Nuclear War

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Nuclear War

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Tue Oct 14, 2025 10:07 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m25lJy6SVDM
What Would Happen If America Found Russian Nukes in Venezuela? - Leaked intelligence reveals Russia has secretly moved nuclear-capable weapons to Venezuela — just a few thousand kilometers from the U.S. mainland. This shocking move recalls the Cold War and signals Moscow’s intent to challenge Washington in its own backyard. Could this mark the start of a new nuclear standoff? Watch the full video to uncover the truth behind Russia’s bold escalation.

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Tue Oct 14, 2025 10:05 am

https://jrnyquist.blog/2025/10/10/is-th ... tion-evil/
Military News is reporting that Russia has moved nuclear weapons into Venezuela. Of course, millions of patriotic Americans are not likely to notice or care. And the U.S. Government may not take notice as well. After all, patriotic Americans (and the U.S. Government) are distracted by internal conflicts, especially with each other.
Under a plutocratic system, where American money is heavily invested in China, for example, the will to declare war is undermined. It seems that our type of society must await a crushing blow from its existential adversaries before the people and their dismal leaders awaken to the fact that they have enemies. Yet, even in a system with a retarded political sense and decrepit willpower, war will nonetheless be declared (eventually). Even if the President and the Congress were wiped out by nuclear strikes, a new political body would arise, similar in form to the Continental Congress of 1776.

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Tue Oct 14, 2025 10:02 am

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93xpqgzkv0o
Trump says he may send Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine
US President Donald Trump is considering sending long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine.

Asked by reporters on Air Force One on Sunday whether he would provide Kyiv with Tomahawks, Trump replied: "We'll see... I may". The missiles would be "a new step of aggression" in Ukraine's war with Russia, he said.

The comments follow a phone call at the weekend between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who pushed for stronger military support to launch counter-attacks against Russia.

Zelensky has said he will meet Trump in Washington on Friday for talks that will focus on air defence and long-range capabilities.


Trump confirmed the Ukrainian leader's visit to the White House when a reporter asked if he plans to host Zelensky on Friday.

"I think so, yeah," the US president said during a brief fuel stop as he travelled back to Washington from the Middle East.

It will be Zelensky's third visit to Washington since January.

Moscow has previously warned Washington against providing long-range missiles to Kyiv, saying it would cause a major escalation in the conflict and strain US-Russian relations.

Tomahawk missiles have a range of 2,500 km (1,500 miles), which would put Moscow within reach of Ukraine.

Trump's attitude to Russia has hardened in recent months as he has become impatient with Vladimir Putin's lack of cooperation in reaching a ceasefire deal with Kyiv.

"I might tell them [Russia] that if the war is not settled, that we may very well, [send Tomahawks to Kyiv] we may not, but we may do it," he said.

"Do they [Russia] want Tomahawks going in their direction? I don't think so," the US president added.

On Sunday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the topic of Tomahawks was of "extreme concern" to Russia. "Now is really a very dramatic moment in terms of the fact that tensions are escalating from all sides," he said.

In September Peskov had dismissed the threat of Tomahawks, saying they would not be able to "change the dynamic" of the war.

But in his comments on Sunday he noted that if Tomahawks were launched at Russia Moscow would not be able to tell whether they were carrying nuclear warheads.

"What should the Russian Federation think? Just how should Russia react?", he said.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev then doubled down on Peskov's comments.

"How should Russia respond? Exactly!" Medvedev said on social media.

"The delivery of these missiles could end badly for everyone. And first of all – for Trump himself," he wrote.

Medvedev, who over the last few years has grown into an increasingly hawkish figure, frequently posts on social media espousing more extreme positions than the Kremlin's.

He and Trump have sparred online before. Comments by Medvedev in August led Trump to say he had ordered two nuclear submarines to move closer to Russia.

Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022, Kyiv has made multiple requests for long-range missiles, as it weighs up striking Russian cities far from the front lines of the grinding conflict.

