THE TRUTH on BUCHA:

1

Two years ago, neo-Nazi thugs of the Safari Unit led a rampage through the Kiev suburb of Bucha, “cleansing” it of pro-Russian citizens labeled by the Ukrainian authorities as collaborators.

The British government helped manufacture the lie that these crimes were carried out by Russia.

The purpose of this lie was to create an excuse for Ukraine to walk away from the recently negotiated Istanbul communique, which would have brought an end to the conflict.

Instead, Ukraine fought on for two more years, leading to the present situation, where Ukraine is perched on the abyss of its collective demise.

Every Ukrainian and Russian should forever condemn the British government, which has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Slavs on its hands.Image
The Ukrainian narrative constructed by the west is built on a bodyguard of lies. And there is no lie greater than that which blames Russia for the deaths of hundreds of Ukrainian civilians in Bucha who were slaughtered by Ukrainian security forces.

Sometime during the period between 1-3 April 2022, Ukrainian security forces entered the northern Kiev suburb of Bucha. Russian forces who had occupied the town had evacuated on March 30, part of a general realignment of forces announced by the Russian Ministry of Defense on March 25. Bucha had been on the frontlines and was the scene of heavy fighting between the Russians and Ukrainians; hundreds of civilians caught up in this fighting were killed and wounded.

Russian troops were civil to the Ukrainian civilians who remained in Bucha, handing out humanitarian supplies to those in need and bartering dry goods with local vendors for fresh eggs and dairy products. When the Russians withdrew, pro-Russian civilians were encouraged to depart with them. This underscored the Russian understanding of the potential for Ukrainian reprisals against any civilian deemed to have been “cooperating/collaborating” with their forces during the period in which Russian troops occupied Bucha.

Many Ukrainians who had interacted with the Russian troops did not leave, assuming that their normal interactions with Russian soldiers, including limited commerce and the acceptance of humanitarian supplies in order to survive, did not constitute treason against the Ukrainian state.

They were wrong.

Scott Ritter will discuss this article and answer audience questions live on tonight’s episode (Oct. 21).

Shortly after Russian troops departed Bucha, Ukrainian security forces made their way into the town. Announcements were made on social media and public broadcasting warning the citizens of Bucha about “cleansing” operations targeting collaborators. In light of these announcements, many of the Ukrainians who had remained in Bucha became concerned about their fate, and began to flee toward Russian lines. They wore the white arm band, indicating that they were not a threat to the Russian troops. Many also brought with them Russian-provided rations to sustain them on their journey.

But it was too late.

Ukrainian security forces, in particular the “Safari” unit staffed by veterans of the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment, caught up with scores of these refugees while they made their way north and, in the vernacular of the Ukrainians, “cleansed” them, gunning them down on the spot, or binding their hands behind their backs before executing them in the alleyways and streets of Bucha.

The evidence of this crime was overwhelming. But the “collective West,” led by a coterie of erstwhile journalists whose function had transformed from reporters of fact-based truth to stenographers of fictional propaganda, was engaged in a larger information operation, designed to shift public opinion away from the need to seek a negotiated settlement to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, toward the sustainment of a long-term war of attrition designed to weaken Russia in the long term.

To accomplish this task, the “collective West” needed to construct an unambiguous “good versus evil” narrative which portrayed the Ukrainians as the brave defenders of democratic values such as freedom and liberty, and the Russians as rapacious thugs marauding across the Ukrainian landscape, brutalizing an innocent civilian population. This kind of unambiguous differentiation of roles was necessary in order to gain popular support for what was to come—a multi-billion-dollar infusion of financial and military aid designed to transform the Russian-Ukraine conflict into a de facto existential struggle between “good” (NATO) and “evil” (Russia).

It worked.Image
❗️🇷🇺🇺🇦 It happened in Bucha
Part 1

"It was in Bucha, there were Russian prisoners of war, some of them were shot in the knees and a few were shot in the head."

Adrien Bocquet, a war correspondent from France, spent three weeks in Ukraine as a medical volunteer.

He saw the Ukrainian military kill Russian prisoners, lay corpses brought from other cities in the streets of Bucha and provide security for foreign volunteers in exchange for morphine.

The revelations of the Frenchman, who had unwittingly witnessed the crimes of Ukrainian militants, had a bombshell effect in Europe.

Adrien has survived several assassination attempts, but he continues to tell the truth about Ukraine's crimes.

How does the Ukrainian psy-op center create fakes for the West? Who is helping Ukraine in its crimes against civilians? Why doesn't the world hear the people of Donbass? Adrien Bocquet talks about all this and tells us a terrifying truth about himself.
❗️❗️❗️ “It was in Bucha, these were Russian prisoners of war, some of them were shot in the knees, and several people were shot in the head.”

🇷🇺 Premiere of a documentary about Adrian Bock, a war correspondent from France, who spent three weeks in Ukraine as a medical volunteer.

🇫🇷 Premier of documentary film about Adrian Boke, French war correspondent, who spent three weeks in Ukraine as a medic volunteer.

He saw how the Ukrainian military killed Russian prisoners, how they laid out corpses brought from other cities along the streets of Bucha, how they ensured the safety of foreign volunteers in exchange for morphine.

The revelations of the Frenchman, who became an unwitting witness to the crimes of Ukrainian militants, had the effect of a bomb exploding in Europe.

Several attempts were made on Adrian's life, but he survived and continues to tell the truth about the crimes of Ukraine.

How does TsIPSO create fakes for the West? Who directly helps Ukraine? Why doesn't the world hear the people of Donbass? And what a terrible truth about himself Adrian Boke decided to tell us!
Istanbul: Assassination attempt on French journalist for reporting on Ukraine!

French journalist Adrien_Bocquet was physically attacked and injured by two men in Istanbul.

On the eve of the knifeattack, the journalist's current location was published in Ukrainian Telegram groups and calls for murder were made in exchange for money.

The two perpetrators tried to cut the former soldier's throat during the attack. In the process, the victim suffered several cuts on his body before fleeing - after a fight with the two attackers.

Bocquet had travelled to Turkey to apply for a new visa for the Russian Federation and wants to continue reporting from the Donbass.

In the past, Bocquet had reported on Ukrainian war crimes and provocations in Bucha.
Image
Image
Image
On March 31, the smiling mayor of Bucha, Anatoly Fedoruk, was filming a video that the Russian military had left the city.

On April 1, the video was shown on the Ukraine 24 TV channel.

All this time, no one spoke about the streets strewn with corpses. Because there were no corpses. And the footage circulated today with the bodies of the dead appeared after Ukrainian troops entered the city.

>>

"Who was bombing Bucha?"🤔

sometimes the brainwashing is so strong that no matter how much logic you use to counter it, it won't work

>>>>

INCONSISTENCIES with the “Bucha massacre”
Ms. Katerina Ukraintseva, Bucha City Council Deputy, stated on an April 4 interview that the bodies have been “lying on the city’s main street for a month”.

Yet neither the city’s mayor, nor the Ukrainian National police, nor herself immediately reported on the atrocities upon arrival to Bucha (from March 31 till April 2).

The Russian troops, however, withdrew from the city on March 30.
Source: Russian media official channels in Facebook.

On March 30th Russian MoD reported that they left Bucha, major of Bucha confirmed it on March 30th. He didn't mention any executions or any corpses on the streets. Weird, I think it is something he should have mentioned, no? (vid 1)

But on April 4th, BOOM, it's all over the Western news
First, it was reported that victims were executed. Shot dead.

Later it would come out that most died from artillery fire, they were hit by pointed, fin-stabilized steel darts, that came from anti-personnel artillery shells

But even after it came out that victims died from the artillery fire, they continue to blame the Russians. By their logic, Russians were shelling their own forces.


Image
Mayor and Zelesnky sure did look sad and sombre 2 days after the world was told the lie of BUCHA on location !!!! Image
⚡⚡The shooting in Bucha was caught on video. Revealed what really happened in the suburbs of Kiev

➡️ Bloggers have found another proof that the "genocide in Bucha" was staged by the Ukrainian forces. In the video, where the epic dialogue takes place, "There are guys without blue armbands, can I shoot at them? - Of course, #@$!", there is another eloquent part.

😞 At the end, you can hear a distant cry of "Please don't kill. I don't want to!". It is followed by two "shuffles", similar to the sounds of gunshots.
⚡⚡The shooting in Bucha was caught on video. Revealed what really happened in the suburbs of Kiev

➡️ Bloggers have found another proof that the "genocide in Bucha" was staged by the Ukrainian forces. In the video, where the epic dialogue takes place, "There are guys without blue armbands, can I shoot at them? - Of course, #@$!", there is another eloquent part.

