supposed threat posed by Moscow.
In response, the Kremlin said such a statement would mean that the Founding Act of Russia-NATO relations “no longer exists.” Under this document, inked in 1997, the two parties do not consider each other rivals. It guarantees no nuclear weapons will be deployed to new NATO members after this date.
Iran tried to transfer explosives to terrorists in Judea and Samaria
via UAVs
November 23, 2021
Iran used UAVs launched from Syria in an attempt to transfer explosives to Palestinian terror groups in Judea and Samaria, Israel’s Defense Minister said.
By Lauren Marcus, World Israel News
Iran has attempted to smuggle explosive material to Palestinian terror groups in Judea and Samaria via UAVs launched from airports in Syria, Defense Minister Benny Gantz revealed in a bombshell statement on Tuesday morning.
During a defense conference at Reichman University in Herzliya, Gantz said that “Iran is not only using unmanned aerial vehicles to attack, but also to carry out weapons transfers to its proxies.”
In 2018, he said, the IDF had intercepted an Iranian drone laden with explosives that departed from the T4 airbase (Althias airport) near Homs, Syria. The UAV was bound for “terrorist elements” in Judea and Samaria, but was successfully neutralized over Beit She’an, Israel, near the Jordanian border.
He added that Iran has launched maritime attacks using UAVs from bases in the Islamic Republic’s south.
“UAVs are an accurate weapon that can reach strategic targets within thousands of kilometers, and thus this capability is already endangering Sunni countries, international forces in the Middle East and also countries in Europe and Africa,” Gantz said.
He noted that Iran also utilizes drones to achieve its goals outside of the region, “transferring oil and weapons to Venezuela, operating….in South America and trying to increase its influence into Afghanistan.”
Gantz said that Iran had been “consistently successful” at using proxy militias to create a major presence along the borders of Israel.
“The Iranians have surrounded the State of Israel with missiles while sitting safely in Tehran,” he said.
The Defense Minister was pessimistic about a possible return to the 2015 nuclear deal, saying that Israel would keep its options open for mitigating the threat of a nuclear Iran.
“In the face of the threat, the world has many tools to act, and it must exercise Plan B for the diplomatic option,” he said.
While acknowledging that “a diplomatic solution is preferable,” Gantz said that the “use of force…is a continuation of diplomacy by other means.”
The most important thing, he emphasized, is preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and said the Jewish State is not willing to commit to any particular course of action on the matter.
Judea and Samaria
No comments:
Post a Comment