Analisi

Alberto Pagani· Agosto 28, 2026· 16 min di lettura

Il 18 agosto una formazione insolitamente numerosa di velivoli ha riempito i cieli della Polonia settentrionale e del Baltico, in…

Il 18 agosto una formazione insolitamente numerosa di velivoli ha riempito i cieli della Polonia settentrionale e del Baltico, in una delle più ampie e meno annunciate esercitazioni aeree condotte dalla NATO negli ultimi anni lungo il fianco orientale dell’Alleanza. Gli osservatori del traffico aereo, abituati a monitorare i movimenti militari nella regione, hanno registrato tra i venticinque e i cinquanta velivoli impegnati contemporaneamente; le autorità alleate non hanno confermato una cifra precisa, invocando ragioni di sicurezza operativa.

L’operazione, guidata dagli Stati Uniti e supervisionata dal comando aereo alleato, ha avuto come teatro l’area compresa tra la Polonia e Kaliningrad, l’exclave russa incuneata tra il territorio polacco e quello lituano: settantacinque chilometri di costa fortemente militarizzata, sede della Flotta del Baltico, di sistemi missilistici Iskander a capacità nucleare e di una fitta rete di difese antiaeree S-400. Per capire perché la NATO abbia scelto di misurarsi proprio con questo lembo di terra, e proprio in queste settimane, occorre allargare lo sguardo oltre la cronaca del 18 agosto: la logica che oggi governa Kaliningrad affonda in una storia molto più lunga di quella della crisi in corso.¹

Una città che la storia ha già messo alla prova

Prima di essere un problema militare, Kaliningrad è un problema storico, e vale la pena ricordarlo per misurare la distanza fra ciò che quella terra ha rappresentato e ciò che è diventata. Fondata nel 1255 dai cavalieri dell’Ordine Teutonico con il nome di Königsberg, la città fu per secoli capitale culturale e amministrativa della Prussia orientale. Vi nacque nel 1724 e vi trascorse l’intera esistenza, senza mai allontanarsene in modo significativo, Immanuel Kant: il filosofo che nel 1795 scrisse “Per la pace perpetua”, il progetto filosofico di un ordine internazionale fondato sul diritto e non sulla forza. Che proprio quella città sia oggi teatro di un’esercitazione concepita per dimostrare la capacità di neutralizzarne militarmente il potenziale offensivo è una delle ironie più amare che la geografia politica europea potesse riservare.

A Königsberg è legato anche uno degli episodi fondativi della matematica moderna: il problema dei sette ponti, posto dagli abitanti della città e risolto nel 1736 da Leonhard Euler, che dimostrò l’impossibilità di attraversarli tutti senza mai ripercorrere lo stesso ponte due volte. Da quella dimostrazione nacque la teoria dei grafi, la disciplina matematica che studia le reti di nodi e connessioni e che, quasi tre secoli più tardi, costituisce il fondamento teorico con cui si modellano le reti di comunicazione, le infrastrutture critiche e, non ultimo, lo spettro elettromagnetico che la guerra elettronica moderna è chiamata a saturare. Una coincidenza che la storia sembra aver voluto sottolineare: la città che pose le basi teoriche della scienza delle reti è oggi, ancora una volta, al centro di un confronto che si gioca sulla capacità di controllare o interrompere una rete.

La cesura arriva con la Seconda guerra mondiale. Assediata e conquistata dall’Armata Rossa dopo una resistenza tedesca durissima, capitolata il 9 aprile 1945, Königsberg fu assegnata all’Unione Sovietica dalla Conferenza di Potsdam insieme alla porzione settentrionale della Prussia orientale. La popolazione tedesca superstite venne espulsa e sostituita con coloni provenienti da ogni angolo dell’URSS, in un’operazione di russificazione deliberata pensata per prevenire qualunque rivendicazione futura; nel 1946 la città fu ribattezzata Kaliningrad in onore di Michail Kalinin. Fu proprio Mosca, e non Vilnius, a mantenere il controllo diretto dell’oblast, respingendo negli anni Cinquanta persino una proposta di Chruščëv di cederlo alla Lituania sovietica: una scelta amministrativa che si sarebbe rivelata decisiva nel 1991, quando la disgregazione dell’URSS lasciò Kaliningrad separata dal resto della Federazione Russa, mentre un’analoga exclave prussiana, Klaipėda, seguiva le sorti della Lituania indipendente.²