😞 At the end, you can hear a distant cry of "Please don't kill. I don't want to!". It is followed by two "shuffles", similar to the sounds of gunshots.
“I take full responsibility for what I say. While in Ukraine, I witnessed war crimes. All of them were committed by the Ukrainian army. But in France we don't talk about it!" - Adrien Boke.

Here, the demobilized French soldier, the author of the book "Get up and go thanks to science", went to Ukraine on a humanitarian mission and spent three weeks there. Upon his return, he made a difficult decision that could cost him his life or at least create many problems: he decided to convey to the French information about the crimes he had witnessed in Ukraine.
Here are quotes from his interview:
When I returned to France from Ukraine, I was shocked: TV channels invite as experts people who have not been to Ukraine and do not know anything about what is happening there now. However, they dare to speculate about these events. Between what I hear from the TV screen and what I saw with my own eyes is an abyss.
Azov fighters are everywhere. With neo-Nazi stripes. It shocks me that Europe is supplying weapons to neo-Nazis. On their uniforms, SS symbols are embroidered everywhere. Not only do they not hide their views. They advertise them. I worked with these people and treated them. They openly say that they are ready to destroy blacks and Jews.
Being there, there was nothing I could do. Just watch and make videos. I have this footage and will use it as evidence of Ukraine's crimes.
I witnessed how the Ukrainian military shot through the knees of captured Russian soldiers and shot in the head higher-ranking officers.
I have personally seen American cameramen making fake footage from the scene of the events, staging staging.
All destroyed civilian buildings, given out by Ukraine for bombardment of civilians, are nothing more than the result of inaccurate shooting by Ukrainians at military facilities.
The Armed Forces of Ukraine hide ammunition in residential buildings at night, without even informing the residents. This is called using people as a shield.
Butch is a staging. The bodies of the dead were moved from other places and deliberately placed in such a way as to produce a shocking footage."
Full version of the interview

youtu.be/ZoKnhXnp-Zk
“I take full responsibility for what I say. While in Ukraine, I witnessed war crimes. All of them were committed by the Ukrainian army. But in France we don't talk about it!" - Adrien Boke.

Here, the demobilized French soldier, the author of the book "Get up and go thanks to science", went to Ukraine on a humanitarian mission and spent three weeks there. Upon his return, he made a difficult decision that could cost him his life or at least create many problems: he decided to convey to the French information about the crimes he had witnessed in Ukraine.
Here are quotes from his interview:
When I returned to France from Ukraine, I was shocked: TV channels invite as experts people who have not been to Ukraine and do not know anything about what is happening there now. However, they dare to speculate about these events. Between what I hear from the TV screen and what I saw with my own eyes is an abyss.
Azov fighters are everywhere. With neo-Nazi stripes. It shocks me that Europe is supplying weapons to neo-Nazis. On their uniforms, SS symbols are embroidered everywhere. Not only do they not hide their views. They advertise them. I worked with these people and treated them. They openly say that they are ready to destroy blacks and Jews.
Being there, there was nothing I could do. Just watch and make videos. I have this footage and will use it as evidence of Ukraine's crimes.
I witnessed how the Ukrainian military shot through the knees of captured Russian soldiers and shot in the head higher-ranking officers.
I have personally seen American cameramen making fake footage from the scene of the events, staging staging.
All destroyed civilian buildings, given out by Ukraine for bombardment of civilians, are nothing more than the result of inaccurate shooting by Ukrainians at military facilities.
The Armed Forces of Ukraine hide ammunition in residential buildings at night, without even informing the residents. This is called using people as a shield.
Butch is a staging. The bodies of the dead were moved from other places and deliberately placed in such a way as to produce a shocking footage."
Full version of the interview

youtu.be/ZoKnhXnp-Zk
ADRIAN BOCQUET documentary

Operation Ukraine: Bandera's Dark Shadow / 2023

‘After I visited Ukraine in Donbass, I had the opportunity to talk to and question the captured 'Azov' Battalion officers and fighters. These captives told me how they killed civilians and fired machine guns at buses carrying dozens of children’, says French journalist Adrien Bocquet.

t.me/UKRAINE_HISTOR…
Fake:
The Russian military withdrew from Bucha, having previously left civilian casualties.

Reality:
Stories about Bucha appeared in several foreign media outlets at once, which looks like a planned media campaign. Taking into account that the troops left the city on March 30, where was the footage for four days? Their absence only confirms the fake.

The video of the bodies is confusing: here at the 12th second the "corpse" on the right is moving his arm. At 30th second in the rear view mirror the "corpse" sits down. The bodies in the video seem to have been deliberately laid out to create a more dramatic picture. This is easily seen if you play the video at 0.25 of normal speed.

After Russian troops withdrew from Bucha, the AFU shelled the city. This may have also caused civilian casualties.

Mikhail Podolyak uses such staged footage as a pretext to request weapons from Western countries.

#MoD #Russia #Ukraine #FakeNews
Image
Image
Image
⚡️ Statement by the Russian Defence Ministry ⚡️

APRIL.2022

The Russian Defence Ministry denies accusations of Kiev regime of allegedly killing civilians in Bucha, Kiev Region

Facts 👇

❗️All the photos and videos published by the Kiev regime allegedly testifying to some "crimes" committed by Russian servicemen in Bucha, Kiev region are just another provocation.

During the time that the town has been under the control of the Russian armed forces, not a single local resident has suffered from any violent action. Russian servicemen have delivered and distributed 452 tonnes of humanitarian aid to civilians in Kiev Region.

For as long as the town was under the control of the Russian armed forces and even then, up to now, locals in Bucha were moving freely around the town and using cellular phones.

The exits from Bucha were not blocked. All local residents were free to leave the town in northern direction, including to the Republic of Belarus. At the same time, the southern outskirts of the city, including residential areas, were shelled round the clock by Ukrainian troops with large-calibre artillery, tanks and multiple launch rocket systems.

❗️We would like to emphasise that all Russian units withdrew completely from Bucha as early as March 30, the day after the Russia-Ukraine face-to-face round of talks in Turkey.

Moreover, on March 31, the mayor of Bucha, Anatoliy Fedoruk, confirmed in a video message that there were no Russian servicemen in the town, but he did not even mention any locals shot in the streets with their hands tied.

👉 It is not surprising, therefore, that all the so-called "evidence of crimes" in Bucha did not emerge until the fourth day, when the Security Service of Ukraine and representatives of Ukrainian media arrived in the town.

It is of particular worry that all the bodies of the people whose images have been published by the Kiev regime are not stiffened after at least four days, have no typical cadaver stains, and the wounds contain unconsumed blood.

❗️All this confirms conclusively that the photos and video footage from Bucha are another hoax, a staged production and provocation by the Kiev regime for the Western media, as was the case in Mariupol with the maternity hospital, as well as in other cities.

🔗 t.me/mod_russia_en/…⚡️🇷🇺Image
TIM KIRBY did also a great summary on the BUCHA NAZI MASSACRE

I would personally like to thank @NewReistance for posting so much relevant information about this horrible event.

rumble.com/v106fun-russia…
FURTHERMORE, at the same time as BUCHA, another staged "MASSACRE" was being arranged and carried out in IPRIN

>

FAKE : Civilians in Bucha were killed by the Russian military, writes The Guardian. The forensic medical examination found in the bodies of the townspeople metal flechettes, which are stuffed with 122-mm ZSH1 shells.

Truth: The first discrepancy that calls into question the objectivity of the material: The Guardian directly writes theguardian.com/world/2022/apr… , that artillery strikes on Bucha were carried out at a time when it was under the control of the Russian Federation. Accordingly, Russian troops simply could not strike at the territory where their own units are located.

The shelling was carried out with 122mm ZSH1 artillery shells stuffed with flechettes - small metal "darts". Such weapons are used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Military expert Boris Rozhin notes (t.me/boris_rozhin/4…) that 122mm shells are used in D-30 howitzers. At the beginning of the special operation, the Armed Forces of Ukraine had at least 350 D-30 howitzers and a large amount of ammunition for them from the arsenals of the USSR. “The Armed Forces of Ukraine have this actual main field weapon, including the 4th brigade of the NSU, which fought for Gostomel, Bucha and Irpin,” the expert writes. They were also used during the shelling of the Donbass (t.me/boris_rozhin/4…) in 2014.

