two officials discussed matters of mutual interest during the meeting, according to an official statement.
The post Saudi minister, CDF Asim Munir discuss bilateral cooperation appeared first on BOL News.
di Matteo Forlani
Per oltre diciassette secoli il suo nome rimase sepolto in un campo dell’Oxfordshire. A riportarlo alla luce, nell’aprile del 2003, fu il segnale di un metal detector.
Brian Malin stava esplorando un terreno nei pressi di Chalgrove, a meno di sedici chilometri da Oxford, quando lo strumento reagì a qualcosa nascosto fra trenta e sessanta centimetri di profondità. Per lui non era un luogo qualunque: nel 1989, appena trenta metri più in là, insieme al fratello Ian aveva già trovato 4.145 monete romane chiuse in due vasi.
Il nuovo recipiente, modellato in una ceramica grigia di produzione locale, sembrava la continuazione di quella scoperta. I due depositi avevano dimensioni e composizione simili; entrambi terminavano con emissioni di Probo del 278-279. Jérôme Mairat ha proposto che appartenessero alla stessa persona, forse qualcuno che aveva preferito dividere i propri risparmi in nascondigli separati. Non possiamo sapere chi fosse né perché non tornò a recuperarli. Resta però difficile considerare casuale la presenza di due fortune quasi gemelle nello stesso campo.
Dentro il secondo vaso c’erano 4.957 monete coniate fra il 251 e il 279. Erano quasi tutte monete radiate di lega povera, rese più brillanti da un velo d’argento ormai in gran parte scomparso. Sette su dieci provenivano dall’Impero delle Gallie; le altre dalle officine controllate dagli imperatori di Roma. Chi aveva raccolto quel denaro, insomma, usava senza distinzione le valute dei due poteri che si contendevano l’Occidente romano.
Quando venne estratto dal terreno, il tesoro non aveva l’aspetto di una cascata di monete. La corrosione aveva saldato i pezzi fra loro e alle pareti del contenitore, formando un blocco compatto. Il vaso arrivò intatto all’Ashmolean Museum e fu poi affidato ai restauratori del British Museum. Per mesi, acqua tiepida e alcol sciolsero il terreno, mentre ultrasuoni e solventi rimossero le incrostazioni. Ogni esemplare venne separato, asciugato, stabilizzato e protetto. Fu un lavoro lento, quasi una seconda esplorazione del tesoro. All’inizio del 2004, da quella massa indistinta comparve un volto che non avrebbe dovuto esserci.
Il pezzo era ben battuto e mostrava pochissimi segni d’usura. Sul diritto si vedeva il busto barbuto di un uomo con la corona radiata, il mantello e la corazza. Intorno al ritratto correva la legenda:
Per esteso significava Imperator Caesar Domitianus Pius Felix Augustus. Il nome era quello di Domiziano, ma non dell’imperatore flavio assassinato nel 96. Lo stile del ritratto e il tipo monetale appartenevano alla seconda metà del III secolo. Gli studiosi lo chiamano Domiziano II soltanto per distinguerlo dal sovrano vissuto quasi duecento anni prima.
Non bastava a raccontare un regno, ma bastava a dimostrare una pretesa. Un uomo chiamato Domitianus aveva assunto il titolo di Augusto, ottenuto l’appoggio necessario per usare una zecca e fatto incidere il proprio nome sul denaro. Le cronache lo avevano dimenticato; il metallo no.
La scoperta di Chalgrove aveva però un precedente. Il 28 novembre 1900, durante alcuni lavori in un vigneto di Les Cléons, presso Nantes, era emerso un ripostiglio di 1.456 radiati. Fra le monete di Gordiano III, Aureliano e Tetrico ce n’era una intestata a Domiziano. La notizia fu pubblicata l’anno seguente. Proprio l’eccezionalità del ritrovamento, tuttavia, finì per renderlo sospetto.
Nel 1929 l’esemplare entrò nelle collezioni del Musée Dobrée. Poi se ne persero le tracce fra i depositi del museo e per decenni rimase accessibile soltanto attraverso fotografie, disegni e un calco in gesso riprodotto nel Roman Imperial Coinage. Il numismatico Lodovico Laffranchi lo interpretò come una moneta di Tetrico ritoccata; Lawrence Okamura riassunse i dubbi nel titolo di uno studio del 1992, Forging a Usurper in Late Roman Aquitania.
La moneta ricomparve nel 1996 e fu portata a Parigi per essere pulita ed esaminata. Il risultato incrinò l’ipotesi del falso: le lettere di DOMITIANVS erano incorporate in prodotti di corrosione antichi. Nessun falsario moderno poteva averle reincise sopra una legenda precedente senza alterare quelle incrostazioni. Anche il ritratto, pur vicino ai modelli di Vittorino e Tetrico, mostrava caratteristiche proprie.
