Biden planning Blitz Nuclear Attack on the Kremlin

According to Newsweek magazine on November 3rd (“Nuclear Bomb Map Shows Impact if Biden’s New Weapon Dropped on Russia”):

A nuclear bomb being developed by the Biden administration could wreak havoc in Moscow, according to a simulation analyzed by Newsweek.

The creation of a new U.S. bomb, a variation of the B61 gravity bomb developed in the 1960s during the Cold War, was announced by the Department of Defense (DoD) last week [27 October 2023: “‘The B61-13 will strengthen deterrence of adversaries and assurance of allies and partners by providing the President with additional options against certain harder and large-area military targets’ [i.e, Moscow], the release states, while adding that the bomb would ‘include the modern safety, security, and accuracy features’ of the B61-12, an Obama-era variant’.”]. A news release by the Pentagon said that the B61-13 is intended to “strengthen deterrence of adversaries and assurance of allies” by providing President Joe Biden “with additional options against certain harder and large-area military targets.”

While the Pentagon has not yet revealed exactly how powerful the bomb will be, officials said it would be capable of an explosive yield similar to an older model, the B61-7. That nuclear bomb had a maximum yield equivalent to 360 kilotons of TNT, roughly 24 times the explosive power of the 15-kiloton bomb that the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II.

A visual representation was created using Nukemap, an online tool created by historian of science and nuclear technology Alex Wellerstein. It shows that a B61-13 bomb exploding over Moscow at an estimated maximum yield of 360 kilotons of TNT would cause significant devastation and kill more than 300,000 people.

Anything within roughly a half-mile radius from the bomb’s detonation site would be vaporized by a fireball, while heavy damage would demolish buildings and likely kill everyone else within a mile.

Anyone within about 2 miles from the detonation site would suffer levels of radiation exposure so high that they would be dead within a month, while 15 percent of survivors would die of cancer later in life.

Some 2 miles out from the point of the bomb’s explosion, buildings would collapse, chances of a fire starting would be high, fatalities would be widespread and injuries “universal,” according to Nukemap. …

An attack like that couldn’t succeed unless it will be done on a blitz-basis, giving The Kremlin less than 30 minutes advance knowledge that the warhead is heading its way and thus to respond to it. That could then decapitate the opponent before the opponent could even know that the attack had even been launched. And it might succeed even if Russia’s automated, or “dead hand”, second-strike nuclear system, activates in response to the annihilation of Russia’s central command (The Kremlin), because such an automated system, by its very nature, is impossible to field-test, and America would therefore be relying on pure luck in order to become maybe in control over the entire world after that blitz-invasion, or else the U.S. too would become (and perhaps even more so) decimated as a result of that second-strike working. In any case, the release of (use of) all of either nation’s nuclear stockpile, would, the scientific studies since 2007 have made clear, produce a “nuclear winter” that would starve to death half of the entire world’s population within just two years; and, so, winning a nuclear war between the two superpowers is, in fact, only a stupid fantasy. (But it is an extremely profitable one for the owners of America’s ‘defense’ firms such as Lockheed Martin — which is why the U.S. Government pursues it, since doing this is profoundly harmful to the general population.)

Currently, the U.S. Government, all alone, spends on its military, annually, around $1.5 trillion, in fact, around half of the entire world’s military expenditures, and the amount would be considerably higher if the entirety of its NATO military alliance against Russia would be included in the sum. So: in terms purely of military expenditures, the U.S. alone expends annually around 17 times as much as Russia does on that. And, yet, its amount keeps increasing — and the non-military portion of the U.S. Government’s annually-authorized-by-Congress expenditures keeps being level or even reduced every year, in order to make that military growth possible — because America’s billionaires are so heavily reliant upon the nation’s military expenditures, and because they control the federal Government. (And that’s why America’s sovereign debt has recently soared to $33 trillion, from half that in 2013, while its GDP has increased only 65% since 2013; and it’s why American life-expectancy peaked in 2014 and has declined 2.8 years from 78.9 years in 2014, down to 76.1 years in 2021 — the world’s worst performance during the latest 7 years. The priorities of the American public certainly aren’t the priorities of the American Government. It’s actually a dictatorship — now only a fake self-declared ‘democracy’.)