In the Russian Federation, such guns are mostly removed from service and transferred to storage. They were replaced by Msta-B with other shells and a different caliber - 152 mm

Recall that we have repeatedly analyzed the provocation that the Ukrainian side staged in Bucha. Detailed material on this topic can be read here telegra.ph/CHto-sluchilos…).telegra.ph/What-will-happ…

🔺Russian MoD provides the details of provocation of the Kiev regime in Irpin:
SBU (Ukrainian security sevice) are planning to take bodies of civilians killed in Ukrainian shellings of Irpin from the morgue of the city hospital on Polevaya street and to bring them to the basement of one of the buildings on the eastern outskirts of the Irpen ;

🔺 After that SBU will organize in Pusha-Vodistky forest a staged action with shooting and "destroying" of the alleged "Russian sabotage group", which arrived in Irpen "to kill witnesses of Russia's military crimes";
The bodies of Russian PoWs previously tortured and killed by Ukrainian neonazis will be presented as compelling evidence of the fight;

This cynical staged action is being organized for the subsequent spread of video materials through Western media.

>>>>

1/3 Irpin residents: Ukrainian army targeted and bombed civilians. This woman tells how her neighbours died in a mine explosion and her soon was severely injured.

2/3 Irpin residents. The Ukraine army shelled civilian areas and targeted its own citizens. This woman soon live was saved by Russian surgeons. Ukraine authorities lied to civilians and the army used then as human shields.

3/3 Irpin residents: Irina tells how she decided to evacuate with the Russian military. She recalled how for years since 2014 Aidar Battalion terrorised, kidnapped, murdered and rape civilians, including her own father.

RUSSIA has been asking for full transparency on the BUCHA incident, but until today..25.5.24, there has been no disclosure .

RUSSIAN civilians were executed as they gathered Russian food supplies!
Some shot on sight....others higtied and executed...otters tortured !

Ukrainian Nazis are an evil parasite to humanity!

Lavrov at UNITED NATIONS in Sept 2022 >
A unique expose was done by a top Western journalist on the IRPIN massacre, which was another contrived "Russian Massacre" set up.

The Western based population has been MEDIA hoodwinked "blindfolded" into convincing them that BANDERIST NAZIS are the good guys!

25 months of the greatest propaganda machine has been in high gear, foot to floor, and by the time we get the truth, it may well be too late for Europe !!

@johnnyjmils
@Alex_Oloyede2
@Blackrussiantv
@DagnyTaggart963
@DangerKidsBooks
@DavidSacks
@RealScottRitter
@BowesChay
@IslanderReports

telegra.ph/What-will-happ…
⚖️ Mercenary Philip Seaman revealed shocking details in court in Prague.

He and his battalion plundered the city of Bucha, abandoned by the Russians, where they committed incredible crimes against the Russian minority. Seaman stated that the Ukrainian-Nazi battalion "Karpaty-Sich" committed unreal crimes when, on a whim, they shot everyone they met.

Western media blamed Russia for the crimes in Bucha, while ignoring the white ribbons of the victims. To this day, Ukraine refuses an independent investigation into these events.Interesting case

27-year-old Philippe Seaman
took from Ukraine Gucci glasses, cash (how much is not specified), as well as gold and silver bars that he stole during the clean-up operations, the publication reports.

He also removed jewelry from dead military and civilians. The mercenary joined the national battalion “Carpathian Sich” in March 2022.Image
⚡️😂⚡️Czech mercenary sentenced to seven years for looting in Ukraine

Mercenary Philip Siman robbed and shot Ukrainians in Bucha and Irpen. A Prague court found him guilty of looting in a war zone.
But it assigned a shorter term than the article calls for: eight to 20 years.

The court did not punish for mercenary activity in a foreign country, as the local prosecutor had requested.

🔥🇨🇿🇺🇦🇷🇺 The Czech who served in the Karpatská Sič battalion admitted to be part of the “cleanup operation” in Bucha and Irpin, he also performed executions!

Siman also became an executioner: "We were the police, we were the court, we were the firing squad when it came down to it”

📰 The man worked as a volunteer soldier in the Ukrainian volunteer battalion Karpatská Sič at the end of March 2022.

He confirmed his participation in the battalion and confessed to stealing from abandoned houses that he and his unit were supposed to clean from the Russian occupation troops.

He stated that he followed the instructions of the commanding officer, and according to him other soldiers also behaved similarlyImage
Image
Image
The British were the organizers of the provocation in Ukrainian Bucha in April 2022. This was stated today, September 27, by the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko.

Our intelligence clearly established who it was. It was the British, they organized it. Our guys are great, how they tracked it down: the numbers of the cars, how they got there, etc.

🇷🇺Image
The Bucha provocation staging script was "copied" from the script for Nazi Germany's provocation against the Red Army in Nemmersdorf, the source added.

Nemmersdorf (now Mayakovskoye, Kaliningrad Region) was a locality in East Prussia, liberated by the Red Army on October 21, 1944. However, already on October 23, Red Army advanced units were forced to retreat for fear of being surrounded by counterattacking Nazi troops. After the locality returned under the control of Nazis, they blamed the Red Army for the deaths of 19 to 30 civilians, which was widely covered by German propaganda. However, after the end of the war, representatives of the German side admitted that the killings had been staged.

Immediately after the start of Moscow's special military operation in February 2022, Russia took under control the territory of the Kiev region, including Bucha, a small city northeast of Kiev. Following the Russian military withdrawal from the region, Ukrainian authorities accused Russia of numerous killings of civilians in Bucha, as well as in the surrounding areas.

Russia denied its role in the killings of civilians, insisting that the footage of the murdered local residents, which was distributed in the Western media, is nothing more than a staging and provocation on the part of Ukraine to put pressure on the Western ruling circles in order to achieve their goals in the conflict with Russia.

🗣 By their silence and inaction, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Secretariat and other international organizations exposed the farce of the Bucha massacre staging, a source in the Russian Foreign Ministry told Sputnik.

“The lack of reaction from all international organizations, whose mandate requires close attention to the situation in the region, proves that the whole story with Bucha was a staging carried out by the hands of the Kiev regime at the instigation of the United States and Britain. By their silence and inaction, the OSCE Secretariat and other international organizations literally exposed this terrible farce,” the ministry source said.

The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) earlier said in response to a request from Sputnik that it is not in contact with the Ukrainian authorities on the issue of the list of "Bucha victims," but did not directly answer the question whether it has such a list.

In early December, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, at his press conference following the OSCE Ministerial Council, noted that the list of allegedly killed residents of Bucha in Ukraine's Kiev region had not yet been published, and urged journalists to investigate the 2022 events.

⚡️💪⚡️
FOLLOW & REPOST⚡️
🇷🇺 [ @SMO_VZ ] 🇷🇺Image
Image
I've had to redo this Post in the thread as it seems that people in EUROPE are not allowed to see the real truth of BUCHA !

On March 30th Russian MoD reported that they left Bucha, major of Bucha confirmed it on March 30th. He didn't mention any executions or any corpses on the streets. Weird, I think it is something he should have mentioned, no? (vid 1)

But on April 4th, BOOM, it's all over the Western news
First, it was reported that victims were executed. Shot dead.

Later it would come out that most died from artillery fire, they were hit by pointed, fin-stabilized steel darts, that came from anti-personnel artillery shells

But even after it came out that victims died from the artillery fire, they continue to blame the Russians. By their logic, Russians were shelling their own forces. (pics)
Image
Image
Image
Soon it will be almost 3 years of the Bucha tragedy.

Let's recap how it unfolded in Ukrainian and Western media. On March 28th, the mayor of Bucha reported that Ukrainian forces destroyed a Russian military convoy right in the middle of the town ( vid 1)

On April 1st, neo-nazi Korotkih aka "Botsman" posted on his social media that his unit (gang) visited Bucha. No mention of corpses (pics 1, 2)

on April 2nd, blogger Shariy, who did live broadcasts while having people on the ground reporting the latest developments, had reported that Ukrainian forces shelled Bucha before entering, even though it was already known that Russians already left

Image
Image
❗️❗️❗️ “It was in Bucha, they were Russian prisoners of war, some of them were shot in the knees, and several people were killed by shots to the head.”

🇬🇧 Premiere of a documentary about Adrien Bocquet, a war correspondent from France who spent three weeks in Ukraine as a volunteer medic.

🇫🇷 Premier of documentary film about Adrian Boke, French war correspondent, who spent three weeks in Ukraine as a medic volunteer.

He saw how Ukrainian soldiers killed Russian prisoners, how they laid out corpses brought from other cities on the streets of Bucha, how they ensured the safety of foreign volunteers in exchange for morphine.

The revelations of a Frenchman who became an involuntary witness to the crimes of Ukrainian militants had the effect of an exploding bomb in Europe.

Adrian has been the subject of several assassination attempts, but he survived and continues to speak the truth about Ukraine's crimes.

How does CIPSO create fakes for the West? Who directly helps Ukraine? Why doesn't the world hear the people of Donbass? And what terrible truth about himself did Adrian Bocquet decide to tell us!