La fortificazione dell’area non fu una conseguenza automatica dell’annessione, ma una scelta strategica precisa, maturata con la formazione del Patto di Varsavia nel 1955: Mosca individuò in Kaliningrad, e in particolare nel vicino porto di Baltijsk, l’unico scalo russo sul Baltico libero dai ghiacci per l’intero anno, condizione che nessun altro porto sovietico nella regione poteva garantire. Nel 1952 la città divenne sede del quartier generale della Flotta del Baltico, trasformandosi in una città chiusa, inaccessibile agli stranieri per l’intera durata della Guerra fredda. È la stessa logica idrografica, unita alla posizione proiettata in profondità nello spazio oggi controllato dalla NATO, a spiegare perché Kaliningrad resti tuttora sede dell’undicesimo corpo d’armata, di sistemi missilistici Iskander a capacità nucleare e di batterie costiere Bastion con missili antinave Oniks: la stessa concentrazione di potenza di fuoco che, settant’anni più tardi, l’esercitazione del 18 agosto ha voluto mettere alla prova.³

Il valore della base navale di Baltijsk, tuttavia, non si esaurisce nella dimensione regionale del Baltico. Va letto in relazione al disegno più ampio della militarizzazione russa dell’Artico, il cui baricentro resta la penisola di Kola, sede della Flotta del Nord e della componente sottomarina della deterrenza nucleare strategica di Mosca. Se la penisola di Kola custodisce la capacità di secondo colpo, garantendo ai sottomarini lanciamissili un bastione protetto nel mare di Barents, la Flotta del Baltico assolve una funzione complementare: presidiare il fianco occidentale, addestrare unità e testare capacità anfibie e di attacco elettronico, liberando la Flotta del Nord dal doversi occupare anche del teatro baltico. Le due aree condividono la medesima logica dottrinale del bastione fortificato, applicata su scala geografica diversa ma con lo stesso obiettivo: proteggere, attraverso l’accumulo di sistemi d’arma e la saturazione dello spazio circostante, i nodi strategici più sensibili del dispositivo militare russo. È dentro questa cornice, non accanto ad essa, che va collocata l’esercitazione NATO del 18 agosto.⁴

La logica della deterrenza: perché ora, e perché in questa forma

È la stessa logica geografica che nel Cinquecento fece di Königsberg la capitale di un ducato affacciato sul Baltico, e che nel secondo dopoguerra spinse Mosca a trasformarla in una fortezza off-limits, a spiegare perché sia proprio quel lembo di terra a tornare oggi al centro dell’attenzione strategica occidentale. Cambiano gli strumenti – non più cannoniere e divisioni corazzate, ma pod di disturbo elettronico e piattaforme di sorveglianza radar –, ma la sostanza resta la stessa: chi controlla Kaliningrad controlla un varco che nessuna delle due parti può permettersi di ignorare. Ed è dentro questa continuità storica che si inserisce, con particolare efficacia, la lettura che Gianluca Di Feo (uno dei migliori analisti e giornalisti italiani che scrivono di guerra) ha proposto su la Repubblica: la deterrenza è una disciplina complessa in cui diplomazia e forza si alternano con la massima attenzione a non superare i limiti, proprio perché il suo scopo non è vincere uno scontro, ma impedire che una crisi degeneri in un conflitto aperto.⁵

Di Feo colloca l’esercitazione dentro un precedente rimasto scolpito nella memoria degli analisti atlantici: nel novembre 2021, mentre le divisioni corazzate russe si allineavano lungo il confine ucraino, il direttore della Cia William Burns volò a Mosca per un colloquio che non riuscì a scongiurare l’invasione. Quella lezione, secondo questa lettura, non è stata dimenticata, ed è alla luce di essa che va compreso il senso più profondo del 18 agosto: non una provocazione fine a se stessa, ma quella che i manuali dottrinali dell’Alleanza definiscono una dimostrazione di determinazione – un insieme coordinato di segnali militari e diplomatici pensati per comunicare all’avversario, prima che sia troppo tardi, che ogni opzione resta sul tavolo. È una lettura che condivido, e che aiuta a spiegare perché l’esercitazione sia arrivata proprio ora: dopo settimane in cui l’intelligence occidentale, secondo la ricostruzione di Di Feo, avrebbe colto la volontà di Mosca di testare la coesione atlantica con una provocazione armata oltre i propri confini, nella convinzione che Washington non sarebbe intervenuta.