Re: Nuclear War

by Felix90 » Tue Oct 07, 2025 2:29 pm

New to these boards, but I've been thinking that America is on the wrong side of history. We're so used to thinking of America as "the good guys" and the "world's police," but I think America has turned from good cop to bad cop.

Anyone else think America is the aggressor of this crisis war?

A lot of John's focus was on pointing towards China and highlighting America during WW2, but I think he's wrong. I think America will be the Germany of this one.

I also believe that America is in a two fold crisis: External and Internal. The powers that be are clearly trying to socially engineer a civil conflict/war, but at the same time the powers that be are preparing for a global conflict. China conquering all of Asia, Russia trying to overpower the EU in the Eastern European corridor, and now America trying to invade Canada and some parts of South/Central America while its people turn against one another.

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Sun Sep 28, 2025 8:38 am

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-resear ... ize-taiwan
How Russia is Helping China Prepare to Seize Taiwan
Russia has agreed to equip and train the PLA to air-drop armoured vehicles and special reconnaissance capabilities.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has directed the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to be ready to militarily seize Taiwan by 2027. A large-scale amphibious operation is highly risky, with the sites suitable for landing craft to deliver troops and equipment ashore constrained by the gradient and load bearing capacity of the beaches. Seizing airfields could allow troops to flow in by air, but as Russia discovered during its invasion of Ukraine, runways can be quickly denied. The PLA is therefore eager to identify ways of diversifying both the methods and locations at which it can move units onto Taiwan.

Although the areas where Russia surpasses China in military capability are diminishing, Russia has practical experience and capabilities for air manoeuvre that China lacks. According to contracts and correspondence obtained by the Black Moon hacktivist group, Russia agreed in 2023 to supply the PLA with a complete set of weapons and equipment to equip an airborne battalion, as well as other special equipment necessary for airborne infiltration of special forces, along with a full cycle of training for operators and technical personnel to use this equipment. In addition, Russia is transferring technologies that will allow China to scale-up the production of similar weapons and military equipment through localization and modernization.

The approximately 800 pages of contracts and collateral materials appear genuine and details from within the documents have been independently verified. However, there is also the possibility that parts of the documents have been altered or omitted.

The Russian Offer

The agreements provide for the sale by Russia to China of:

37 BMD-4M, light amphibious assault vehicles with a 100 mm gun and 30 mm automatic cannon.
11 Sprut-SDM1 light amphibious anti-tank self-propelled guns with a 125 mm cannon.
11 BTR-MDM ‘Rakushka’ airborne armoured personnel carriers.

Several Rubin command and observation vehicles and KSHM-E command vehicles.
The agreements state that all armoured vehicles must be equipped with Chinese communication and command and control suites, and with verification of their electromagnetic compatibility with Russian electronic equipment. This is due both to the need to maintain interoperability with other Chinese units, and the better technical capabilities of Chinese equipment. The Russians must also prepare the equipment and software for the use of Chinese ammunition.

The agreements also require Russia to train a battalion of Chinese paratroopers in employing the equipment. Armoured vehicle drivers will be trained at the Kurganmashzavod base, and the crews of KMN command and observation vehicles and Sprut anti-tank guns will be trained in Penza at JSC NPP Rubin. After completing courses on training equipment and simulators, the collective training of the Chinese airborne battalion will be carried out at training grounds in China. Here, Russian instructors are to prepare the battalion for landing, fire control and manoeuvring as part of an airborne unit. The Russians are also transferring Rheostat airborne artillery command and observation vehicle and Orlan-10 multi-purpose unmanned aerial vehicles. A Centre for Technical Maintenance and Repair of Russian Equipment will be established in China, to which all necessary technical documentation will be transferred. This will allow China to undertake the production and modernisation of these capabilities in the future.