Poi il presunto falso trovò il proprio gemello.
L’antoniniano inglese era identico per conio a quello di Cléons e persino un poco meglio impresso. Coincidevano il profilo del volto, la posizione delle lettere e le irregolarità più minute. I conii antichi erano incisi a mano: due monete che condividono gli stessi piccoli difetti provengono dalla medesima coppia di matrici, come fogli stampati dallo stesso torchio.
A chiudere la discussione fu soprattutto il contesto. Il nuovo pezzo era ancora saldato a un deposito romano intatto, in mezzo a migliaia di emissioni comuni recuperate in condizioni documentate. Nessuno avrebbe potuto introdurlo in quella massa di corrosione. Domiziano continuava a non avere una biografia, ma da quel momento ebbe un’esistenza storica.
Il momento in cui Domiziano tentò la fortuna era uno dei più confusi della storia romana. Nel 260 l’imperatore Valeriano era caduto prigioniero del re sasanide Sapore I. Suo figlio Gallieno si ritrovò solo al comando di un impero attaccato su più fronti e attraversato dalle rivolte degli eserciti.
In Occidente le truppe acclamarono il generale Postumo, che diede forma a quello che oggi chiamiamo Impero delle Gallie. Comprendeva la Gallia e la Britannia, per qualche tempo anche la Hispania. Il nome può trarre in inganno: non era uno Stato nazionale staccatosi da Roma. Postumo e i suoi successori si consideravano imperatori romani, nominavano consoli e governatori, proteggevano le frontiere e battevano moneta come qualunque altro Augusto.
Postumo riuscì a governare per quasi dieci anni. Nel 269 sconfisse il rivale Leliano, ma vietò ai soldati di saccheggiare Magonza e fu ucciso dai suoi stessi uomini. Gli succedette Mario, rimasto al potere per poche settimane o pochi mesi, quindi Vittorino. Nella primavera del 271 anche Vittorino morì assassinato. Per la terza volta in meno di due anni, il trono gallico era disponibile.
Secondo una tradizione tarda e non del tutto affidabile, Victoria, madre di Vittorino, usò denaro e influenza per favorire Tetrico, allora governatore in Aquitania. Ma un imperatore non poteva imporsi nello stesso istante da una provincia all’altra. Nel tempo necessario a Tetrico per raccogliere consensi, guarnigioni e officine monetarie potevano scegliere altri candidati.
Fu con ogni probabilità in quel vuoto che Domiziano fece la sua mossa.
Le monete lo collocano come un concorrente di Tetrico alla guida dell’Impero delle Gallie, non come il sovrano di un regno britannico e neppure come un avversario in grado di minacciare direttamente Aureliano. La città in cui fu proclamato e i reparti che lo sostennero restano sconosciuti. Il suo tentativo, però, superò il fragore di un’acclamazione militare: arrivò fino a un’officina monetaria.
Per battere denaro servivano incisori, metallo, tondelli, incudini, martelli e maestranze abituate a lavorare in serie. Domiziano controllò quell’organizzazione almeno per il tempo necessario a preparare due conii e avviare la produzione. Non era dunque soltanto un nome gridato dai soldati: uomini, strumenti e metallo erano stati messi al servizio della sua candidatura.
Il pezzo di Chalgrove è un antoniniano di 22 millimetri e 2,07 grammi. La corona radiata indossata dal sovrano identifica la denominazione. Il colore attuale è quello del bronzo, ma all’origine una sottile argentatura copriva la lega povera e faceva apparire la moneta assai più preziosa di quanto fosse davvero.
Dal ritratto non ricaveremo il vero volto di Domiziano. Barba, sguardo fermo, mantello e corazza appartenevano al repertorio con cui gli incisori costruivano l’immagine di un imperatore. Eppure non si limitarono a cambiare il nome su un modello di Tetrico. Il diritto venne preparato appositamente per Domiziano, e il rovescio fu inciso per la stessa emissione. Anche un potere destinato a durare pochissimo volle dunque un’immagine propria.
Sul rovescio compare Concordia, con la coppa delle libagioni in una mano e una cornucopia nell’altra. La legenda CONCORDIA MILITVM significa «la concordia dei soldati». Nessun messaggio poteva essere più opportuno. In un’epoca in cui gli imperatori salivano al potere sulle spalle delle legioni e spesso morivano per mano delle stesse truppe, Domiziano presentava l’esercito come compatto attorno a lui. Forse descriveva una realtà momentanea; forse esprimeva soltanto un desiderio.