Il perché della forma scelta – la guerra elettronica anziché una dimostrazione di potenza cinetica – discende direttamente dalla natura del bersaglio. Kaliningrad, come si è visto, è dagli anni Cinquanta un bastione costruito attorno alla capacità di vedere e colpire per primi: un sistema di tipo A2/AD, Anti-Access/Area Denial, che si regge su una rete di sensori, radar e comunicazioni prima ancora che sui lanciatori missilistici veri e propri. Mostrare a Mosca di poter penetrare e accecare quella rete, anche solo per la durata di un’esercitazione, equivale a dimostrarne la vulnerabilità senza sparare un colpo: è la deterrenza per negazione applicata al teatro più esposto del fianco orientale, ed è precisamente il primo dei motivi che Di Feo individua nell’operazione del 18 agosto.

Sul piano tecnico, il centro di quella dimostrazione è stato l’EA-37B Compass Call (foto apertura), il più recente velivolo da attacco elettronico dell’aeronautica statunitense: un Gulfstream G550 pesantemente modificato, capace non solo di disturbare le frequenze radar e di comunicazione avversarie ma di mandare in tilt le strumentazioni con un bombardamento mirato di impulsi elettromagnetici. Schierato per la prima volta in questa configurazione a ridosso dell’exclave, ha operato insieme a un aereo da sorveglianza radar E-3A AWACS e a una piattaforma di ricognizione ARTEMIS II decollata da un aeroporto rumeno dopo aver sorvolato Ungheria e Slovacchia, costruendo un quadro elettromagnetico completo dell’area.⁶

Un pacchetto di questo tipo, sostenuto da un numero significativo di aerocisterne – tra cui un KC-767A dell’Aeronautica militare italiana, un KC-135R statunitense e due A330 MRTT dell’Alleanza – non è concepito per un singolo passaggio dimostrativo, ma per sostenere una permanenza prolungata sul teatro operativo. Ed è qui che il racconto di Di Feo aggiunge un dettaglio che merita di essere sottolineato: l’operazione ha reso deliberatamente visibile solo una parte del proprio dispositivo. I trasponditori delle aerocisterne e dei radar volanti sono rimasti accesi, quasi a voler essere osservati; quelli di decine di caccia, affiancati da manovre navali e corazzate, sarebbero invece rimasti spenti – il tutto senza violare in alcun momento i confini aerei, terrestri o marittimi altrui. Sul terreno, la simulazione dell’assedio si è tradotta anche in un gesto fisico e volutamente visibile: reparti polacchi hanno sbarrato le strade di accesso con cavalli di frisia, gli sbarramenti anticarro a incrocio che richiamano, non senza un certo valore simbolico, le fortificazioni di un’epoca che si credeva superata. Un’esercitazione pensata, insomma, per essere in parte vista e in parte intuita: la manifestazione più pura della logica dimostrativa di cui si è detto.

Quella lettura trova conferma anche nelle parole con cui, poche settimane prima, il generale Christopher Donahue, comandante delle forze statunitensi in Europa e Africa, aveva descritto le nuove capacità alleate: la NATO sarebbe oggi in grado di occupare Kaliningrad “in tempi mai visti prima”, aveva dichiarato, collocando l’affermazione nel quadro della nuova strategia nota come Eastern Flank Deterrence Line. L’esercitazione del 18 agosto, protrattasi secondo la ricostruzione di Di Feo fino alla notte di venerdì 21, appare come la traduzione operativa di quella dichiarazione: non un’occupazione simulata nel senso tradizionale, ma la dimostrazione che l’exclave può essere isolata dal punto di vista elettromagnetico e logistico in tempi rapidissimi, privando le forze russe ivi schierate della capacità di coordinarsi, ricevere dati bersaglio e comunicare con il resto del teatro.⁷