The capacity to airdrop armour vehicles on golf courses, or other areas of open and firm ground near Taiwan’s ports and airfields, would allow air assault troops to significantly increase their combat power and threaten seizure of these facilities to clear a path for the landing of follow-on forces
In addition, the agreements provide for the transfer of special-purpose parachute systems ‘Dalnolyot’, which are designed for inserting loads of up to 190 kg from an altitude of up to 32,000 feet, achieving a range of between 30-80 km depending on load. Russia is equipping and training Chinese special forces groups to penetrate the territory of other countries without being noticed, offering offensive options against Taiwan, the Philippines and other island states in the region.

Implications

The operational challenge for the PLA in seizing Taiwan is successfully landing with a sufficient mass of troops and thus enough combat power to be able to establish a lodgement and thereby build up a force that can defeat the Taiwanese military by seizing vital ground before the ROC mobilises. The beaches suitable for landing are limited, known, and dispersed. The runways and ports on the island could be invaluable for reinforcing the lodgement but denying these facilities would likely be a priority task for Taiwanese forces.

If the People’s Liberation Army Air Force, supported in a Joint Firepower Campaign, can successfully suppress Taiwanese air defences, then air manoeuvre offers the fastest means of transferring combat power onto Taiwan, and spreading operations across an expanded area. Helicopters offer the most flexible means of deploying troops, but light infantry, unsupported by armour and fires, will necessarily struggle to hold their objectives against a mechanised adversary, as Russian airborne troops found to their detriment at Hostomel. The capacity to airdrop armour vehicles, therefore, on golf courses, or other areas of open and firm ground near Taiwan’s ports and airfields, would allow air assault troops to significantly increase their combat power and threaten seizure of these facilities to clear a path for the landing of follow-on forces.

It should also be noted that an attempt to seize Taiwan would likely see fighting erupt throughout the South China Sea, creating a requirement for the PLA to project combat power further afield. In the initial phases of war air manoeuvre could allow the PLA to move airborne forces with organic firepower and mobility to critical terrain beyond Taiwan, securing airfields or other infrastructure that could otherwise support US operations to counter the PLA amphibious landings on Taiwan. In short, an expanded air manoeuvre capability gives the PLA a diversity of options for rapid power projection.

The equipment purchased from the Russians is compatible with Russian built Il-76/78 aircraft equipped with PBS-955M/957, MKS-350-14M and APSDG-250 landing and parachute platform equipment, which is used for landing vehicles ‘in a train’. This capability was recently demonstrated by Russian forces during the Zapad military exercise. The agreements provide for sending Russian instructors to train Chinese pilots and crew members in landing in this way on the territory of the PRC.

China already operates air deployable armoured vehicles from its Y-20 transport aircraft, and as of 2025 has fielded a range of new airborne equipment that is comparable to the Russian equipment. Given that an air manoeuvre operation for a battalion of the Russian supplied equipment would require around 35 Il-76s, while the PLAAF operates a fleet of 26 Il-76s, including 10 Il-76s sold to the PRC by the Russians in 2013, it may be asked why the PLA purchased a battalion set of Russian equipment. The fact that the contracts include a battalion’s worth of landing and parachute equipment suggests that the PLA expects to obtain the necessary aircraft, or to insert in multiple phases.

The greatest value of the deal to the PLA, however, is most likely in the training and the procedures for command and control of airborne forces, as Russia’s airborne forces have combat experience, while the PLA does not. The requirement for a battalion’s worth of equipment – with an expanded number of C2 platforms – likely speaks to the desire to conduct battalion scale collective training, and since the Russians are to deliver it, this must be conducted on Russian vehicles.