I conii conservano anche una traccia del disordine di quei mesi. Il diritto sembra opera dell’incisore legato alla cosiddetta officina II; il rovescio ricorda invece la mano attiva nell’officina I e anticipa alcune monete di Tetrico. Una matrice, o forse lo stesso artigiano, potrebbe essersi spostata fra le due zecche durante la crisi. Persino la sede della coniazione è ancora discussa: il catalogo dell’Ashmolean indica Colonia, mentre MER-RIC assegna l’emissione a Treviri. Sono divergenze che raccontano quanto poco conosciamo ancora dell’organizzazione delle zecche galliche.
Quei piccoli dischi erano il mezzo di comunicazione più capillare di cui disponesse un sovrano. Entravano nelle paghe, passavano di mano nei mercati e viaggiavano insieme agli eserciti. Il ritratto annunciava chi comandava, i titoli ne proclamavano l’autorità e il rovescio spiegava su quale sostegno diceva di fondarsi. Domiziano parlò lo stesso linguaggio degli imperatori che lo avevano preceduto.
I due esemplari sicuramente autentici provengono dalla stessa coppia di conii, un indizio forte di una produzione limitata. Non significa che fossero le uniche matrici: altre monete possono essere state ritirate, rifuse o perdute. Per questo i «quattro giorni di regno» spesso attribuiti a Domiziano sono una formula giornalistica senza fondamento. Possiamo dire che la sua occasione durò poco, non contare i giorni.
Il ritrovamento inglese non prova che Domiziano governasse la Britannia. Il vaso fu sepolto negli anni Ottanta del III secolo, anni dopo l’emissione. L’antoniniano ebbe tempo per attraversare la Manica: documenta il viaggio della moneta, non i confini del suo potere.
Una volta accertata l’esistenza di Domiziano, restava da capire chi fosse. Le fonti antiche offrono due possibili tracce, entrambe troppo incerte per trasformarsi in un’identità.
La Historia Augusta attribuisce la vittoria sui Macriani nel 261 a Domitianus, «il più valoroso e attivo» dei comandanti di Aureolo. Aggiunge che si diceva discendente dell’imperatore Domiziano e di Domitilla. Se quel comandante fosse l’uomo delle monete, il tentativo del 271 sarebbe l’ultima tappa di una carriera militare lunga almeno dieci anni, non il gesto improvviso di uno sconosciuto.
La fonte, però, impone prudenza. La Historia Augusta mescola documenti, errori e personaggi inventati ed è stata composta molto tempo dopo i fatti. La discendenza dalla dinastia flavia assomiglia a una genealogia costruita per nobilitare il protagonista. Il racconto può custodire un dato autentico, ma non basta a sovrapporre con sicurezza il generale e il pretendente.
All’inizio del VI secolo Zosimo ricordò invece Epitimio, Urbano e Domiziano come innovatori rapidamente arrestati e puniti durante il regno di Aureliano. Non disse dove avessero agito, quali truppe li sostenessero o quale autorità avessero sfidato. Nome e cronologia possono adattarsi all’usurpatore gallico; la certezza, ancora una volta, resta fuori portata.
La sua fine resta completamente oscura. Potrebbe essere caduto combattendo Tetrico, essere stato abbandonato dalle truppe o essere sopravvissuto abbastanza da subire la punizione di Aureliano. Quando Tetrico consolidò il potere, il rivale era già scomparso dalla scena. Tre anni più tardi anche l’Impero delle Gallie cessò di esistere e le province occidentali tornarono sotto Roma.
Persino il numero ordinale «II» appartiene alla storiografia moderna. Sulle monete compare soltanto DOMITIANVS e nessun contemporaneo lo chiamò «secondo». Un possibile terzo antoniniano proveniente dalla regione bulgara di Vidin è stato attribuito allo stesso pretendente, ma stile, dimensioni e rovescio sono diversi. Finché l’attribuzione resterà discussa, la sua storia continuerà a poggiare sui due esemplari di Cléons e Chalgrove.
Uno rimase dimenticato nel deposito di un museo. L’altro trascorse oltre diciassette secoli dentro un vaso, confuso fra migliaia di pezzi corrosi. Insieme conservano ciò che gli storici antichi non raccontarono: nel 271 un uomo assunse il titolo di Augusto, riuscì per breve tempo a servirsi di una zecca e cercò di prendere il controllo dell’Impero delle Gallie.
Il suo potere scomparve quasi subito. Le due monete sopravvissero abbastanza a lungo da restituirgli un posto nella storia.
L'articolo Domiziano II: l’imperatore romano restituito alla storia da due monete su Vanilla Magazine scritto da Arianna Mecozzi
Una stretta monetaria energica può riportare stabilmente l’inflazione all’obiettivo solo se il bilancio pubblico è in grado di assorbirne il costo. Altrimenti la disinflazione perde credibilità e i rendimenti a lungo termine segnalano il rischio di una sbandata.