Resta il secondo motivo individuato da Di Feo, che riguarda la tutela del corridoio di Suwałki: la striscia di poco più di cento chilometri che collega la Polonia alla Lituania e che costituisce l’unico collegamento terrestre tra i Paesi baltici e il resto dell’Alleanza. Un’eventuale chiusura di quel corridoio, coordinata con un’azione offensiva dall’exclave, isolerebbe Estonia, Lettonia e Lituania nel giro di ore: l’esercitazione ha inviato in questo senso un avvertimento politico-militare esplicito, pensato per scoraggiare qualunque tentativo di blitz russo proprio nel punto più esposto dell’intera architettura di sicurezza del fianco orientale. E resta, infine, il terzo motivo, più immediato e meno simbolico degli altri due: testare in condizioni reali, a ridosso dei confini russi, piattaforme di guerra elettronica di ultima generazione ha permesso all’Alleanza di verificare la propria prontezza operativa e di azzerare il fattore sorpresa che il Cremlino potrebbe altrimenti sfruttare in una crisi improvvisa – un guadagno che si materializza già nell’immediato, indipendentemente da qualunque sviluppo futuro, perché i tempi di reazione delle difese russe e il coordinamento tra assetti aerei di più nazioni sono stati osservati e messi agli atti.

Se questi tre motivi spiegano il perché militare dell’operazione, è nei giorni immediatamente successivi che si è misurata la componente diplomatica della stessa logica di deterrenza – quella che, secondo Di Feo, non può mai essere disgiunta dalla forza. Il Cremlino non ha dato segni di essersi lasciato intimidire: sabato 22 agosto Vladimir Putin ha usato un’immagine volutamente inquietante, dichiarando che gli attacchi ucraini sul territorio russo avrebbero scoperchiato un “vaso di Pandora”, scelta lessicale che, in un leader abitualmente misurato nei toni pubblici, è stata letta da più osservatori come la conferma dei timori peggiori. Due giorni dopo, lunedì 24 agosto, il direttore della Cia John Ratcliffe ha attraversato l’Atlantico per atterrare a Mosca il giorno seguente e incontrare Sergej Naryškin, dal 2016 a capo del servizio segreto per l’estero Svr e figura di lunghissima fiducia di Putin.

Il contenuto del colloquio è rimasto riservato: secondo il Wall Street Journal vi sarebbe stato un avvertimento esplicito sulla protezione statunitense degli alleati da ogni aggressione, mentre altre fonti riferite da Di Feo parlano anche di un’apertura a un possibile canale di de-escalation, con l’offerta di una mediazione americana per fermare i raid ucraini contro le raffinerie in cambio della cessazione degli attacchi russi contro porti, navi e centrali elettriche ucraine – una proposta già avanzata da Zelensky in precedenza e finora respinta da Mosca con un’intensificazione, e non un’attenuazione, dei bombardamenti. È il volto diplomatico della stessa dimostrazione di determinazione che nei cieli del Baltico ha assunto la forma della guerra elettronica: due canali paralleli, militare e negoziale, tenuti aperti nello stesso momento.⁸

Su questo equilibrio pesa anche un calendario politico che la lettura di Di Feo non manca di sottolineare: mancano poco più di tre settimane alle elezioni per la Duma, e benché il partito di Putin non abbia rivali strutturati, il presidente sarebbe consapevole di un consenso in calo e, secondo questa ricostruzione, poco incline ad apparire debole proprio in questa fase. Nei giorni della crisi lo scambio di colpi tra le parti non si è fermato: missili balistici russi su Kiev in parte intercettati dai sistemi Patriot appena consegnati dagli Stati Uniti, droni ucraini contro depositi e stabilimenti in territorio russo, un missile britannico Storm Shadow contro un comando nel Donbass che ha innescato minacce di Mosca contro Londra, e una visita non programmata di Lukashenko al Cremlino che ha riacceso, nei comandi alleati, il timore di un’offensiva dal territorio bielorusso verso i Paesi baltici. I timori raccolti dall’intelligence occidentale, secondo questa ricostruzione, non riguarderebbero comunque l’impiego di testate nucleari tattiche: lo snodo resta, ancora una volta, il Baltico.⁹