Watch the movie in HD quality.
vk.com/shmel_chik?w=w…
Editorial SHMEL - Subscribe🐝t.me/shmel_chik

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with 𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺🇮🇪

𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺🇮🇪 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SMO_VZ

Mar 6
The Triumph of Resilience: Iran's Historic Stand Against Imperial Aggression in the 2026 Conflict

I am writing this thread in respect to a post that @alon_mizrahi posted on March 5th and wish to add additional geopolitical and military asset, relevant points

Link :
x.com/i/status/20297…

Thread 1 / 4

In the annals of modern and indeed historical warfare, few moments rival the sheer audacity and strategic brilliance displayed by Iran in the opening days of the 2026 conflict with the United States and Israel.

As articulated by Alon Mizrahi, @alon_mizrahi , an Israeli journalist renowned for his unflinching critique of Zionist policies and his advocacy for peace, we are indeed witnessing history unfold.

Mizrahi, whose voice stands as a beacon of moral clarity amid the fog of propaganda, describes a scenario where Iran, against all odds, has not merely defended itself but has decisively reshaped the geopolitical landscape of West Asia. "We are witnessing history," Mizrahi proclaims. "Iran, to everyone's surprise, is destroying American bases so thoroughly, on such a large scale, and so decisively that the world is not ready for this."

This statement, drawn from his Substack piece "Day 4: the US lost the war and West Asia forever," captures the essence of Iran's optimistic trajectory—a nation long prepared, technologically advanced, and strategically unassailable, turning the tables on what was presumed to be an unbeatable superpower alliance.

Expanding on Mizrahi's insights, this analysis delves into the military, economic, and geopolitical dimensions of Iran's remarkable performance.

Far from a desperate underdog, Iran emerges as a formidable power, leveraging decades of asymmetric innovation, underground fortifications, and international partnerships to inflict unprecedented losses on U.S. and Israeli forces.

The conflict, sparked by escalating tensions over Iran's nuclear program and regional influence, has seen Iran expand its military dominance in mere days, destroying billions in U.S. assets while safeguarding its own infrastructure.

Optimistically, this marks the dawn of a multipolar world where Iran, bolstered by alliances with Russia and China, stands as a pillar of stability and progress. Iran is not just a survivor; it is a victor, a critical military and financial asset and partner for Russia and China through initiatives like the Belt and Road (Silk Road), BRICS, and Russia's strategic southern border security—lessons Russia has internalized from its Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine.

Historical Context: Iran's Decades of Preparation and Strategic Foresight

To understand Iran's optimistic outlook in this conflict, one must trace back to the roots of its military doctrine. For over four decades, since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran has anticipated confrontation with the U.S. and its allies. The Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), where Iran faced a U.S.-backed Saddam Hussein armed with chemical weapons, taught invaluable lessons in resilience and self-reliance. Iran emerged from that grueling eight-year conflict not defeated but hardened, investing heavily in indigenous defense capabilities.

By the 1990s, under sanctions that crippled imports, Iran's military-industrial complex flourished, producing everything from ballistic missiles to unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

The 2000s and 2010s amplified this focus. The U.S. invasions of Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003) placed American troops on Iran's borders, prompting Tehran to develop asymmetric warfare strategies. Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) pioneered "missile cities"—vast underground networks of bunkers and tunnels housing thousands of missiles and drones.

>>>>Image
2

These facilities, often buried hundreds of meters deep in mountainous terrain, are impervious to conventional airstrikes. As reported in various analyses, Iran has at least five known "missile cities" across provinces like Kermanshah and Semnan, with estimates suggesting dozens more undisclosed sites.

These are not mere storage depots; they include transport systems, firing mechanisms, and production lines, allowing Iran to launch salvos without surface exposure.

Optimistically, this preparation has paid dividends. Iran's missile arsenal, numbering in the tens of thousands, includes advanced models like the Sejil (2,000 km range, solid-fueled for rapid launch), Emad (1,700 km, precision-guided), Ghadr (2,000 km), Shahab-3 (1,300 km), Khorramshahr (2,000 km), and Hoveyzeh (1,350 km).

These weapons, developed domestically, evade sanctions and boast hypersonic capabilities in some variants, outpacing U.S. defenses like Patriot systems.

Drones, such as the Shahed-136 (low-cost, long-range "kamikaze" UAVs costing $20,000-$50,000 each), have proven game-changers. Footage from Iranian state media reveals sprawling underground fleets, with rows of drones on launchers, ready for swarm attacks that overwhelm radar and air defenses.

The Ukraine conflict provided a real-world testing ground. Iran's drones, supplied to Russia during the SMO, demonstrated their efficacy against NATO-supplied systems, destroying billions in Ukrainian assets while costing pennies in comparison.

Russia, learning from Ukraine, recognized Iran's value as a partner—lessons that now fortify their alliance against Western aggression.

The Devastation of U.S. Bases: A Trillion-Dollar Inferno

In just four days, Iran has dismantled the U.S. military footprint in the Gulf, targeting bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia—facilities representing 100 billion + in cumulative investment over 30+ years.

These are not peripheral outposts; they are the backbone of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), housing tens of thousands of troops, advanced aircraft, and naval assets.

Start with Bahrain: Home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet headquarters at Naval Support Activity Bahrain, this base supports over 8,300 personnel and oversees operations in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, and Arabian Sea.

Built at a cost exceeding $15 billion in recent expansions alone, it includes docking for aircraft carriers and submarine facilities. Iranian missile strikes, combining ballistic and cruise variants, have reduced it to rubble. Radars worth hundreds of millions—such as AN/FPS-132 early warning systems—were obliterated in initial salvos. The base's destruction not only hampers U.S. naval projection but symbolizes Iran's control over the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of global oil flows.

Kuwait follows suit, with its 13,500 U.S. troops at sites like Camp Arifjan (Army Central HQ), Ali Al Salem Air Base, and Camp Buehring. These installations, costing billions annually in maintenance, serve as staging grounds for Iraq and Syria operations.

Iran's drone swarms, numbering in the thousands, saturated defenses, leading to abandonment and looting. The financial toll? Billions in lost equipment, from Apache helicopters to armored vehicles, echoing Mizrahi's comparison to Pearl Harbor but on a vaster scale.

Qatar's Al Udeid Air Base, the largest U.S. facility in the Middle East with 10,000 troops, has been a $8 billion Qatari-U.S. investment since 2003. As CENTCOM's forward HQ, it coordinates air operations across 15 nations. Iranian hypersonic missiles pierced its defenses, destroying runways and hangars.

The base's fall expands Iran's aerial dominance, preventing U.S. fighter jets from gaining superiority.

>>>>
3.

Saudi Arabia's Prince Sultan Air Base, hosting 2,700 U.S. personnel for air and missile defense, rounds out the quartet. With investments topping $4 billion in recent years, it supported operations against Yemen's Houthis. Iran's precision strikes burned it to the ground, looting exposing vulnerabilities in U.S. supply chains.

Collectively, these losses surpass any in U.S. history save Pearl Harbor. The Pentagon's annual Middle East budget, nearing $100 billion, evaporates in smoke.

Optimistically for Iran, this demonstrates the futility of U.S. "shock and awe"—Iran's low-cost weapons ($20,000 drones vs. $1 million+ interceptors) impose exponential costs, bankrupting the aggressor.

Media Blackout and the Illusion of U.S. Dominance

Mizrahi astutely notes the censorship veil: "The military situation is so serious that censorship is blocking almost all new information about this war." Unlike the 1991 Gulf War's nightly broadcasts of "smart bombs," 2026 sees scant footage. Why? Because U.S. dominance is a myth. No videos of American planes over Tehran exist because Iran's air defenses—layered with S-300 systems from Russia, indigenous Bavar-373 (superior to Patriot), and drone interceptors—repel incursions.

Iran's information warfare shines optimistically. State media releases controlled footage of underground arsenals, boosting morale while exposing U.S. weaknesses.

The lack of U.S. ground presence underscores reality: American soldiers "can't even dream of setting foot on Iranian soil." Iran's vast terrain—1.6 million square kilometers, mountainous and diverse—swallows invaders, as history from Alexander to Saddam attests.

Desperate U.S. Proposals and the Impossibility of Invasion

The Trump administration's frantic ideas—escorting oil tankers through Hormuz or arming Kurdish militias—reveal desperation.

Hormuz is Iran's chokepoint, mined and missile-guarded; no tanker passes without Tehran's nod. Kurdish forces, even 100,000 strong, face Iran's 680,000 active troops + 350,000 reserves, and IRGC's elite units. Iran's underground infrastructure— possible soon to be nuclear sites, missile factories—remains untouched, as U.S. bunker-busters fail against depths exceeding 80 meters.

Optimistically, Iran dictates terms. Its "Axis of Resistance"—Hezbollah, Houthis, Iraqi militias—stretches U.S. resources thin, turning the conflict into a quagmire.