Starting in 2006 under George W. Bush, America has been planning “Nuclear Primacy” — the ability to win a nuclear war against Russia — as its replacement for the prior nuclear meta-strategy that had been employed by both sides, which was called “Mutually Assured Destruction” or “M.A.D” for short (which Russia has continued to apply, and for which purpose its “dead-hand” system has been designed — it’s purely a second-strike system).

Consequently, American strategy is to get its nuclear missiles and its stealth bombers close enough so as to be able to annihilate Moscow within 7 minutes (if, say, from Finland), or even just 5 minutes (from only Ukraine), (and for which reason the U.S. Government, in February 2014, overthrew Ukraine’s democatically elected Government and replaced it with a rabidly Russia-hating one. Russia reluctantly ended up responding to that eight years later, on 24 February 2022, by invading Ukraine, so as to eliminate the possibility that American missiles will be positioned only 5 minutes away (i.e., in Ukraine).

America is geographically positioned so that the only way that Russia could even conceivably position its missiles within a 5-minute striking-distance from Washington DC would be via its offshore-U.S. submarines. A knowledgeable observer said a few years ago, that “they are no more of a threat than stationary land based missile silos” (none of which are near to Washington). However, by now, that situation might have changed, so that Russia could do to the U.S. what the U.S. has been trying (at least since 2006) to do to Russia. The only way that that could happen is by a truly stealth Russian submarine. Whereas America’s biggest danger to Russia could only be by way of land, Russia’s biggest danger to America could only be by way of sea. If America continues to aim for “Nuclear Primacy”, then Russia might ultimately do the same, but via submarine. Far better for both sides would be for them to negotiate together, so that neither side can even possibly do that to the other. Either both sides will adhere to the M.A.D. meta-strategy, or else both sides will be wasting enormous sums of money trying not to. Only M.A.D. is sane. “Nuclear Primacy” is insane (but it has clearly been, and is now, the nuclear policy of Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden). Its goal is to achieve a blitz-nuclear attack annihilating the opponent’s central command too fast for it to be able to respond.

The B61-13 bomb is designed to be carried aboard what will be America’s first-ever totally new 21st Century bomber, the stealth B-21 Raider, which is in development but is expected by the Government to “be available for combat use in the ‘mid-2020s’.” So: if Biden wins a second term and uses this bomb in his planned blitz-nuclear attack upon The Kremlin, then it would probably be by means of a B-21 Raider plane dropping the B61-13 bomb onto The Kremlin. Otherwise, a U.S. missile fired from the nearest NATO member nation (perhaps Finland) would likely be used. (In either case, the U.S. would first have to be able to overcome the world’s best defensive military systems such as the S-500 anti-aircraft missile system. America’s Presidents and Congress-members would need to be insane to think they’ll be able successfully to pull off such a thing — but the owners of such firms as Lockheed Martin insist that they keep trying, so that the owners can keep profiting; and successful politicians in today’s America are merely those people’s — not the public’s — agents. The Government serves them well.)

The B61-13 bombs will be built in place of B61-12 bombs that were previously scheduled. The B61-13 will have a 360 kiloton yield, which is equivalent to 17 Nagasaki bombs, or to 24 Hiroshima bombs. The B61-12 has only a 50 kiloton yield — one-seventh as big. Presumably, Biden wants the much larger bomb in order to increase the likelihood that despite the uncontrollability of where a dropped bomb will exactly hit (missiles thus can be far more accurate than bombs that are dropped), the bomb’s being seven times as powerful will nonetheless destroy the intended target (Putin, etc.). A previous gravity bomb with a similar yield was described by saying “The large yield could destroy facilities buried 750 feet (250 meters) underground.” (The depth of the offices and bunkers below the Kremlin is believed to reach to no lower than 200 meters.) Among the details regarding the B61-13 that are kept “Top Secret” are its price-tag — possibly in order to hide how much more expensive than the B61-12 and its predecessors the 360-kiloton B61-13 bomb will be. Unlike the weaker B61-12, which certainly can’t penetrate deep underground to the allegedly 50-to-200-meter-deep “Metro-2” secret underground network of tunnels and offices that are below the visible Kremlin, some people allege that a 360-kiloton bomb might be able to destroy to a depth of 50 or more meters. However, regarding the “bunker-buster” B61-11, which was 10% bigger-kilotonnage even than the model 13 will be but was insufficiently “safe” in storage, the G.W. Bush Administration in 2001 found that the B61-11 “does not provide a high probability of defeat of these important targets.” The reason for this judgment was probably that a field-test of that bomb in March 1998 had shown that “the penetration depth was around 18 feet (6 meters).” So: even the B61-13 bomb might fail, even if it hits the target exactly. And, then, all hell would break lose from Russia upon the U.S. and all of its allies. Biden’s efforts to pull off the biggest war-crime in history, and to do it with total impunity (i.e., to ‘win’), continue nonetheless.

