We know what’s coming and we are prepared.
Is it possible that NATO forces could become directly involved in the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine?
Until recently, such a question seemed very hypothetical given the high risks of escalation of the military confrontation between the US-led bloc and Russia into a large-scale armed conflict. But this scenario should be taken seriously now, writes Ivan Timofeev, programme director of the Valdai Club
“A significant escalation factor that would amplify the risk of a direct clash between Russia and NATO, could be the appearance of military contingents form bloc members on the territory of Ukraine. The prospect of such a scenario has already been mentioned by some Western politicians, although their view has not been supported by the US and isn’t an official NATO position.”
“Each of these scenarios involves a direct clash between Russian and NATO forces. Such a situation would inevitably raise the question of deeper bloc involvement and, in the longer term, the transfer of military conflict to other areas of contact with Russia, including the Baltic region. At this stage, it will be even more difficult to stop the escalation. The more losses both sides suffer, the more the maelstrom of hostilities will grow and the closer they will come to the threshold of using nuclear weapons. And there will be no winners.”
https://www.rt.com/russia/599286-russia-nato-ukraine-conflict/
After several hours of confusion and uncertainty, it’s time to bring some order to the situation.
What exactly did Trump agree to?
The agreement rests on two very lean principles:
“The Strait of Hormuz must remain open to free navigation, and Iran must not possess nuclear weapons.”
Trump has insisted in nearly every other post that Iran will not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, while simultaneously pushing to keep the Strait of Hormuz open to unrestricted maritime traffic at any cost.
But why was Trump so eager to reach such a minimal agreement? Why did he pressure Israel not to interfere, even at the cost of merging the various fronts and exposing soldiers to greater danger? Why did J.D. Vance, who has opposed military intervention, suddenly move to the forefront while Rubio faded into the background? And why has no one managed to offer a convincing explanation beyond references to the World Cup, birthdays, the midterm elections, and other superficial reasons for this apparent obsession?
Most ...
— 🇺🇸/🇮🇷/🇮🇱 i24 News correspondent, Amichai Stein:
‘Why is this agreement a strategic disaster?
The Americans give the Iranians plenty—and get nothing in return.
The most absurd thing is that this war ends with sanctions relief for oil sales. Something that didn't exist before the war.
What do the Americans get? Nothing. No nuclear, no ballistic, no proxy.’
🇮🇱❌🇱🇧❗️ — Israeli Ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir have called upon Netanyahu's government to respond with military force to the Hezbollah drone attack that struck an IDF military installation in northern Israel.
▶️ Smotrich called for direct attacks against the Dahiyeh suburbs in Beirut, which could derail U.S.-Iran negotiations at the last moment.
🍄
The Israeli Air Force struck Hezbollah targets in Beirut's southern suburbs a short while ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz say.
"The IDF has just struck Hezbollah terror targets in the Dahiyeh district of Beirut, in response to Hezbollah's firing toward Israeli territory," they say in a joint statement.
"Israel will not tolerate fire directed at its territory," they add.
This morning, three Hezbollah drones exploded in Israeli territory.
🍄🟫
🇮🇱🇱🇧⚡️ — Israeli strike on Beirut’s Dahiyeh kills at least 3, wounds 15, Lebanese Civil Defense ...