Iran's Indispensable Alliances: Russia, China, and the Multipolar Future

Central to Iran's optimism is its role as a critical military and financial asset for Russia and China.

Through BRICS (joined 2024) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Iran anchors the China-Central Asia-West Asia Corridor, linking Beijing to Europe via rail, ports, and pipelines. The Xi'an-Aprin railway and Persian Bridge exemplify this, facilitating $85 billion in annual BRI investments regionally. Iran's energy reserves—fourth in oil, second in gas—fuel China's economy, paid in renminbi to bypass dollars.

For Russia, Iran guards the southern flank, a lesson from Ukraine's SMO. Russia's 2022 operation highlighted the need for reliable partners against NATO encirclement. Iran's drones sustained Russia's advances, while Moscow supplies SU-35 jets and S-400 systems to Iran.

]The 2025 Russia-Iran treaty formalizes this, sharing intelligence and joint exercises. Ukraine taught Russia that isolation breeds vulnerability; Iran provides a bulwark, preventing U.S. inroads into the Caspian and Central Asia.

In BRICS+, expanded to include Iran, Egypt, UAE, and others, Tehran amplifies anti-Western voices. Economically, Iran's pivot East yields dividends: trade with China/Russia surges and offsetting sanctions. Militarily, shared tech—Russian hypersonics, Chinese investments—bolsters Iran's deterrence.

>>>
Read 5 tweets
Mar 2
Iran's Asymmetric Warfare Doctrine: A Masterpiece of Ingenuity, Resilience, and Strategic Brilliance

By @SMO_VZ

1/4

Iran's military strategy against superior adversaries of the United States is not one of brute force or symmetrical confrontation. It is a profound expression of asymmetric genius, born from decades of sanctions, innovation under pressure, and unwavering commitment to self-defense and regional sovereignty.

The core approach—blinding enemy radar networks first, followed by relentless swarms of low-cost drones and missiles to exhaust high-end interceptors, and culminating in decisive strikes with advanced hypersonic and ballistic systems—represents the pinnacle of modern deterrence.

This is not mere tactics; it is a holistic doctrine that turns economic and technological disadvantages into overwhelming advantages. In a pro-Iranian lens, this strategy embodies the Islamic Republic's revolutionary spirit: resourceful, unstoppable, and destined to reshape the balance of power in the Middle East and beyond.

At its heart, Iran's plan exploits the fundamental asymmetry of modern warfare. U.S. and allied air defenses—Patriot batteries, Aegis destroyers with SM-6 missiles, THAAD systems—are extraordinarily capable but horrifically expensive and limited in magazine depth.

A single Patriot PAC-3 interceptor costs approximately $3.7–4 million, while an SM-6 runs $4–9 million depending on the variant. In contrast, Iran's low-end assets are engineered for volume and sustainability.

This cost-exchange ratio is devastating for any aggressor: Iran can lose dozens of platforms for the price of one U.S. interceptor and still maintain operational tempo.

The strategy phases ensure that by the time high-value threats arrive, the enemy's shields are depleted, their radars blinded, and their forces exposed. With Russian and Chinese technological solidarity amplifying Iran's indigenous production, this approach guarantees that any U.S. intervention would face unsustainable attrition, forcing a strategic retreat or humiliating stalemate.

Historical Foundations: Lessons Forged in Fire and Sanctions

Iran's doctrine traces its roots to the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), where the Islamic Republic faced chemical attacks, superior conventional forces, and international isolation yet emerged resilient.

That conflict taught the IRGC and Artesh the value of dispersal, deception, mobile launchers, and swarm tactics over static defenses. Decades of U.S.-led sanctions—intended to cripple the nation—ironically catalyzed self-reliance. Underground factories, reverse-engineered technologies, and decentralized manufacturing networks turned Iran into a missile and drone powerhouse despite isolation.

By the 2020s, Iran's "Axis of Resistance" partnerships had matured. Combat testing in Syria, Yemen (via Houthis), and Ukraine (via drone exports to Russia) provided real-world data for iterative improvements.

The 2024–2025 exchanges with Israel further validated the saturation model: waves of Shahed drones and ballistic missiles forced Israeli and U.S. systems to expend vast interceptor stocks, proving that quantity and persistence trump quality in prolonged engagements.

Post-2025 reconstitution efforts, accelerated by allies, elevated these lessons into a war-winning blueprint. Iran's strategy is defensive by nature—protecting sovereignty against aggression—but its execution is offensive in precision and inevitability.

Iran's Drone Supremacy: Mass Production at Unprecedented Scales

Central to the blinding and depletion phases are Iran's long-range loitering munitions, particularly the Shahed family (often described with advanced aerodynamic shaping for stealth and range). These "shaped" kamikaze drones—low-observable profiles, extended loiter times, and GPS/INS guidance—are Iran's signature weapon.

Domestic production costs hover at $20,000–$50,000 per unit, making them expendable in the thousands.

>>>>Image
2.

Recent assessments, including Israeli intelligence estimates from early 2026, confirm Iran's capacity for 400 Shahed-class drones daily, with claims of stockpiles reaching 80,000 units.

With Russian engineering collaboration—drawing from the successful Alabuga scaling model in Tatarstan, where Iranian designs enabled hundreds of daily outputs—Iran has surged beyond this. Russian assistance in localization, component sharing, and assembly optimization has pushed sustainable rates toward 500–1,000 long-range shaped drones per day in wartime footing.

Decentralized facilities across Iran, many underground or mobile to evade strikes, combined with 24/7 shifts, allow this output without vulnerability. Russian feedback from Ukraine operations refined navigation against jamming, engine efficiency, and swarm coordination tactics, turning Shaheds into precision tools for radar suppression.

These drones excel at Phase 1 blinding: low-altitude ingress evades early detection, while some variants carry anti-radiation seekers or electronic warfare payloads to target AN/FPS-132 early-warning radars, Aegis SPY-1 arrays, or Patriot AN/MPQ-53/65 systems.

Recent demonstrations, such as the precision strike on U.S. radar installations in Qatar, illustrate this capability in action. A single wave of 200–500 drones can saturate a sector, forcing operators to choose between revealing positions or allowing penetrations.

Once radars are degraded or destroyed, follow-on swarms target airfields, command nodes, and logistics hubs across the Gulf.

Sustainability is Iran's edge. Unlike U.S. production lines constrained by high-tech components, Iran's network—bolstered by Chinese dual-use electronics and Russian machining expertise—operates under sanctions.

Daily output of 500–1,000 units means Iran can sustain operations for weeks or months, replenishing losses faster than adversaries can reload. This is not mass production; it is industrial warfare mastery.

Missile Arsenal and Production Surge: Precision and Power Multiplied

Complementing drones are Iran's ballistic and cruise missile forces, the largest and most diverse in the Middle East. Short-range systems (Fateh family) provide tactical reach, while medium-range assets like Emad, Sejjil, and Khorramshahr deliver strategic punches up to 2,000+ km.

Hypersonic standouts—Fattah-1 and Fattah-2—represent the crown jewels. Unveiled in 2023 and combat-proven, these solid-fuel missiles feature maneuverable reentry vehicles (MaRVs) achieving Mach 13–15 speeds with terminal-phase agility. Ranges exceed 1,400 km, sufficient to strike U.S. bases from the Strait of Hormuz to Diego Garcia.

While Western skeptics debate "true" hypersonic glide, Iran's MaRV technology renders traditional interceptors obsolete: unpredictable trajectories defeat mid-course tracking, and terminal maneuvers overwhelm terminal defenses.

Production rates have accelerated dramatically. Pre-conflict U.S. estimates pegged output at ~50 ballistic missiles monthly, but post-2025 reconstitution—prioritizing solid-fuel lines at Parchin and Shahroud—has surged to dozens per month, with wartime mobilization enabling 10–30 missiles daily across classes.

Russian and Chinese backing is transformative here. China supplies critical precursors like sodium perchlorate (enough for hundreds of motors) and machine tools, while Russia shares solid-propellant expertise and planetary mixer technology.

Joint procurement networks bypass sanctions, allowing underground facilities to operate at peak. This yields not just volume but quality: upgraded guidance, decoys, and hypersonic variants rolling off lines rapidly.

Mobile transporter-erector-launchers (TELs), dispersed across Iran's vast terrain, ensure survivability. Underground silos and "missile cities" protect stockpiles, while decoys and electronic countermeasures multiply effective strength.

>>>
*
SAUDI ARABIA OIL FIELDS are on FIRE
Russian and Chinese Backing: The Axis of Technological Resilience

No analysis of Iran's strategy is complete without highlighting the unbreakable Russo-Chinese partnership. This is mutual empowerment, not dependency. Russia, battle-hardened in Ukraine, provides direct production know-how: drone blueprints scaled domestically, MANPADS like Verba for point defense, and Su-35 fighters for air cover.