The U.S. already has, ever since 1997, in service, a stealth bomber, the B-2 Spirit, and it can carry even bigger payloads, up to 1.2 megatons (nearly four times larger than 360 kt.), but that plane is far too slow (not even Mach 1, the speed of sound) to qualify for doing a blitz-attack; so, that is why the B-21 Raider was commissioned by Obama in 2011. A blitz-attack bomber needs to be extremely fast, preferably at least five times the speed of sound (“Mach 5”) or “hypersonic”. (Russia’s fastest bomber, the Tu-160, is Mach 2, which likewise wouldn’t be suitable for a blitz-attack against America’s central command. But Putin hasn’t yet been planning any blitz-attack against Washington. The Tu-160 is fast enough for his purposes. It’s not even stealth; so, it would be useless for a blitz-attack against Washington. Russia still adheres to the M.A.D. meta-strategy. They’re the world’s leader in hypersonic missiles but have never shown any indication of having abandoned the M.A.D. meta-strategy. Their strategic thinking has always been based upon it — to avoid WW III instead of to win it.)

Anyway, there would be no winners from what Biden is doing. Everyone would end up losing — perhaps from “nuclear winter”, if not from anything else.

Though the news-media and other commentators have described what was at issue in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis as having been how close (only 100 miles) Cuba was to the U.S. border (Florida), that wasn’t the real issue; the real issue, then, as it is now for Russia regarding Ukraine (and to a lesser extent Finland), is how close it is to the opponent’s central command, its capital city. The ultimate geostrategic danger is the possibility of decapitating the opponent. But the public aren’t being told this. In a democracy they need to be told the truth, so that they can vote on the basis of reality.

Hitler tried to conquer the world, and what did it gain him? For some reason, his American successors have been copying his effort. They apparently think that they would do a better job of it, with their operation barbarossa II, than Hitler did, with his Operation Barbarossa (I: Hitler’s original, of Barbarossa).

https://theduran.com/biden-planning-blitz-nuclear-attack-on-the-kremlin/

¶

For the First Time, RFK Jr Now Polls at 24% for the US Presidency

A new poll in five toss-up states, by Siena College, commissioned by and published on November 7th in the New York Times, shows that if on 5 November 2024 the U.S. Presidential ballot will list on its Presidential line not only Joe Biden and Donald Trump, but also Robert F. Kennedy Jr, then Biden would, as-of now, get 33%, Trump, 35%, and Kennedy 24%, which 24% is by far the highest percentage that has yet been shown for Kennedy in the polls for the prior hypothetical Democratic Party primary contest that would show on the ballot Biden and Kennedy but (since that would be a Democratic Party primary, instead of the general election) not Trump. In those earlier Biden-versus-Kennedy polls, Kennedy was polling at from 15% to 20%, and Biden at around 60%. This Sienna poll is the first that’s three-way (Biden, Trump, Kennedy), and — showing Kennedy at 24% — it indicates that Kennedy stands a possibility of winning the Presidency running as an independent.

Consequently, unless the Democratic and Republican Parties will succeed in their efforts to exclude from the 5 November 2024 ballots (and from the debates) any third Presidential candidate that might possibly win who has not been appointed by either of the two Parties — and if the two Parties also won’t succeed at blocking Kennedy’s ballot-access in enough states so that Kennedy won’t be able to win the Presidency — then all that Kennedy would need to do in order to win the Presidency would be to draw off from Biden’s current 33%, and from Trump’s current 35%, enough supporters so as to gain an additional 9% or more, in order to win a third (33%) or more of the total votes cast and counted, which then would give him a possibility of becoming the next President.

Here was the crucial portion of the detailed poll-report, “Cross-Tabs: October 2023 Times/Siena Poll of the 2024 Battlegrounds”:

“IF NEEDED: If you had to decide today, are you leaning toward one candidate?”