The deal also reflects the growing military-industrial co-operation between Russia and the PRC over the course of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. On the Chinese side, the project is being handled by the Main Directorate for the Development of Armaments and Military Equipment of the Central Military Council with the involvement of representatives of the PLAAF and Airborne Forces Command. The Russian side of the deal is covered by Rosoboronexport, the sole state intermediary authorized to export military and dual-purpose goods, services, and technologies. But the deal involves participation from a range of Russian defence companies including PJSC Il (manufacturer of the Il-76/78), KBP Instrument Design Bureau (weapon systems), Sozvezdiye, United Instrument Corporation OPK and NIISSU (automatic control and communication systems), Kurganmashzavod and SKBM (armoured vehicles), NPP Rubin (command and surveillance vehicles), MKPK Universal, Technodynamika, and Polyot (parachute and landing systems), as well as 27 Central Research Institutes of the Russian Ministry of Défense. On the Chinese side, the implementation is being handled by state-owned companies AVIC (aviation), CETC (communications and control systems), and NORINCO (armoured vehicles, weapons, and ammunition).

Historically, Russia has been wary of exporting its areas of military-technical advantage to China out of fears of intellectual property theft. However, Moscow increasingly sees the invasion of Taiwan – and subsequent division of the global economic order into opposing spheres – as a means of building leverage over Beijing by making Russia a supplier of critical raw materials and military industrial capacity. For China, funding to Russian military industrial enterprises contributes to the continuation of fighting in Ukraine, which the PRC supports to fix NATO capacity in the European theatre. Nevertheless, China has hitherto sought to reduce the signature of its overt defence cooperation with Moscow. The question is whether these contracts represent a shift in Beijing’s willingness to deepen direct defence collaboration.

© RUSI, 2025.

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Tue Aug 05, 2025 9:49 am

https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/ ... d-shocking
The CCP Is Inside the Fed: Shocking New Evidence of Chinese Infiltration at America’s Central Bank

A decade-long infiltration campaign by the Chinese Communist Party has penetrated the Federal Reserve—coercing employees, stealing sensitive data, and compromising America’s financial core.
Most Americans have heard about Chinese spies targeting our military or hacking private companies. But there’s another front in this quiet war, one that’s gone largely unreported—and it may be the most dangerous of all: China’s long game to infiltrate and manipulate the United States Federal Reserve.

A 2022 Senate investigation offered a rare glimpse into this operation, but even that barely scratches the surface. What’s playing out behind closed doors isn’t just a few bureaucratic missteps or naïve collaborations—it’s a full-blown economic espionage campaign.

This is warfare without bullets.
Hard Evidence of Espionage and Infiltration

Here are some documented examples that received little attention from the mainstream media:

1. Detained and Surveilled in China (Individual A)

• In 2019, a Fed employee was detained four separate times by Chinese authorities during a visit to Shanghai. He was threatened, told his family would be harmed, and coerced into handing over sensitive U.S. economic data. Chinese agents accessed his Fed laptop, phones, and internal contact lists. He was ordered to “tell a good story about China” back in the U.S. This employee returned to his post with full access to confidential monetary policy data.

2. Secret Data Transfers to Chinese Institutions (Individual B)

• Another employee sent modeling code and restricted Fed data to a university linked to China’s central bank (PBOC). He proposed deeper collaboration between his Reserve Bank and Chinese state institutions while maintaining access to Class II FOMC data, which includes sensitive internal forecasts and deliberations.

3. Coordination with Chinese Propaganda Outlets (Individual C)

• Another Fed employee took a paid visiting professorship in China funded by the CCP and subsequently acted as a liaison with Xinhua News Agency, the Chinese government’s propaganda arm. He even helped Chinese journalists and officials gain access to Fed contacts, often bypassing formal Fed communication channels.

4. Suspicious Talent Recruitment Programs (Individual D)

• Another Fed employee attempted to transfer large U.S. data sets to Chinese institutions. He was found to have joined the Thousand Talents Program, China’s premier foreign recruitment tool for stealing scientific and economic research. This affiliation was never disclosed and the employee continued working at the Fed.