Un fianco orientale sotto pressione crescente

L’esercitazione del 18 agosto e il canale diplomatico apertosi nei giorni successivi non vanno letti come un episodio a sé stante, ma come un tassello – probabilmente il più visibile, ma non l’unico – di una sequenza di attriti che negli ultimi mesi ha progressivamente eroso il margine di ambiguità lungo l’intero confine orientale dell’Alleanza. Solo due giorni dopo l’inizio del wargame, il 20 agosto, il ministero della Difesa finlandese ha denunciato la violazione del proprio spazio aereo sovrano da parte di un velivolo da ricognizione elettronica russo Ilyushin Il-20M nel golfo di Finlandia, in un corridoio aereo internazionale largo appena quindici-venti chilometri che le autorità di Helsinki ed Estonia mantengono aperto proprio per garantire i collegamenti russi verso Kaliningrad e San Pietroburgo – la stessa exclave, ancora una volta, al centro della scena.¹⁰

A ciò si sommano gli episodi, ormai ricorrenti nelle ultime settimane, di droni non identificati rilevati sopra la Polonia, la Romania e diversi scali scandinavi, che hanno costretto diverse capitali europee a rivedere le proprie regole d’ingaggio e ad alzare il livello di allerta nei cieli. Il Cremlino ha respinto ogni responsabilità diretta in questi episodi, ma il clima diplomatico tra Mosca e l’Alleanza si è comunque irrigidito su più fronti contemporaneamente: l’ambasciatore russo a Parigi ha avvertito che l’abbattimento di un velivolo russo da parte della NATO sarebbe considerato un atto di guerra, il segretario generale Mark Rutte ha ribadito che ogni centimetro del territorio alleato, spazio aereo compreso, sarà difeso, e proprio in questi stessi giorni Ratcliffe cercava a Mosca un canale che tenesse insieme fermezza e apertura al dialogo. Sono, in fondo, le due facce della stessa medaglia che dà il titolo a questa analisi: la deterrenza come equilibrio permanente, mai acquisito una volta per tutte, tra la dimostrazione di forza e la ricerca di un canale che eviti l’errore di calcolo.

Letta in questa luce, l’esercitazione del 18 agosto smette di essere un episodio isolato per diventare la chiave di lettura di un momento preciso nella relazione tra NATO e Russia: un confronto che si gioca sempre meno sul terreno degli scontri aperti e sempre più su quello della sorveglianza elettronica, della saturazione informativa e della dimostrazione di capacità – accompagnato, quando necessario, da un canale diplomatico che nessuna delle due parti ha interesse a chiudere del tutto. È il segno di una competizione che si è spostata, in larga misura, nello spettro elettromagnetico e in quello, altrettanto delicato, dei segnali politici: chi controlla la capacità di vedere, comunicare, colpire per primo e negoziare al momento giusto, in un teatro compresso come quello baltico, detiene un vantaggio che nessuna esibizione isolata di potenza convenzionale potrebbe replicare con altrettanta efficacia.

Resta da capire se Mosca interpreterà questo insieme di segnali – militari, tecnologici e diplomatici insieme – come un deterrente credibile o, al contrario, come un ulteriore pretesto per intensificare la propria pressione ibrida sul fianco orientale europeo, magari attendendo l’esito delle elezioni per la Duma prima di scoprire le proprie carte. La storia recente delle relazioni russo-atlantiche nel Baltico, e la stessa storia più lontana di Kaliningrad, suggeriscono che la seconda ipotesi non sia meno probabile della prima.