Joe Biden, Democrat 33%

Donald Trump, Republican 35%

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Independent 24%

Biden there is getting 50% of the Blacks, and Trump is getting 40% of the Whites (by contrast, Kennedy’s voters show as being remarkably even, around 24% across all three ethnic groups tabulated: Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics), and this is interesting because both Trump and Biden opposed implementation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Brown versus Board of Education decision, which mandated the end of racial segreagation in the schools. Trump and his father opposed it because they were in real estate and the profits in that line of investment are higher with red-lining and other forms of commercial discrimination. Biden led the Democrats in the U.S. Senate that were cooperating with Jesse Helms who led the Republicans against it. Their tactic was to be opposing obligatory (race-conscious) school-bussing of students, which (bussing) would have been the only available way to achieve racial integration other than by the Government’s mandating that Whites sell their homes only to Blacks, and Blacks sell theirs only to Whites so as to achieve integration of neighborhoods (and consequently of schools) — which Congresspeople knew would have been a non-starter. Opposition to school bussing was thus the way to block implementation of the Brown-v-Board decision, and Biden was a leading Senate opponent of that school bussing. So: this way, the opponents to “mandatory bussing” of students were able to prevent racial integration — they blocked implementation of the Brown v. Board of Education decision — while not obviously being (and serving) racists.

The big chance that Senator Bernie Sanders had had in the 2020 Democratic Party primaries against Biden was for Sanders to have stated publicly in South Carolina that Biden (who lied to Blacks by saying that he had been a leading Senate supporter of desegregation) had led Democrats in the U.S. Senate to block implementation of the Brown versus Board of Education decision mandating the end of segregation in the schools, but Sanders refused to do that; and, so, Biden, whose support among Blacks in the crucial South Carolina primary was enormous, was able to keep his racism secret from Blacks, and as a result he got almost all of the Black vote there and swamped Sanders in that crucial primary and then in the immediately following days all across the South, also among Blacks on Super Tuesday and straight into the Party’s Presidential nomination. But RFK Jr. won’t have to do like Sanders did, because Kennedy is now running as an independent. So, that 50% of the Black vote for Biden won’t necessarily hold if Kennedy plays political hardball and exposes Biden as the liar that he has always been. And if he thereby knocks Biden’s current 33% down 6% to 27%, and also knocks Trump’s 35% down 4% to 31%, and raises his own 24% up 10% to 34%, then despite the two billionaire-controlled U.S. Parties, he might win. It wouldn’t be likely, but it would be possible.

https://theduran.com/for-the-first-time-rfk-jr-now-polls-at-24-for-the-u-s-presidency/

¶

Lots of Recent ‘History’ is Actually Lies

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

The Rwandan genocide in 1994 was arranged by the U.S. Government — by Bill Clinton, in fact, though after the event he said that he regretted he hadn’t gotten involved earlier to stop it from happening, and the stenograhically reporting, propagandistic, U.S.-and-allied press never even mentioned that he had actually initiated it. On 25 March 1998, Clinton told Rwandans that he “did not fully appreciate the depth and the speed with which you were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror”. However, even the Establishmentarian Foreign Policy magazine, decades later, on 5 April 2015, noted about that assertion, “But U.S. officials in Rwanda had been warned more than a year before the 1994 slaughter began that Hutu extremists were contemplating the extermination of ethnic Tutsis, according to a review panel’s newly released transcript and declassified State Department documents obtained by Foreign Policy from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.” Americans tolerate as being a ‘democracy’ a Government that allows itself routinely to “classify” — keep secret from the public for decades — the crucial facts, and so to cover-up the fact that America’s President is lying or did lie to the public; it can do that for as long as a President wants, while the regime’s supine ‘news’-media don’t even (if and when they belatedly find out that he had done so as that magazine did) come right out and state that he had been lying to everyone about it, and was actually covering-up his own international-war-crime. Instead, that magazine alleged Clinton’s actions in this matter had merely been among “the missteps” by supposedly him and many unnamed people. “Missteps,” instead of “genocide” by them. And they didn’t say “lied.” That’s called ‘journalism’, not “propaganda” — which it is: softening a massive international war-crime, down to supposedly many “missteps,” by not only that national CEO but also numerous other and unidentified people (especially his Administration, for which he alone is responsible). It continues the covering-up of a war-crime, of genocide, by a U.S. President.