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Sun Aug 03, 2025 2:42 pm

https://www.hudson.org/defense-strategy ... s-john-lee
Implications of Chinese Nuclear Weapons Modernization for the United States and Regional Allies
Based on current trends, China will become a quantitative and qualitative nuclear weapons peer of the United States by the early to mid-2030s with a diversified, accurate, and survivable force that will rival America’s. Rather than having only high-yield nuclear missiles as a strategic deterrent against nuclear attack, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is developing a range of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, the latter being lower-yield weapons usable in a conflict theater.

Why is China seemingly going beyond its long-standing nuclear weapons approach of maintaining only a minimal deterrent or assured retaliation? Why has it chosen to rapidly develop its nuclear arsenal and related delivery system in a deliberately opaque manner?

This report argues that Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) decided to embark on such a rapid nuclear modernization not primarily because China wants to “win” a nuclear exchange against the US. Rather, Beijing wants to create political and psychological effects that lead to enormously important strategic and military effects.

As the report explains, the CCP and PLA are using the rapid development of nuclear capability and related delivery systems to subdue the adversary and win without fighting. The following are components of achieving this:

Degrade the adversary’s decision-making.
Weaken the adversary’s will to fight.
Undermine the adversary’s public support for war.
Undermine the resolve of the adversary’s government from within.
Support and enhance deterrence.
The report assesses that there are three ways in which China uses nuclear modernization to change the material and psychological environment with important strategic effects that work to its advantage.

First, China uses advances in nuclear weapons to craft and entrench its strategic narratives throughout the region. Second, nuclear modernization enhances Beijing’s ability to deter, enjoy escalation dominance, and coerce in material and psychological ways that are advantageous for China. Third, Chinese modernization manipulates and degrades trust in US extended nuclear deterrence and deepens allied fears of US abandonment.

More broadly, the report argues that these strategic effects of Chinese nuclear modernization are completely aligned with evolving CCP and PLA notions of strategic stability, strategic deterrence, and strategic capabilities. For China, strategic stability is not simply a stable state in its relations with other great powers. It entails a stability that is advantageous for the advancement of Chinese geopolitical and development objectives. In this sense, a stable but dynamic (rather than static) set of relationships and arrangements allows China to accumulate comprehensive national power in a relative and absolute sense.

For the CCP and PLA, strategic deterrence is not only about deterring an adversary from a specific military course of action or policy. It also involves placing ongoing and enduring military and nonmilitary constraints on an adversary in a manner that is advantageous for the pursuit of China’s broader objectives. Indeed, China’s nuclear weapons do not exist only to deter a nuclear attack. They also exist to shape the military and nonmilitary actions and mindsets of other states to ensure they are conducive to Chinese interests. This includes asymmetric strategic stability and asymmetric strategic deterrence, which shape the actions and mindsets of nations that do not have proportionate strategic capabilities.

The modernizing nuclear arsenal exists to enable China to attack the adversary’s plans (strategies) and allies, bringing China one step closer to subduing the enemy and winning without fighting.

The report then offers case studies of the Chinese stratagem against the Philippines, Japan, and South Korea. It concludes with the recommendations summarized below:

Abandon the false hope of arms control and embrace ambiguity and strategic instability.
Recognize that there is no need for allies to consider developing their own nuclear weapons. This is a distraction that will play into Chinese hands.
Double down on conventional allied rearmament and underpin it with credible US extended nuclear deterrence.
Engage in psychological warfare with strategic effects.

Re: Nuclear War

by spottybrowncow » Mon Jul 28, 2025 7:33 pm

tim wrote: Sun Jul 20, 2025 10:29 pm https://jrnyquist.blog/2025/07/15/china ... ched-fist/ Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.rm thinking and strategic calculation may prove decisive.
"Curious" that Russia was left out of this list, since they have more land than anyone. Does anyone really think China won't come after Russia when they think the time is right? I bet the Russians are counting on an invasion in that setting.

I'm betting Putin thinks that America is more trustworthy than China. Who knows if he will factor that into his decisions, and if so, when?