• _{1Fonti: militarnyi.com, “NATO Aircraft Conduct Large-Scale Unannounced Exercises Near Kaliningrad”, 18 agosto 2026; ilmessaggero.it, “Nato, la maxi operazione sul Baltico”, 18 agosto 2026.}
• _{2Fonti: Treccani, voce “Kaliningrad”; Aspenia Online, “Il nodo di Kaliningrad e il Baltico tra NATO e Russia”; Britannica, “Kaliningrad”.}
• _{3Fonti: Tiscali Notizie, “Kaliningrad, un porto russo al centro dell’Europa del Baltico”; Aliseo Editoriale, “Kaliningrad, il bastione russo sul Mar Baltico”; Wikipedia, voce “Flotta del Baltico”.}
• _{4Fonte: IARI, “L’Artico come bastione”, 21 luglio 2026.}
• _{5Fonte: Gianluca Di Feo, “Russia, l’assedio virtuale a Kaliningrad: così la Nato ferma Putin”, la Repubblica, 28 agosto 2026, https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2026/08/28/news/russia_assedio_virtuale_kaliningrad_nato_ferma_putin-425550845/}
• _{6Fonti: migflug.com, “NATO Massed Its Jets Right Next to Kaliningrad”, 18 agosto 2026; associazioneeuropalibera.wordpress.com, 22 agosto 2026.}
• _{7Fonte: Kyiv Independent / Defense News, “US general says NATO could seize Russia’s Kaliningrad with ‘unheard of’ speed”, 17 luglio 2026.}
• _{8Fonte: Gianluca Di Feo, la Repubblica, 28 agosto 2026, cit.}
• _{9Fonte: Gianluca Di Feo, la Repubblica, 28 agosto 2026, cit.}
• _{10Fonte: peacelink.it, “La Finlandia sospetta che un velivolo russo abbia violato il suo spazio aereo”, 20 agosto 2026}

L'articolo Kaliningrad sotto assedio virtuale: la NATO mette alla prova la propria capacità di neutralizzazione elettronica proviene da Blondet & Friends.

Leggi tutto

The attack targeting a military patrol in the Benzú area of Ceuta last night was a pre-planned ambush rather than a spontaneous clash, according to preliminary findings from the National Police. Now, military sources are speaking of soldiers who are unable to use physical force, have no weapons, and are vulnerable to such attacks in the future.

Regarding the ambush, police investigators at the scene discovered an abnormal accumulation of heavy stones that did not match the natural geology of the terrain. Police believe the projectiles were intentionally stockpiled at the location in advance, setting a trap for a vehicle or convoy passing through the area.

Images of damaged military vehicles have gone viral across social media. Multiple vehicles suffered smashed windshields and other damage in the attack.

#URGENTE | Los inmigrantes ilegales de Ceuta han atacado esta madrugada los vehículos de los militares españoles.

Este es el estado de algunos de los coches y camiones del Ejército que les ha ayudado a instalarse en polideportivos. pic.twitter.com/KnT9RU35AM

— Vito Quiles (@vitoquiles) August 27, 2026

The ambush occurred while troops from the 54th Regular Group of Ceuta were conducting routine patrol duties. Dozens of illegal immigrants ambushed the patrol vehicle with a heavy barrage of rocks. The sudden intensity of the assault severely damaged the vehicle, shattering its windows and trapping the occupants inside.

Surrounded by a high volume of projectiles, the soldiers “feared for their lives,” according to statements later provided to investigators, as reported by Spanish newspaper El Debate. Four soldiers were left injured and officials told the press that sthe all-terrain logistical vehicles were not armored and not equipped to deal with such attacks.

Marco Antonio Gómez, president of the Association of Spanish Troops and Sailors (ATME), stated that the “very serious aggression” shows “our military is helpless.”

“They go without weapons. Our colleagues had to run away to save their own lives.”

Speaking to El Debate, military sources who are directly on the ground in Ceuta say that soldiers have their “hands and feet tied.”

Although the military is working with National Police, the situation remains dangerous. The source said “they have done what is necessary and have intervened in situations in which the illegal immigrants bothered the inhabitants of Ceuta.”

A young Spanish woman is fleeing Ceuta because she no longer feels safe.

"I don't want to feel anxious every time I step outside… It seems awful to me that all this is allowed to happen and nobody can close the border or do anything."

However, she also claims that the… pic.twitter.com/o6KVfhR7p8

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) August 10, 2026

However, these military sources complain that various legal frameworks have left soldiers without weapons, and these policies also restrict soldiers from carrying out arrests and using any type of force.

Migrants may even be aware of these restrictions, empowering them to conduct ambush strikes against soldiers with near impunity.

5 migrants tried to gang rape a 12-year-old girl as she screamed for help, said locals in Ceuta who stopped the attack.

"There were five against a 12-year-old girl. She was a little girl, they were taking off her pants. She was screaming, screaming, screaming. She was… pic.twitter.com/g97pj8phUR

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) August 25, 2026

Since the attack, 12 suspects have been taken into custody at the scene by National Police’s Prevention and Reaction Unit (UPR). Some migrants reportedly tried to evade arrest by jumping into the sea. Reinforcement from the Civil Guard also helped secure the perimeter.