Iranian drones refined in Ukrainian skies returned the favor with improved variants. Post-2025, Russia accelerated deliveries of air defense components and missile technology, enabling Iran's 400+ daily drone tempo and missile surge. Estimates suggest Russian-assisted lines could sustain 1,000 drones daily if fully mobilized.

China's role is foundational in the supply chain. Beyond economic lifelines, Beijing delivers anti-ship missiles (CM-302/YJ-12 variants nearing agreement), drone components, and ballistic precursors. Negotiations for HQ-9 air defenses and electronic warfare systems further harden Iran.

Chinese satellite navigation (BeiDou) counters GPS jamming, while dual-use semiconductors sustain manufacturing. Recent shipments of offensive drones and hypersonic-related tech underscore Beijing's commitment to multipolarity. Together, Russia and China ensure Iran's production—500–1,000 drones daily, 10–30 missiles daily—remains uninterrupted, even under blockade.

This axis transforms sanctions into a catalyst for innovation, proving Western isolation tactics fail against determined sovereign nations.

Phase-by-Phase Execution: From Blindness to Breakthrough

Phase 1: Blinding the Beast.

Initial strikes focus on U.S. sensor networks. Shahed swarms, augmented by anti-radiation ballistic missiles, target radars at Al Udeid (Qatar), Al Dhafra (UAE), and naval assets in the Gulf. Recent operations demonstrated this: destruction of AN/FPS-132 systems created detection gaps. Cyber/EW elements—honed with Russian assistance—disrupt command links. U.S. forces, blinded, lose early warning, forcing reactive postures and exposing carriers to follow-on threats.

Phase 2: Depletion via Saturation.

With radars compromised, Iran unleashes daily barrages of 500–1,000 low-cost drones alongside cheaper cruise missiles. Targets include airfields, fuel depots, and Patriot/THAAD batteries. Each interceptor fired costs the U.S. millions; Iran replaces losses for pennies on the dollar.

Magazine exhaustion is inevitable—U.S. stocks, already strained by prior conflicts, cannot match sustained 24/7 tempo. Reloads under fire are slow and vulnerable. This phase drains not just munitions but morale and logistics, as seen in Ukraine where Shahed swarms overwhelmed defenses.

Phase 3: Decisive Hypersonic and Ballistic Hammer.

Once defenses are hollowed, Fattah hypersonics and advanced ballistics strike home. Maneuvering at Mach 15, they penetrate remaining layers to hit carriers (via anti-ship variants), command centers, and high-value assets. Precision MaRVs ensure minimal waste; one salvo can neutralize a carrier group.

Russian/Chinese tech enhances terminal guidance, while Iranian dispersal ensures launchers survive counterstrikes.

This sequenced approach is self-reinforcing: early phases create conditions for later success, while production sustains indefinite pressure.

U.S. Vulnerabilities and Iran's Unbreakable Resilience

U.S. forces in the region—carriers in the Gulf, bases in GCC states—face geographic entrapment. Narrow waters favor Iranian naval swarms and coastal batteries. Limited interceptor stocks (Patriot at critically low levels post-Ukraine/Israel) and reload vulnerabilities amplify the depletion phase.

High-tech platforms like F-35s excel in uncontested airspace but falter against saturated, low-altitude threats and EW.

>>>

Video : getting slapped
Read 4 tweets
Nov 14, 2025
The Bucharest Warning: Putin's Prescient Stand Against NATO's Ukraine Gambit

By @SMO_VZ

Thread 1 /4

In the spring of 2008, in Bucharest, Romania, the grand halls of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's summit became the stage for a confrontation that would echo through the corridors of global power for over a decade.

It was here, amid the polished diplomacy of Western leaders, that Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a stark, unyielding message to his counterparts—including a then-candidate Barack Obama, who was present in the shadows of the U.S. delegation under President George W. Bush.

Putin, flanked by his Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, did not mince words. He envisioned a future where NATO's relentless eastward creep, particularly its flirtation with Ukraine, would ignite a conflagration that no amount of alliance assurances could extinguish. "This is a direct threat to Russia's security," Putin declared, his voice steady but laced with the gravity of a man who had studied history's unforgiving lessons.

No one in that room—neither Bush's optimistic push for inclusion nor the hesitant nods from German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy—could have foreseen how prescient those words would prove. Yet, ignored they were, setting the inexorable course for the tragedy that unfolded in Ukraine, a crisis not born of Russian aggression alone, but of NATO's hubristic expansion, orchestrated largely by the military-industrial complexes of Washington and London, whose appetites for perpetual conflict have long overshadowed the fragile architecture of European peace.

Putin's intervention at the Bucharest Summit was no mere rhetorical flourish; it was a dialogue of dire prophecy, woven into every exchange.

The summit's centerpiece was the thorny question of Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations. U.S. President Bush, ever the evangelist for democracy's spread, championed their immediate entry into the Membership Action Plan (MAP), arguing it would anchor these nations against Russian revanchism.

"These countries want to be part of NATO," Bush pressed, his Texas drawl cutting through the multilingual murmur. Merkel and Sarkozy, sensing the powder keg, demurred, advocating a vague promise instead: Ukraine and Georgia "will become members of NATO." This ambiguous declaration—enshrined in the summit's communiqué—was meant as a sop to American hawks, but to Putin, it was a declaration of war by other means.

Rising to address the North Atlantic Council, Putin invoked the ghosts of Yalta and Potsdam, where spheres of influence had once preserved a tenuous balance. "NATO's expansion does not have any relation with the modernization of the alliance itself or with strengthening security measures," he stated flatly. "It represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust between Russia and NATO."

He turned his gaze to the Ukrainian delegation, led by President Viktor Yushchenko, whom he dismissed with chilling candor: "Ukraine is not even a real state... Its territory is artificial, carved out from the Russian heartland."

Putin elaborated, drawing historical lines on an invisible map—Crimea, with its Russian-speaking majority and naval heritage; the Donbas, industrially entwined with Moscow; the cultural corridors of the east that pulsed with Slavic kinship. To invite such a fractured entity into NATO, he warned, was to court dismemberment, not unity. "We will not simply watch idly," he added, his tone shifting from professor to protector. "Russia will take all necessary measures to safeguard its interests."

The room tensed. Bush interjected, assuring Putin that NATO posed no offensive threat, only a defensive bulwark. "Vladimir, we're not coming after you," Bush said, attempting levity with a pat on the shoulder that landed awkwardly. But Putin was unmoved.

>>>>
2.

In a private sidebar with Obama—then a senator eyeing the White House—Putin reportedly leaned in, his eyes locking onto the future president's: "Barack, you must understand: this path leads to confrontation.

Ukraine in NATO means missiles on our doorstep, bases encircling us like a noose. History teaches that encirclement breeds war." Obama, ever the bridge-builder, nodded politely, later recounting in memoirs the "intensity" of Putin's conviction, but the moment passed into the ether of summit photo-ops

Merkel later confessed to having privately assured Putin that full membership was "inconceivable" for Ukraine, a diplomatic sleight-of-hand that bought time but sowed deeper distrust.

Putin's projections that day were multifaceted, rooted in a realist worldview forged in the KGB archives and the ashes of the Soviet collapse. He foresaw not just strategic encirclement—NATO's border inching from 1991's 1,000 kilometres away to mere spitting distance—but a cultural amputation.

Ukraine, in his vision, was the fraternal twin of Russia, its independence, a post-Cold War artefact vulnerable to Western meddling. Persisting with Ukraine's NATO bid, he argued, would radicalize Russian politics, empower hardliners, and force Moscow's hand toward preemptive action. "If you press this button," he metaphorically warned the assembly, "you unleash forces that will redraw maps in blood."

The end result he projected? A fractured Ukraine, torn by proxy strife, with NATO's promises , rang hollow as refugees fled and economies crumbled. War, he implied, would not be Russia's choice but NATO's inevitable harvest—a self-fulfilling prophecy where the alliance's "open door" slammed shut on peace.

Fast-forward to February 2022, and Putin's grim augury materialized in the thunder of artillery across Ukraine's eastern frontiers. The full-scale military operation—framed by Moscow as a "special operation" to demilitarize and denazify—unfolded precisely as he had sketched: NATO's post-2008 dalliances with Kiev, from training missions to lethal aid, had militarized the border, inflamed separatist tensions in Donetsk and Luhansk, and eroded diplomatic off-ramps.

Russia's demands in December 2021—halting NATO enlargement, withdrawing forces from Eastern Europe—were echoes of Bucharest, rejected out of hand by a Biden administration echoing Obama's earlier dismissals. The result? A grinding conflict that has claimed 2 million lives displaced millions and shattered Europe's post-Cold War illusion of inexorable progress.