L'articolo L’autobus della politica monetaria e le cinture fiscali proviene da Lavoce.info.
Negli ultimi anni c’è stata una ricalibratura del nostro welfare, malgrado il crescente peso elettorale degli anziani. Sono diminuite le spese in sanità, mentre sono cresciute quelle dirette ai giovani, per esempio per famiglia ed esclusione sociale.
L'articolo Sorpresa: la spesa sociale per gli anziani è in calo proviene da Lavoce.info.
Talks focus on agriculture, water resources, food security and investment.
The post Pakistan, Saudi Arabia look to expand economic partnership appeared first on BOL News.
On 26 August, Romania received its first payment of €2.5 billion under the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) defence instrument, representing 15% of its total allocation of €16.7 billion.
SAFE is a €150 billion financial instrument providing loans to member states. It primarily funds joint procurement of ammunition, missiles, air defence, and ground combat systems produced within the EU. It is part of the European Commission's ReArm Europe/Readiness 2030 plan, which aims to unlock over €800 billion in defence investment across the European Union.
The pre-financing will help Romania accelerate priority defence investments, strengthen resilience, and modernise its military capabilities in line with shared European goals. SAFE is designed to enable swift, co-ordinated action, improve the ability of European forces to work together, and strengthen Europe's defence industry, including through joint procurement and closer cross-border co-operation.
Defence and Space Commissioner Andrius Kubilius (pictured) said: "Today's €2.5 billion payment to Romania under SAFE is a major milestone for European defence and a more sovereign Europe. This funding will strengthen Romania's defence capabilities and industrial base, while contributing to Europe's overall security. SAFE is a clear demonstration of our strong commitment to European security, and to the resilience and to defence of our Eastern Flank."
This payment follows the completion of all required procedural steps and reflects the EU's commitment to providing timely, practical support through SAFE. Further payments will follow, as agreed milestones and implementation are met.
The SAFE instrument is financed by EU borrowing on the financial markets. This enables competitively priced and attractively structured long-duration loans to requesting Member States. The terms of the SAFE loans benefit from the EU's strong credit rating.
The appointment follows the SDF’s move to integrate its fighters into Syria’s national army.
The post Syria appoints Mazloum Abdi as presidential adviser appeared first on BOL News.
“The Strait of Hormuz cannot be separated from the broader regional conflict,” Rezaei said.
The post Iran links Hormuz Strait reopening to end of Mideast wars appeared first on BOL News.
By Gordon Duff for TID Iceland and the Russian Academy of Sciences
All links to previous Gospa News invetigation have been added in the aftermath
Let’s start with a simple question: What happens when you spend a trillion dollars building a shield, and the other guy builds a spear that goes right through it?
This isn’t a hypothetical. It’s 2026. And the answer is: you panic. Or you pretend it isn’t happening. Or you double down on the same policies that got you here and hope nobody notices.
America has chosen option three.
There’s a submarine out there. Actually, there are several. But one in particular — the Belgorod — has been the subject of more nervous whispering in Pentagon hallways than just about anything else. It’s a special-purpose submarine, which is military-speak for “we don’t really know what it does, but we’re pretty sure we don’t like it.”
It carries six Poseidon torpedoes. Each one, according to Russian sources, carries a 200-megaton nuclear warhead. That’s 1.2 gigatons of explosive power sitting on one submarine. For comparison, the entire world’s nuclear arsenal during the Cold War peaked at around 70,000 warheads with a combined yield of roughly 18,000 megatons.
The Belgorod carries six percent of that total destructive power on a single hull. Western analysts have spent years trying to talk this down. “Maybe it’s only 50 megatons.” “Maybe it’s just a test vehicle.” “Maybe the Russians are bluffing.”
Maybe. And maybe the moon is made of cheese.
The Soviet Union built a 100-megaton warhead in 1961 and detonated half of it just to prove they could. They scaled it down to 50 megatons because the bomber couldn’t carry the full version. The technology isn’t the problem. The engineering isn’t the problem. The only question was whether they wanted to build it. They did. They have. End of story.
But here’s where it gets interesting — and by “interesting,” I mean terrifying.
The Poseidon isn’t designed to destroy a city. It’s designed to destroy a coastline. The 200-megaton warhead isn’t for blast damage. It’s for the wave. A detonation of that size underwater, close to a coastal target, generates a tsunami measured in hundreds of feet. Not tens of feet. Hundreds.