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Sun Jul 20, 2025 10:29 pm

https://jrnyquist.blog/2025/07/15/china ... ched-fist/
It is the destruction of the United States that is uppermost in the thinking of Chinese military and political strategists. The top leadership of the Chinese Communist Party has studied the strategic errors of World War II. This is how they have been preparing themselves, intellectually, for World War III. Their primary criticism of Hitler is that he did not start out by destroying America first. All the other countries could have been easily conquered if America was destroyed at the outset. Thus, Chinese sources have reported the following: That China wants World War III to be fought on American soil; that China has been infiltrating People’s Liberation Army soldiers across the U.S. border; that China has been smuggling ammunition and weapons into the United States; that China is stirring up racial animosity between white and black Americans. Meanwhile, China and Russia have been infiltrating Latin America, placing communists into key leadership positions. The idea is to surround America, choke it off, weaken it by every and any means. Many fools within the United States political system are cooperating in this strategy.
Chi’s importance owes much to his ruthless strategic outlook. His secret speech on “cleaning up America,” which he spoke to top Communist Party officials more than twenty years ago, has been dismissed by many observers as something that could not have taken place. Five years ago, I spoke with a U.S. Army colonel who participated in translating the speech for the Pentagon. The colonel said the speech was authentic. It was delivered by Chi himself. It contained his characteristic phrases. The speech was significant because it discussed a future genocidal campaign against the American people. According to General Chi, the third and most important of China’s strategic problems is the “issue of America,” which he said was shocking, “but the logic is actually very simple.”

“The renaissance of China is in fundamental conflict with the Western strategic interest, and therefore will inevitably be obstructed by the western countries doing everything they can. So, Only by breaking the blockade formed by the western countries headed by the United States can China grow and move toward the world!

“Would the United States allow us to go out to gain new living space? First, if the United States is firm in blocking us, it is hard for us to do anything significant to Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or even Japan, [so] how much more living space can we get? Very trivial! Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.

“Therefore, solving the ‘issue of America’ is the key to solving all other issues. First, this makes it possible for us to have many people migrate there and even establish another China under the same leadership of the CCP. America was originally discovered by the ancestors of the yellow race, but Columbus gave credit to the white race. We the descendants of the Chinese nation are entitled to the possession of the land! It is said that the residents of the yellow race have a very low social status in the United States. We need to liberate them. Second, after solving the ‘issue of America,’ the western countries of Europe would bow to us, not to mention Taiwan, Japan and other small countries. Therefore, solving the ‘issue of America’ is the mission assigned to the CCP members by history.”[ix]

And what method would be used to “liberate” the yellow race in the United States? Chi explained the CCP’s strategy as follows:

“To resolve the issue of America we must be able to transcend conventions and restrictions. In history, when a country defeated another country or occupied another country, it could not kill all the people in the conquered land because back then you could not kill people effectively with sabers or long spears, or even with rifles or machine guns. Therefore, it was impossible to gain a stretch of land without keeping the people on that land. However, if we conquered America in this fashion, we would not be able to make many people migrate there.

“Only by using special means to ‘clean up’ America will we be able to lead the Chinese people there. This is the only choice left for us. This is not a matter of whether we are willing to do it or not. What kind of special means is there available for us to ‘clean up America’?”
The importance of “special means” for “cleaning up” America is central to the entire Chinese strategic enterprise. Rifles and machine guns are inadequate for the kind of mass killing General Chi had in mind. There is only one kind of weapon that can kill enough Americans to open the vast spaces of the United States for colonization. Chi’s speech continues:

“Conventional weapons such as fighters, canons, missiles and battleships won’t do; neither will highly destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons. We are not as foolish as to want to perish together with America by using nuclear weapons, despite the fact that we have been exclaiming that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved at whatever cost. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology, and new bio-weapons have been invented one after another. Of course, we have not been idle, in the past years we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of ‘cleaning up’ America all of a sudden. When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focus instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country.”