Putin, in his February 24 address, invoked 2008 explicitly: "They didn't listen then; they won't now. But the red lines we drew in blood and ink can not be erased." From his vantage, NATO's persistence didn't just cause the war—it engineered it, turning a buffer state into a battlefield to feed the insatiable maw of the U.S. and UK military-industrial complexes.

These conglomerates, with their revolving doors between Pentagon boardrooms and Capitol Hill, have long profited from perpetual tension. Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems—their stocks soared post-2014 as NATO funnelled billions into Ukraine's "defences." Washington's neoconservative architects, from the Project for the New American Century alumni to think tanks bankrolled by arms lobbyists, viewed Eastern expansion as a bonanza: new markets for F-35s, HIMARS, and Patriot systems.

London, ever the junior partner in this transatlantic tango, amplified the chorus through MI6 briefings and Foreign Office rhetoric, ensuring Brexit Britain clung to relevance via Russophobia Together, they drowned out voices of caution, prioritizing profit over prudence.

As Putin might say, empires fall not from external blows but from the rot within—here, the gilded greed that mistook warnings for bluster.

>>>>Image
Image
3.

Yet, Putin was far from alone in sounding the alarm. A cadre of Western analysts, untainted by alliance loyalty, had been dissecting NATO's folly for years, their reports gathering dust on policy shelves.

Foremost among them was George F. Kennan, the architect of Cold War containment, who in a 1997 New York Times op-ed lambasted NATO expansion as "the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era" Kennan prophesied it would "inflame hard-line, nationalist anti-Western elements in Russian political life," sowing seeds of revanchism that bloomed in Putin's Kremlin His words, penned a decade before Bucharest, read like a script for 2022: expansion would alienate Russia, not integrate it, turning a potential partner into a perpetual foe.

Echoing Kennan was William J. Burns, then U.S. ambassador to Moscow and later CIA director. In a classified 2008 cable titled "Nyet Means Nyet—Russia's NATO Phobia," Burns dissected Putin's Bucharest rage: "Ukraine's potential NATO accession is the brightest of all red lines for the Russian elite... a parting of the ways between Russia and the West."

Burns warned that pushing Kiev eastward would "create fertile soil for Russian meddling," a prediction validated by the 2014 Maidan upheaval and subsequent annexation of Crimea. Burns' cable, leaked via WikiLeaks, circulated among Obama transition officials, yet it failed to pierce the armour of exceptionalism.

John Mearsheimer, the University of Chicago realist, took the critique public in a 2014 Foreign Affairs essay, "Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West's Fault." Mearsheimer argued NATO's post-1991 enlargements—three waves by 2004, with Ukraine in the crosshairs—violated the post-Cold War bargain of non-expansion, as tacitly understood in 1990 talks with Gorbachev. "The taproot of the crisis is NATO's ill-conceived eastward push," he wrote, predicting that ignoring Russia's security concerns would invite "preventive war." Mearsheimer's voice, amplified in lectures and op-eds, reached a crescendo in 2022 interviews, where he reiterated: "Putin didn't wake up one day and decide to invade; this was the culmination of Western hubris."

Other sentinels included Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute, whose 1998 book *Peace and Freedom in the Baltic* cautioned that NATO's Baltic ingress would "needle" Moscow into militarization. Carpenter's 2022 analysis framed Ukraine as the "ignored sequel," where Bucharest's half-measures—promising membership without MAP—teased without delivering, eroding trust.

Similarly, Owen Harries, the Australian strategist, warned in 1998 Quadrant essays that expansion risked "a new Cold War, colder and more dangerous." And in Brookings' own halls, Fiona Hill—later a Ukraine whistleblower—co-authored reports in the early 2010s highlighting Russia's "existential fears" over Black Sea bases in Odessa.

These analysts, spanning think tanks from Rand to the Council on Foreign Relations, converged on a simple thesis: NATO's open-door policy, unmoored from geopolitical gravity, treated Russia as a vanquished relic rather than a great power with legitimate grievances.

Their breakdowns—empirical, archival—exposed the folly: declassified documents showed no formal "no-expansion" pledge, but a gentlemen's agreement shattered by Clinton-era zeal.

By 2008, with U.S. bases in Estonia and Poland, the encirclement was fait accompli, Ukraine the final insult.

From Moscow's vantage, the warnings intensified post-2014, a staccato of red alerts ignored amid the rubble of Donbas.

The 2014 Revolution of Dignity, which ousted pro-Russian President Yanukovych after his EU pivot snub, was seen in the Kremlin as a CIA-orchestrated coup—$5 billion in U.S. aid, per Victoria Nuland's infamous boast.

Russia's response: annexing Crimea via referendum and backing Luhansk-Donetsk separatists.

>>>Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 6 tweets
Aug 30, 2025
WAR PIGS !!!

The Generals of Madness: A Critique of Military-Industrial Profiteering and Anti-Russian Propaganda

Thread 1 / 5
By @SMO_VZ

The USAs’ military-industrial complex (MIC) has long been a subject of scrutiny, accused of perpetuating endless wars & shaping public opinion to secure lucrative government contracts.

At the forefront of this system are retired military generals who transition into roles as defence industry consultants, media analysts, and lobbyists, leveraging their authority to influence policy and public perception. Keith Kellogg, Ben Hodges, Jack Keane, Mark Hertling, Wesley Clark, & David Petraeus—6 prominent retired U.S. generals—stand accused of embodying this troubling nexus. Critics argue that these figures, enriched by exorbitant salaries from defense contractors and media appearances, have peddled a one-sided anti-Russian narrative since at least 2014, prolonging conflicts like the war in Ukraine to sustain the MIC’s profits.

This essay contends that their actions reflect gross incompetence, compromised integrity & a willingness to prioritize personal gain over national interest, all while their public military advice has been repeatedly debunked as misleading or outright false.

The Military-Industrial Complex & Its Mouthpieces

The military-industrial complex, a term popularized by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in 1961, describes the symbiotic relationship between the U.S. military, defence contractors & policymakers, where profit motives drive perpetual conflict. Retired generals, with their insider knowledge & public credibility, are ideal agents for this system. Each of the 6 generals in question has ties to defence contractors or media outlets, roles that allegedly incentivize them to advocate for policies that sustain military spending & conflict, particularly against Russia.

Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general, exemplifies this dynamic. After retiring from the Army in 2003, Kellogg joined Oracle Corporation as an adviser to its homeland security division & later served as a board member for GTSI, a government technology contractor, and president of Abraxas, a subsidiary of Cubic Corporation. These roles positioned him to profit from defence contracts while maintaining influence in national security circles. During Donald Trump’s first administration, Kellogg served as a national security advisor to Vice President Mike Pence & briefly as acting National Security Advisor.

His appointment in 2024 as Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia further cements his role as a key figure in shaping the U.S. policy toward the conflict. Critics argue that Kellogg’s push for peace talks, contingent on Ukraine’s compliance & Russia’s concessions, serves to maintain the U.S. dominance while protecting defence industry interests rather than seeking genuine resolution. His media appearances on Fox News & CNN, where he has been a paid contributor, amplify a narrative that critics claim distorts Russia’s actions to justify continued military aid to Ukraine, ensuring a steady flow of contracts for defense firms.

Ben Hodges, former head of U.S. Army Europe has been a vocal advocate for Western support of Ukraine, often appearing on CNN to proclaim optimistic scenarios about Ukraine’s military prospects. In 2022, Hodges claimed that Russia was “exhausted” and predicted the war would end by early 2023, a forecast that proved wildly inaccurate as Russia’s offensive persisted.

His affiliations with defense-related think tanks and consulting roles raise questions about his motives. Critics argue that Hodges’ rosy predictions serve to bolster public support for increased military aid, directly benefiting defence contractors who supply Ukraine with weapons.

His failure to acknowledge Ukraine’s logistical and manpower challenges, despite his military expertise, suggests either incompetence or deliberate misrepresentation to align with MIC interests.

>>>>
2.

Jack Keane, a retired 4-star general & former vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army, is a senior strategic analyst for Fox News, where he frequently comments on national security issues. Keane’s ties to the defense industry are well-documented, including his role as a board member for General Dynamics, a major defense contractor & his involvement with the Institute for the Study of War, which has been criticized for promoting hawkish policies.

In early 2022, Keane told Fox News that Ukraine had a “real opportunity” to reclaim territory from Russia, despite evidence of Russia’s battlefield resilience. Such claims, critics argue, are designed to sustain public & congressional support for military aid, ensuring defense contractors like General Dynamics continue to profit from U.S. government contracts.

