Lavrov war & peace

Lavrov & Tucker

Lavrov did his interview with Tucker Carlson, which was much talked about on the Internet.

But there was nothing new in that interview. It was just a reiteration of things said many times before.

So why was it -is it - important?

Because of course the public have not been listening.

Why Tucker matters?

And also it's Tucker Carlson !

Now taken as a beacon of truth -- as the "legacy" media discredit themselves more and more.MSNBC hate him. Fox hate him. CNN loathe him. He therefore has excellent credentials and Americans will pay attention to anything he says. IF they pay attention - they might begin to think. IF they do that — maybe we will see a teeny, weeny bit of change in the United States of Ambivalence.

For the record, I am never quite sure what to make of Carlson --he's a 21st Century conservative--which means that he is all over the map --anti-immigration, anti-abortion-- somewhere between economic libertarian and protectionist, once a registered Democrat, (he had his reasons), now a Republican-- clearly a nationalist, if not an "Americanist". He’s a gun nut too from youth. Oh and he believes in “free speech”.

He's a "rabid" China hawk says Branko Marcetic for Jacobin .

No matter—a lot of Americans think he is the voice of “reason”. Naturally, one always has to wonder what the American public’s idea of “reason” is!

Shall we just say he is an American original.

Why Lavrov matters

Lavrov is also an original — without a doubt the most talented diplomat of any country of almost any era. Who could rival him?

But I wish he didn’t smoke.

Is it because he thinks we are going to die in nuclear war anyway?

But what did he say in his talk to Carlson?

For “news” try China

The interview is interesting to listen to - -but long— and it’s easy to get lost.

However, Xinhua sums this interview up accurately and succinctly, unlike the Western Press.

MOSCOW, Dec. 6 (Xinhua) -- Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has warned of nuclear escalation risks in Ukraine, reaffirming that Russia remains open to dialogue.

In an interview video released Friday by American reporter Tucker Carlson on social media platform X, Lavrov discussed Russia-U.S. relations, the Ukraine crisis, and the broader geopolitical landscape.

Lavrov expressed grave concerns over certain rhetoric by some officials in the Pentagon and NATO about potential limited nuclear strikes on Russia without getting U.S. territories involved in nuclear conflicts, emphasizing that any such actions could spiral into uncontrollable escalation.

The foreign minister said "Russia's military doctrine says that the most important thing is to avoid a nuclear war," and referred to the Joint Statement of the leaders of the five Nuclear-Weapon States in January 2022, which stated that "a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought."

He reiterated Russia's long-standing opposition to NATO's eastward expansion, blaming the West for ignoring Russia's security concerns.

Lavrov urged U.S. policymakers to abandon the so-called "rules-based order" that prioritizes U.S. dominance over multilateralism.

Russia remains open to dialogue under equitable terms, he added.

It was a long interview, in which Lavrov repeated Russia’s reasons for the SMO, and the dangers of the West’s illusions of a limited nuclear war in Europe to destroy Russia.

When “limited’ has consequences

The implication is that there is no such thing as a “limited” nuclear” battlefield war.

“Limited” or not the dangers are very real indeed.

KInd of like sex where the guy says: I’ll only put in a little. The girl still gets pregnant.

Average changes in maize yield in the five years following a nuclear war between Pakistan and India. (Adapted from Jägermeyr et al., 2020)

A study from Princeton University indicates global disaster — looking at a nuclear war triggered by just one low-yield nuclear weapon.

34.1 million people could die, and another 57.4 million could be injured, within the first few hours of the start of a nuclear war between Russia and the United States triggered by one low-yield nuclear weapon, according to a new simulation by researcher’s at Princeton‘s Science and Global Security programme.

Of course there are other studies that say different things. You’ll find lots of them if you google a little.

Scenarios

In the case of battlefield attack in Europe using multiple tactical nukes , American, French, and British nuclear weapons, would likely be destroyed by Russian hypersonic weapons, before they finished warming up. A major coordinated operation is hard to prepare and harder to hide.

Of course, that could lead to further escalation — which could mean strikes on the continental US.

None of this is certain. One thing IS certain however—MAD is dead. “Assured destruction” is no longer “mutual”.

A nuclear attack in Europe would be like a sucker punch.

Sucker punches only work if your opponent doesn’t expect them. If they know it’s coming — YOU are in trouble! And the Russians are prepared. You have a fist. They have a baseball bat. They are not suckers.

In a street fight, however, it is best to do as little damage as possible to avoid…y’know… unforeseen but inevitable consequences.

Preventing Escalation?

To prevent escalation, the Russians might launch a massive hypersonic missile attack using Avangard fired from Western Russia— and, fired from Eastern Russia, Oreshnik systems targeting the East Coast and Pacific Bases.

My guess is they would avoid a nuclear strike and use conventional weapons— if they had enough hypersonic weaponry. They don’t want nuclear fallout affecting grain sales. And they still want their grandkids to visit Disneyland.

Avangard can hit any site in the US –a MACH 27. Just 15 minutes to the US from Russia, with multiple warheads.

The US has not countermeasures for any of the stuff above.

Russian submarines off the coast, could also launch MACH 10 Zircon hypersonic missiles.

Obviously, using submarine launches, the Russians could destroy the government in Washington, the Pentagon, and those underground bunkers in minutes, decapitating the government and military command before they even started their PowerPoint Presentations and certainly before the President could find his nuclear keys.

Minuteman ICBMs are conveniently located on just 3 bases.

American nuclear armed submarines would be a bigger problem for the Russians.

So….decapitation

So a Russian offshore submarine decapitation strike would have to be done fast to prevent American submarines from getting firing orders.

Russian submarines offshore of the Eastern seaboard could destroy American command centers in less time than it takes to take an elevator down from the Oval Office to the bunker below—which would also be destroyed.

Ask yourself —do the Americans have a death wish?

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh…..

Western politicians all share one important characteristic – self-aggrandizement – and therefore self-preservation. A semi-psychopathic survivor instinct. They don’t care about YOU – but they do care about themselves.

The upshot is that maybe, just maybe… Russians can fight and win— without harming themselves. And still get to go Disneyland. Can the American fight and win— that’s a lot less likely.

Posturing made simple

So, all this talk about “limited nuclear war” is just posturing and an attempt to persuade the public that West is still in the game, Oreshnik or not. Good for podcasts and YouTube videos and so on. And all that YouTube advertising for iHERB and face cream. Just think how important the threat of war is to people who sell supplements and stuff for pimples.

The notion of “limited nuclear war” also keeps also keeps thinktanks in business, with stuff that guarantees funding from MIC companies. Not to worry Patriot missiles and their ilk can shoot down Kinzhal and Zircon missiles— although there is no actual verified cases of them ever doing that unless you accept UAF reports. Which also insist Ukraine is winning.

According to the UAF, American Patriot systems are shooting down flocks of Russian missiles in Ukraine. Why is there no electricity? Why does Kiev beg for new Patriot batteries to replace the ones knocked out by ….umm…missiles? Minor ambiguities, I guess.

You get my point.

In wars, everyone over-claims and exaggerates. Usually when they are losing.

In WWII, Americans over-claimed fighter victories over the Germans by 500 %-- in Korea – 400 %.

Nowadays, the Americans don’t’ care about “confirmation” —they just out and out lie.

In any case, Lavrov has stated the obvious.

"A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought."

That’s why the Russians have their arsenal of game-changing superweapons.

As I said, MAD is dead.

If you like my work, please spread the word — and buy a coffee for Ichi, Chappy and What’s-His-Name. Click HERE.