This is ‘journalism’, in America, and in its allied countries. It’s the way that propaganda is routinely done in America, so as to fool the public that America is a democracy. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that the Government cannot prohibit the public from saying anything, but it doesn’t prohibit the Government from lying to the public (much less provide for penalties against any public official — any traitor — who does so). Consequently, it’s easy for that Government to descend into a dictatorship — a Government by and for fraudsters. And any media that serve those fraudsters, instead of serve the public, are propagandists instead of journalists.

The great international lawyer Christopher Black noted at 5:15 into his 23-minute-long classic “The Criminalization of International Justice” speech, that, “As Boutros-ghali told the Canadian writer Robin Philpot on Rwanda in 2004 in an interview [dated 6 April 1994], he said, quote, ‘the Americans are 100% responsible for what happened in Rwanda.’” And subsequent international investigations, as Black also noted, confirmed Boutros-gali’s account. But did you know any of this? Did the general public? Do they today? Why not? Black’s address is entirely factual and contains many other such hidden facts, including that before the 9/11 attacks, bin Laden was in the pay of and controlled by the CIA, and that Clinton instead of Milosevich initiated the international war crimes for which Milosevich was being tried by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

The U.S. Government has invaded and destroyed many countries that posed no actual national-security danger to America, such as Iraq on 20 March 2003, and all on the basis purely of lies. Even if one forgets that the war in Ukraine started in February 2014 (as both Stoltenberg and Zelensky have said but which doesn’t fit with the Western press’s uniform charge of ‘Russia’s  unprovoked  invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022’) and that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 was actually a reaction to that long-ongoing military conflict on Russia’s own border and which Russia always said consequently endangered the national security of Russia — even if one forgets such things as this — was America’s 2003 invasion of Iraq (which had posed no national-security threat to Americans) worse than Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine (which did pose a very real threat to Russia)? And if that is the case, then why are so many countries that nonetheless continue to accept America’s leadership (despite those lies and that entirely illegal and unjustified destruction of a country) so intensely outraged and condemnatory against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and why are they sanctioning Russia for it with historically unparalled ferocity and a more intense hatred against Putin and Russia than they ever directed against the Soviet Union or its leaders, though no nation has ever sanctioned America for any of its blatant international war-crimes in Iraq nor anywhere else that the U.S. Government has couped or even outright invaded and massacred people (including in Rwanda, and then in Yugoslavia) on the basis of what were actually bald lies?  What about its international-war crimes against Libya? What about them in Syria? What about them in 1953 Iran, or 1954 Guatemala, or 1965 Indonesia, or 1973 Chile — and there are so many other such instances, which murdered millions of innocent and/or rounded-up and slaughtered people? Can a bad international actor be any worse than this? But the U.S. Government goes on for decades like this, and doesn’t lose any international ‘allies’ (far less be sanctioned, at all) from anything. It doesn’t really make sense, does it? How can that make any sense? Did Hitler make sense? Does the America that followed after him and has largely copied from him? To the extent that they make sense, it is basically the same sense — but it was never reported in the ‘news’, until decades after (if ever). That’s the ‘news’, in a dictatorship.

Government classification laws that hide information from the public for more than 5 years (and for more than 1 year in most cases) should be outlawed altogether, and should be condemned constantly by the ‘news’-media so that these media might become authentic, instead of what they now are, which is mere propagandists for the regime. Their record is atrocious; but, because they are that bad, the public have no idea how bad, and thus still subscribe to them. This article is therefore being submitted to all of them (to all of those media, and to others, besides) so that they can document to their audiences how bad — and thus start to become good.

The reason that lots of recent ‘history’ is actually lies, is that the ‘news’-media that are owned and controlled by the regime’s beneficiaries, who are its billionaires, are propagandists for the regime, instead of news-media in an actual democracy.

Censorship is the essential tool for any dictatorship, and the death-knell for any democracy. Any media that participate in it are propagandists for the regime, instead of journalists in a democracy. It’s their choice, what to be.

https://theduran.com/lots-of-recent-history-is-actually-lies/

¶

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new 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.
Eric Zuesse blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/.

We all know.

— Singing Bird (@Singing04164036) November 9, 2023

Meer informatie
https://robscholtemuseum.nl/?s=Eric+Zuesse
https://robscholtemuseum.nl/?s=The+Duran