You don’t need to hit New York. You need to hit fifty miles off the coast of New York. The wave does the rest. New York Harbor is gone. The ports are gone. The financial district is underwater. The same applies to Los Angeles, to Miami, to Norfolk — any coastal city with strategic importance.
This isn’t science fiction. It’s the stated purpose of the weapon. Russia has been remarkably straightforward about this. They built it to make coastal defenses irrelevant. And you know what? They’re right.
Six Poseidon torpedoes. Six coastal targets. One submarine.
The Belgorod reportedly left its base in the White Sea in October 2022. NATO lost track of it. It turned up later in the Barents Sea, surfaced, and waved hello. But in between? Nobody knows. That’s the point. A submarine designed to operate at depths over 1,000 meters, with a nuclear reactor that gives it effectively unlimited range, carrying six weapons that can end life as we know it on a continental scale
And what did America do? The CIA Director flew to Moscow and apparently had a chat. No meeting with Putin. Just a chat with the security services. “Please don’t do anything reckless,” presumably.
The Russians must have nodded politely and thought: “We have six Poseidons. What exactly are you going to do about it?”
Now let’s talk about speed. Specifically, 13,000 miles per hour.
That’s the reported speed of Russia’s hypersonic weapons. The Avangard glide vehicle. The Zircon cruise missile. The Kinzhal air-launched system. All of them travel at speeds that make interception functionally impossible.
Here’s why. Missile defense systems work on a very simple principle: detect, track, predict, intercept. You detect the missile. You track its trajectory. You calculate where it’s going to be. You launch an interceptor to meet it there.
This requires the target to follow a predictable path. A ballistic missile does that. It goes up, it goes down, and the math is straightforward. Hypersonic glide vehicles do not do that. They maneuver. They change direction. They change altitude. They zig. They zag. And they do all of this at 13,000 miles per hour.
Let me put that in perspective. A bullet from a high-powered rifle travels at around 2,000 miles per hour. A hypersonic weapon travels at six times that speed. By the time your radar detects it, tracks it, and computes an intercept trajectory, the weapon has already changed course three times. The intercept solution you computed is worthless. And there’s no time to compute a new one.
The math simply doesn’t work. You cannot intercept a maneuvering target at 13,000 miles per hour with current technology. You can’t do it with future technology, either, unless you invent something that breaks the laws of physics.
Now, the Pentagon has issued confident statements about being “on track” to develop anti-hypersonic defenses. They’ve awarded billions in contracts. They’ve held press conferences. They’ve assured Congress that the problem is being addressed.
This is what we call in the journalism trade: a comforting lie.
The people who run these programs know the truth. The physics is the physics. You can’t cheat it. You can throw money at it, and you can promise results, but at the end of the day, you’re trying to hit a bullet with a faster bullet, except the first bullet is actively dodging. Good luck with that.
And here’s the part that keeps strategic planners awake at night. Russia isn’t the only country developing these systems. China has them. North Korea has them. Iran has demonstrated hypersonic capabilities that Western analysts initially dismissed — until they saw the footage. Then they stopped dismissing it.
The Chinese AJX002 underwater drone is essentially a Poseidon clone. North Korea’s “Haeil” system does exactly what the Poseidon does, on a smaller scale. Iran’s hypersonic missile test in 2024 reportedly achieved speeds of over Mach 15 with terminal maneuvering.
The old rules of missile defense are dead. They just haven’t been buried yet.
Every country that develops these systems is making a simple calculation: we can’t match the United States in conventional military power. But we don’t need to. We just need one or two of these weapons. One is enough. One gets through, and the game changes.
And the United States cannot stop them. It cannot intercept them. It cannot defend against them. All it can do is promise retaliation. But retaliation against whom? The submarine that launched the Poseidon is already gone. The hypersonic missile came from a truck on a highway somewhere in a country the size of Iran. Good luck finding it. Good luck bombing it.
This is the new strategic reality. America’s missile defense shield — the one that cost a trillion dollars, the one that was supposed to make the nation safe — is effectively useless. It works against old technology. It does not work against new technology. It’s like building a castle wall to defend against arrows, while the enemy shows up with cannons.
Now we get to the part that nobody in Washington wants to discuss honestly.
Since 2022, the United States has provided tens of billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine. Tanks. Artillery. Air defense systems. Missiles. Intelligence. Training. Logistics. All of it aimed at one goal: weakening Russia.
This is not an unreasonable policy. From America’s perspective, it makes perfect sense. Weaken a strategic rival without putting American boots on the ground. It’s cheap. It’s effective. It’s the kind of warfare the United States has been practicing for decades.
Here’s the problem: Russia is a nuclear power. And Russia is not Afghanistan. It’s not Iraq. It’s not Syria. It’s a country with 5,000 nuclear warheads, hypersonic weapons, Poseidon torpedoes, and a military doctrine that explicitly allows nuclear first-use in response to existential threats.