Directly related to General Chi’s speech, in 2022 the Center for Security Policy’s Team B Report on the COVID 19 biological attack concluded that,

“The preponderance of evidence indicates that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was man-made, engineered in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), a product of the CCP’s illegal biological warfare program and exploited (whether the result of an intentional release with plausible deniability or opportunistically after an accidental leak from the lab) to inflict damage on China’s enemies and obtain proof-of-concept for Chinese BW attacks.”[x]

According to the Report’s Executive Summary, the pandemic was an act of deliberate biological warfare against the United States. If the virus was part of a leak, the Chinese government nonetheless took steps to assure the virus spread to the United States. The Chinese government, in fact, “participated in one of the tabletop pandemic exercises sponsored by Bill Gates.”[xi] The report also found serious problems with the West’s response to COVID-19 as a Chinese bioweapon.[xii] The Chinese communists not only attempted to deceive the West about the nature of SARS-CoV-2, they successfully imposed a Chinese model for containment of the pandemic on many countries. According to the B Team,

“Actions taken in the name of protecting the American people against COVID-19, including obligatory mask-wearing, lockdowns, and vaccine mandates and passports – which have been shown to be of dubious medical value but help enforce political agendas – should be rejected, as must the ‘China model’ for insinuating its totalitarian system, more generally, on the rest of the world.”

Government officials suspended property rights, destroyed businesses, while enforcing senseless rules on hundreds of millions of people. To show how useless these policies were, consider the case of Sweden. No mandatory national lockdowns were imposed in Sweden. Instead, the Swedes relied on recommendations, voluntary actions, and individual responsibility to reduce transmission. Schools and daycares, bars and restaurants, largely remained open. Considering the entire pandemic period (2020-2022), Sweden ranked among the lowest death rates in Europe. This suggests that while Sweden initially saw a higher mortality rate, the differences diminished over the long term compared to countries imposing lockdowns. In other words, the virus was going to spread everywhere. The lockdowns only slowed the spread and were harmful in and of themselves. The vaccines, in turn, were questionable. Sacrificing property rights for safety was not a good bargain in the end. The socialists loved it, of course. The most significant effect was hardly noticed: small businessmen, who Stalin said were the greatest enemy of communism, suffered the greatest losses.

The COVID-19 pandemic may have been a test run. According to Chinese defector and virologist, Dr. Li-Meng Yan, the COVID-19 virus was “created in the lab … and also, it is spread to the world to make … damage.”[xiii] The allegations of Dr. Li-Meng Yan are extremely controversial. She has cited sources in China who told her the virus was “intentionally brought out of this strict lab and released into the community.”[xiv]

Few have understood the COVID-19 pandemic strategically. China is upside-down in terms of population, with too many elderly people and not enough young people to support them. This happened because of China’s one child policy. The COVID-19 virus killed countless elderly people in China. This helped to alleviate the CCP’s difficulty with supporting hundreds of millions of elderly citizens who were too old to work. At the same time, outside China, the virus would do enormous economic damage – provoking deficit spending that would hamper the United States in its future efforts to rebuild its military industry and catch up with Chinese and Russian arms production. Once again, China’s long-range strategy has been carefully thought through. Only now, after Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit to Europe, do the West’s leaders finally understand what they have been dealing with. Russia and China are working together against the West. Their objective is to take down the United States. As General Chi said, Europe will fall when America falls. At the same time, Trump’s tariffs are hitting Europe to the glee of Russian and Chinese strategists. One must wonder how they achieved so much, with such astonishing coordination. Here, of course, the value of long-term thinking and strategic calculation may prove decisive.

Re: Nuclear War

by tim » Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:02 pm

https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/rad ... -blanketed
Radioactive Iodine-131 Fallout Blanketed Nearly the Entire U.S. in Gov't Nuclear Tests

The American public was dosed—without consent.

Top