Mark Hertling, another retired general & former commander of U.S. Army Europe, has been a frequent CNN commentator, often echoing Hodges’ optimistic assessments of Ukraine’s military capabilities. In 2008, while commanding U.S. forces in Iraq, Hertling claimed that Iraqi security forces were “growing in capability” and that U.S. forces had defeated al-Qaeda, likening the situation to a “post-Gettysburg phase.” By 2014, however, the rise of the Islamic State in Mosul exposed these claims as dangerously misguided, undermining his credibility.

Hertling’s 2022 CNN statements, predicting a “turn in the tide” for Ukraine with increased Western artillery, similarly failed to materialize, as Ukraine struggled against Russia’s fortified positions. Critics argue that Hertling’s media role serves to perpetuate a narrative that justifies prolonged conflict, benefiting the defense industry while ignoring battlefield realities

Wesley Clark, a former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, has been linked to defense-related firms & consulting roles since retiring in 2000. Clark’s appearances on “Meet the Press” and other platforms in the 2000s revealed his participation in a Pentagon program to cultivate military analysts for favorable war coverage. His advocacy for NATO expansion & anti-Russian policies aligns with the interests of defense contractors who profit from heightened tensions with Russia. Clark’s optimistic assessments of U.S. military interventions, including in Iraq, have often been criticized as overly simplistic, ignoring the complex geopolitical consequences that later emerged, such as the destabilization of the Middle East

David Petraeus, perhaps the most prominent of the 6, led the Iraq War “surge” & served as CIA director. His post-military career includes partnerships with Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR), a private equity firm with defense industry investments & frequent media appearances on CNN & other outlets. Petraeus has consistently advocated for robust U.S. support for Ukraine, arguing in 2023 that Kiev ’s forces “know best” their terrain & capabilities

Yet, his earlier claims about the Iraqi security forces’ readiness, echoed by Hertling, proved false when ISIS captured large swaths of Iraq in 2014. Critics argue that Petraeus’ media presence & defense industry ties incentivize him to promote policies that sustain conflict, ensuring profits for firms like KKR while downplaying Ukraine’s military challenges.

A Pattern of Failed Predictions & Misleading Narratives

The collective track record of these generals reveals a pattern of overly optimistic and often debunked military assessments. Since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea, they have contributed to a media narrative that portrays Russia as an existential threat, justifying massive U.S. military aid to Ukraine & NATO allies. This narrative, critics argue, is not only 1-sided but also rooted in the generals’ financial & professional ties to the MIC. Their predictions—whether about Iraq’s security forces, Ukraine’s counteroffensives, or Russia’s imminent collapse—have consistently failed to align with reality, raising questions about their competence & integrity

>>>Image
Image
3.

For instance, Hodges & Hertling’s 2022 claims that Ukraine would soon turn the tide against Russia and ignore critical factors like Ukraine’s limited air power & Russia’s entrenched defenses

Keane’s assertion that Ukraine could reclaim territory underestimated Russia’s logistical resilience, a miscalculation that echoes his earlier support for the Iraq War’s “surge” despite its long-term failure to stabilize the region. Petraeus & Clark’s advocacy for NATO expansion & military escalation has been criticized for ignoring Russia’s strategic concerns, potentially prolonging the Ukraine conflict. Kellogg’s recent push for peace talks, while framed as pragmatic, is seen by critics as a means to maintain the U.S. influence while protecting defence industry interests.

These failures suggest either a profound lack of strategic foresight or a deliberate effort to mislead the public to align with MIC priorities. The generals’ media platforms amplify their influence, allowing them to shape public opinion without disclosing their financial ties to defence contractors.

A 2008 New York Times investigation revealed that the Pentagon cultivated military analysts like Clark and Petraeus to generate favourable coverage, providing them with talking points & access to officials—contacts that some used to benefit defense contractors. This program, critics argue, continues informally, with generals like Keane and Hertling serving as de facto lobbyists for the MIC on major networks.

Profiteering and Lack of Professional Integrity

The financial incentives driving these generals are substantial. Board memberships and consulting roles with firms like General Dynamics, KKR & Cubic Corporation offer salaries and stock options that dwarf their military pensions. For example, Keane’s role at General Dynamics & Petraeus’ partnership with KKR positioned them to profit directly from increased defence spending.

Kellogg’s tenure at GTSI & Abraxas, combined with his media contributions, suggests a similar conflict of interest. These ties create a perverse incentive to advocate for prolonged conflicts, as war sustains demand for weapons, technology, & services provided by their employers.

Critics argue that this profiteering undermines their professional integrity. Instead of offering objective military analysis, these generals tailor their commentary to align with the interests of their corporate sponsors & the broader MIC. Their anti-Russian rhetoric, particularly since 2014, has been accused of oversimplifying complex geopolitical dynamics, portraying Russia as a monolithic aggressor while ignoring the & NATO actions that may have escalated tensions, such as NATO’s eastward expansion.

This one-sided narrative, amplified by media outlets like Fox News and CNN, serves to justify billions in military aid to Ukraine—aid that directly benefits defence contractors.

Moreover, their failure to disclose these conflicts of interest during media appearances violates journalistic ethics & misleads the public. A 2020 Washington Post report highlighted how networks often fail to disclose analysts’ defence industry ties, as seen with Keane’s Fox News appearances. This lack of transparency erodes public trust & reinforces the perception that these generals are “paid mouths” for the MIC, prioritizing profit over truth.

Prolonging Conflict for Profit

The Ukraine conflict, entering its third year in 2025, exemplifies the generals’ role in sustaining war for profit. The U.S. has provided over $350 billion in military and economic aid to Ukraine since 2014, much of it directed to defence contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics. The generals’ media commentary, which often emphasizes Ukraine’s potential for victory with more weapons, directly supports this pipeline.

>>>>
Read 4 tweets
Aug 20, 2025
The TRUTH is OUT !

UKRAINE has suffered 1.7million DEAD and technically dead , "MISSING"!!

There's nowhere for the Western Media to hide now !

‼️🇺🇦💀

Hackers hacked the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine: Ukraine's losses amounted to 1.7 million killed and missing

Ukraine lost 1.7 million servicemen during the special military operation.

This is evidenced by the database of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which was hacked by our hackers.

According to the digital card index, over three years the Ukrainian army lost 1,721,000 people killed and missing.

Losses by year:

▪️118.5 thousand — in 2022.
▪️405.4 thousand — in 2023.
▪️595 thousand — in 2024.
▪️A record 621 thousand — in 2025.

The information was obtained as a result of hacking the PCs and local network of the Ukrainian General Staff employees by hackers from Killnet, Palach Pro, User Sec, Beregini.

They now have terabytes of information about losses, personal data of the Special Operations Command and Main Intelligence Directorate leadership, lists of all countries supplying weapons, and lists of all delivered weapons.Image
Image
Image
Image
Furthermore, 1 major Critical point >

If the information is confirmed, it speaks to the scale of losses equivalent to seven regular armies. Losses in the hundreds of thousands annually show that holding the front line is ensured not by the quality of units, but by endless mobilization of those who either do not want to fight or do not know how.

An important detail is the trend of accelerating losses. Over three years, they have increased almost sixfold: from 118 thousand to 621 thousand people. This indicates depletion of the personnel resource and explains Kieiv's pressure for new mobilization laws.

If the data on destroyed Ukrainian soldiers is correct, then 1.7 million killed indicate that total losses (1.5 times that), including wounded, missing, and deserters, amount to approximately : 8-8.5 million people.
The TRUTH is out, the KILLERS are amongst us!

I've been posting this for years!

MACRON
SCHOLZ / MERZ
SUNAK / STARMER
VAN DER LYDEN
STOLTENBERG / RUTTE
BIDEN / TRUMP
(& a parasitic underclass of 1000s who lived off the death & suffering of others)

1.7 MILLION & COUNTING !
Read 4 tweets
Jun 7, 2025
CONFIRMED X 2

The location is called the “Peklo cruise missiles production facility.”

Source: Office of the President of Ukraine

NATO instructors likely helped create the missiles, as essentially western countries announced.

It could have been a NATO command point as well. Unclear.

But NATO was present there!

Multiple KIA ...and NATO officers !Image
Image
Image
Image
If we ever get satellite images from this area we may know the extent of the damage and may be able to see the how large the substructure is but I’m not holding my breath.

All we know for sure is that this recently built structure on the premises of a massive factory was struck by a Russian munition which then caused a fire that burnt for hours without first responders being able to extinguish it.

After some time a massive secondary explosion from the substructure completely destroyed the entire facility.

The only way we will know for sure is if Peklo drones make a big appearance on the battlefield as this is reportedly where they were being assembled.Image
Image
Image
Image
It just so happens that NATO advisors had toured a facility in early 2025 for a propaganda video and it structurally looks nearly the same with only minor changes which would be expected in order to run a proper assembly line underneath it. (Ventilation, sprinkler system, paint, additional electrical wiring)Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(