Ukraine has been conducting strikes inside Russian territory. Long-range drones hitting air bases. Missiles hitting infrastructure. Sabotage operations. Attacks on Russian border regions. These are not incidental. They are part of the Ukrainian war plan. And the United States has provided the intelligence and the weapons to make them possible.
From Russia’s perspective, this is not “helping Ukraine defend itself.” This is the United States arming a proxy to conduct attacks on Russian soil. This is an existential threat. And Russia has stated, repeatedly, that they will respond to existential threats with nuclear weapons.
This is not a bluff. This is not a negotiation tactic. This is Russian doctrine.
America’s conventional military forces are struggling. It’s an open secret that the Pentagon doesn’t discuss publicly, but the numbers don’t lie.
The defense industrial base in the United States is atrophied. The factories that produced tanks, artillery shells, and missiles in vast quantities during the Cold War are largely gone. Defense contractors prioritize high-tech, high-profit systems like fighter jets and stealth bombers. They don’t make conventional artillery shells in sufficient quantity.
They don’t make armored vehicles quickly. They don’t have the surge capacity for a major war.
The Army is struggling to meet recruitment goals. The Navy’s shipbuilding capacity is at a historic low. The Air Force is trying to field a new generation of fighters while maintaining an aging fleet. The logistics tail is enormous.
The cost of doing business is astronomical.
Meanwhile, Russia has put its economy on a war footing. Production of artillery shells is three times what it was before the war. Tank production has been restarted. Missile production continues around the clock. The Russian military is in the process of learning from its mistakes in Ukraine and rebuilding accordingly. And Russian air defenses — despite the criticism they’ve received from Western analysts — are actually quite effective. Russian sources claim their air defense systems are 25 times more effective than anything the United States fields. That’s probably an exaggeration. But not by as much as you’d hope.
Now imagine a conventional conflict between the United States and Russia. Not a nuclear exchange. Just a conventional war. Where is America going to get the ammunition? The spare parts? The replacement vehicles? The surge capacity? The answer is: it won’t. The supply chains are gone. The factories are gone. The workforce is gone.
And Russia knows this. Russia also knows that America’s only credible response to a conventional defeat would be nuclear escalation. And Russia has the systems to survive that escalation and retaliate. The Poseidon. The Avangard.
The Zircon. The Sarmat. The air defenses. This is not a fair fight. This is not a contest that America can win.
Now we come to the current American president. Donald Trump. A man who has built his political career on negotiating from what he calls “strength.” A man who threatens, cajoles, blusters, and insists he can make deals that nobody else can make. A man who genuinely believes that his personal relationships with foreign leaders can overcome strategic realities.
The problem is, strategic reality doesn’t care about relationships. It doesn’t care about deal-making. It doesn’t care about bluster.
Trump has threatened Russia with military force. He has said he would “destroy” the Russian economy. He has suggested that America’s missile defenses are so effective that Russia should be intimidated. He has mocked Putin publicly. He has talked about the strength of the American military as if it were 1990 instead of 2026.
And the Russians are watching. They’re watching the American military struggle with recruitment. They’re watching the defense industrial base struggle to produce shells. They’re watching the missile defense system fail again and again in tests. They’re watching the hypersonic weapons that America has been promising for years remain stubbornly in development, while Russia’s systems are already deployed.
From Moscow’s perspective, Trump’s bluster is empty. It’s noise. It’s the sound of a man who doesn’t understand the strategic reality he’s confronting. And the Russians are patient. They’ve been patient for decades. They can wait out another American presidency. They can wait out the political cycle. They’ve been playing this game a long time.
But here’s the danger: Trump is not rational. Or rather, he’s rational in a way that’s unpredictable. He might actually believe his own threats. He might actually think he can bluff his way to victory. And bluffing against a country with a 200-megaton Poseidon torpedo is not a winning strategy.
Americans, by and large, don’t understand how Russians think. They assume that Russians want what Americans want. Peace. Prosperity. Freedom. Democracy. They assume that trade and engagement will eventually win the day.
They assume that economic pressure will force Russia to change its behavior.
This is all wrong. Russians have a fundamentally different worldview. They have been invaded three times in the last two hundred years by European armies. They have suffered tens of millions of casualties. They have starved. They have been betrayed by allies. They have been encircled, threatened, and pushed to the brink. And they have survived.
The Russian mindset is survivalist. It’s existential. Russians don’t think in terms of “winning.” They think in terms of “not losing.” They don’t care about prosperity if it comes at the cost of security. They will endure hardship, poverty, and sacrifice, because they have done it before. And when they are threatened, they respond with overwhelming force.
PUTIN: The Powerful, Winning CHRISTIAN! A Great Statesman among Devilish Clowns of NWO-NATO’s Circus
This is what America doesn’t understand. When Russia says “this is an existential threat,” they mean it. When they say “we have red lines,” they mean it. When they say “we will use nuclear weapons if necessary,” they mean it. It’s not a game. It’s not a negotiation tactic. It’s survival.
And America keeps pushing. Every shipment of weapons to Ukraine. Every intelligence assist. Every drone strike on Russian soil. Every threat from Donald Trump. It’s pushing the Russians closer to the edge. And the Russians have weapons that America cannot stop.
The Poseidon Deployment Question: Have They Already Done It?
Now we come to the question that nobody in Washington wants to ask: Has Russia already deployed Poseidon torpedoes off America’s coasts?
There’s no way to know. That’s the whole point of the system. It operates at depths of over 1,000 meters. It’s virtually silent. It has unlimited endurance. It could sit off the coast of New York or Los Angeles or Miami for months, waiting. It could move into position and wait for the order. And nobody would know.
The Belgorod has been out of sight. NATO has lost track of it multiple times. Russian naval exercises have been conducted in unpredictable patterns. The United States claims to know where Russia’s submarines are. The United States has claimed this for decades. And Russia’s submarines have managed to show up in surprising places — including the Atlantic coast — on multiple occasions.
If a Poseidon is already off the coast of the United States, there is no defense against it. There is no way to detect it. There is no way to intercept it. There is no way to stop it. The only thing that stops it is a Russian decision not to detonate it.
And that’s the point. That’s the strategic reality. The United States cannot defend against a Poseidon. It cannot threaten Russia into disarming the Poseidon. It cannot negotiate away the Poseidon. It can only hope that Russia doesn’t use it.
And Russia is watching American behavior. They are watching the threats. They are watching the arming of Ukraine. They are watching the attacks on Russian territory. They are watching Donald Trump. And they are asking themselves: How long can we tolerate this before we need to prove our capability?
I am a policy advisor, not a journalist. But the truth is the truth, and the truth needs to be told.
The United States should stop threatening Russia. It should stop arming Ukraine with weapons that can strike Russian territory. It should stop pretending that its missile defense system actually works. It should stop talking about “winning” a confrontation with a country that has weapons America cannot stop.
Instead, the United States should talk. Seriously. Quietly. Without cameras. Without bluster. Without threats. It should acknowledge that Russia has legitimate security concerns. It should acknowledge that Russia’s red lines are real. It should acknowledge that America’s conventional military power is less formidable than it appears.
And it should negotiate. A deal. A settlement. A strategic pause. Something that gives Russia an off-ramp and gives America a chance to rebuild its military capacity without pushing the world to the brink.
Because right now, the United States is doing the opposite. It’s threatening. It’s provoking. It’s pretending. And Russia is watching, quietly, with six Poseidon torpedoes, hypersonic glide vehicles, nuclear cruise missiles, and the patience of a people who have survived everything history has thrown at them.
This is not a column about Russia being virtuous. Russia is not a nice country. It’s authoritarian. It’s aggressive. It has done terrible things in Ukraine and elsewhere. The United States has plenty of legitimate grievances.
But grievances don’t matter when a 200-megaton torpedo is sitting off your coast. Right and wrong don’t matter.
What matters is survival. And survival requires a clear-eyed understanding of reality.
The reality is this: the United States cannot defend against Russia’s newest weapons. It cannot stop a Poseidon. It cannot intercept an Avangard. It cannot track a Zircon. It has bankrupted itself on a missile defense system that doesn’t work against the threats that actually exist. And it has provoked a nuclear power to the point where that nuclear power is starting to ask very hard questions about its own survival.
This is not a lecture. This is not a threat. This is a warning. Written by a journalist. For average readers. Because someone needs to say it clearly, without jargon, without political bias, without comforting lies.
The United States is pushing toward a confrontation it cannot win. The clock is ticking. And the only thing worse than admitting that reality is pretending it isn’t true until it’s too late.
By Gordon Duff for TID Iceland and the Russian Academy of Sciences
America’s elders need more places to live, but even in liberal enclaves that recognize the problem, developers are facing fierce foes: America’s elders. Make it make sense! Charley Locke reports from her hometown of Oakland, California, where boomers are organizing against two proposals that would add 618 market-rate residential units to the city’s senior housing stock:
Many in the crowd had been marching against governmental and corporate overreach for half a century: against the Vietnam draft and the invasion of Iraq; against Wall Street; against police brutality. They’re part of a generational force that’s antiestablishment and suspicious of power. But in this fight, it wasn’t so clear who the establishment was or who had the power. Were these righteous middle-class activists fending off greedy developers who would charge high rents, or were they wealthy seniors prioritizing neighborhood character over ameliorating the housing crisis? Were they once again David, or had they become Goliath?
Entre reis, cavaleiros, artesãos, músicos e personagens de outros tempos, Castro Marim vive, até 30 de agosto, mais uma edição dos Dias Medievais. A vila algarvia volta a transformar-se num cenário de outros séculos, numa das maiores recriações históricas da região.
Por estes dias, caminhar pelas ruas de Castro Marim é fazer uma viagem no tempo. As roupas contemporâneas dão lugar a túnicas, capas e armaduras, enquanto o som dos tambores, das músicas medievais e das vozes dos vendedores se mistura com o movimento de milhares de visitantes.
A 27.ª edição dos Dias Medievais de Castro Marim, que decorre entre 26 e 30 de agosto, volta a levar à vila uma atmosfera marcada pela história, pela fantasia e pela recriação de costumes e tradições de outros tempos.
O Castelo de Castro Marim assume, uma vez mais, um papel central nesta viagem ao passado. No interior das muralhas, os visitantes encontram dezenas de representações de artes e ofícios, demonstrações ao vivo, espaços de animação e diferentes recriações que procuram aproximar o público do quotidiano medieval.
Ao longo dos dias do evento, as ruas e ruelas enchem-se de personagens que parecem ter saído diretamente de um livro de História. Reis e rainhas, nobres, damas, monges, cavaleiros, artesãos, bobos e figuras ligadas ao imaginário medieval cruzam-se com os visitantes.
Um dos momentos mais aguardados são os desfiles medievais, que acontecem no primeiro e no último dia do evento. Centenas de figurantes percorrem as ruas da vila, representando diferentes grupos sociais da época, num cortejo acompanhado por músicos, malabaristas, equilibristas, bobos e outros artistas.
A participação da população ajuda a reforçar o ambiente de autenticidade. Os figurantes são convidados a respeitar determinadas regras de indumentária e a representar diferentes estratos sociais, desde o povo à nobreza, passando pelo clero, homens de armas, cavaleiros e personagens de inspiração árabe.
Os combates e torneios a cavalo são também uma das imagens de marca dos Dias Medievais. Entre demonstrações de destreza e momentos de animação, os cavaleiros contribuem para recriar o ambiente dos grandes espetáculos medievais.
A feira dá ainda destaque ao artesanato e às antigas profissões, permitindo aos visitantes observar demonstrações de diferentes artes e ofícios. A par da componente histórica, o evento aposta igualmente na gastronomia, com tabernas, produtos tradicionais e os já conhecidos Banquetes Medievais, realizados no ambiente do castelo e acompanhados por música, dança, acrobacia e falcoaria.
Também as famílias encontram diversas propostas de animação, com atividades infantis, espetáculos de rua, acampamentos temáticos e outras iniciativas pensadas para aproximar os mais novos da história de uma forma lúdica e participativa.
É ao final da tarde que Castro Marim ganha uma nova dimensão. Com a abertura do mercado medieval, as ruas começam a encher-se e a animação prolonga-se pela noite dentro.
Nos dias 26 e 27 de agosto, o mercado funciona até às 02h00, enquanto nos dias 28 e 29 encerra às 02h30. No último dia, 30 de agosto, abre mais cedo, às 16h00, e mantém-se até às 02h30. O espaço do castelo funciona, nos primeiros quatro dias, das 18h00 à meia-noite, encerrando à meia-noite também no dia 30, com a última subida prevista para as 23h30.
É neste ambiente noturno, iluminado e povoado por personagens históricas, que muitos visitantes encontram um dos momentos mais marcantes da experiência. A fronteira entre o presente e o passado parece, por algumas horas, desaparecer.
Mais do que uma feira temática, os Dias Medievais afirmam-se como um acontecimento cultural com forte ligação à identidade de Castro Marim. A recriação histórica permite valorizar o património local, divulgar antigas artes e ofícios e criar um espaço de encontro entre a comunidade, os visitantes e a própria história da vila.
A organização descreve o evento como um dos grandes destaques da agenda cultural algarvia, capaz de atrair visitantes nacionais e estrangeiros e de transformar o centro da localidade num verdadeiro palco vivo da Idade Média.
Durante cinco dias, Castro Marim deixa de ser apenas uma vila do Algarve e transforma-se numa viagem. Uma viagem feita de espadas e armaduras, música e dança, artesanato e gastronomia, história e fantasia.
E, quando a noite cai sobre o castelo, entre tochas, sons medievais e o movimento dos visitantes, a sensação é de que o passado não está assim tão distante.
Login