The Union of Military Troops (UMT) issued a statement expressing its “strong rejection and indignation,” stating they had warned about the conditions facing troops already ten days eariler.

The National Police investigation remains active as authorities work to trace all remaining individuals involved in the ambush.

The post ‘Our military is helpless’ – Migrant ambush that targeted military vehicles in Ceuta was pre-planned, claims National Police appeared first on Remix News.

Sven Hüber, the deputy federal chairman of Germany’s Police Union (GdP), has stepped down from his post with immediate effect following public scrutiny regarding his service as a political officer for East Germany’s border guards. Hüber recently made headlines for his stance against the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.

The resignation follows investigative reporting by the German media outlet Apollo News alleging that Hüber committed severe abuses at the East German border during the Cold War prior to joining the German Federal Police. The report claims that during his tenure as an SED political officer, Hüber placed a service weapon into the mouth of a captured East German refugee in the “death strip” and physically assaulted the individual while they were pinned to the ground.

Hüber vehemently denied the allegations, framing the coverage as a coordinated effort to dismantle his reputation. In a formal press statement, he characterized the reporting as “defamatory” and a “character assassination,” explaining that his resignation was intended to “avert the daily new, untenable accusations from the GdP during the necessary legal proceedings.”

The finger is also being pointed at right-wing media, with Hüber’s attorney Johannes Eisenberg stating the claims began in “right-wing extremist media and from there overflowing into well-known inflammatory media.” Eisenberg firmly maintained that his client “did not commit the misanthropic acts spread about him there,” adding that Hüber would refrain from further public comment as he prepares to challenge the outlets in court.

The GdP similarly confirmed it plans to pursue criminal and civil legal action against authors and publishers behind what it deems false accusations, targeted threats, and distorted reporting.

Hüber’s tenure at the union had already generated significant friction prior to the recent revelations.

Writing in the official GdP members’ magazine, Hüber recently urged police officers to actively counter a potential AfD administration in Saxony-Anhalt, arguing that “police officers personally take on enemies of the constitution because the oath they take stipulates the same” and asserting that an “AfD seizure of power does not release any civil servant from their oath.”

Since Hüber’s resignation, his anti-AfD article, entitled “Saying a True No,” has been scrubbed from the GdP website, according to Apollo News, but is still archived in the police union’s newsletter.

The AfD is extremely popular in that state, reaching 43 percent support of the voting population in recent polling. Recently, a mayor in the state came under fire on social media for threatening to dismiss firefighters who posed for a photograph with Ulrich Siegmund, the highly popular AfD lead candidate in the state.

Regardless of whether the claims about torture prove true or not, Hüber has his own history of reportedly making false allegations against his rivals. He previously faced backlash for attempting to block the lifetime professorship of conservative academic Stephan Maninger at the Federal Police Academy using claims that were ultimately shown to be groundless. Attorney Ralf Höcker subsequently alleged that GdP federal chairman Jochen Kopelke backed Hüber during that campaign, using union membership fees to support the effort.

The controversy triggered a wave of exits within the organization. The Mitteldeutsche Zeitung confirmed that a “low double digits” number of police officers in Saxony-Anhalt severed their union membership following the initial reports.

Hüber finalized his decision to step down following discussions with GdP federal chairman Kopelke. The union has not yet named a replacement to fill the vacant deputy chair position.

The post Anti-AfD German police union VP resigns amid allegations he tortured a man during Cold War appeared first on Remix News.

A French youth, 19-year-old Constant, was kidnapped, robbed, and beaten so badly by three suspects that he was left in a six-day coma in the hospital in 2025. Now, the case has come once more to the public’s attention after Constant described the attack on French television, including that his assailants were not speaking French when they nearly killed him.

Near dawn on April 12, 2025, 19-year-old Constant was on his way to work when three men changed his life forever. To this day, only one suspect has ever been arrested and convicted.

This French teen was kidnapped on his way to work and beaten into a 6-day coma by suspects who “did not speak French.”

19-year-old Constant, who has been an apprentice butcher since he was 15, was headed to work in Rouen at 5 a.m. when a car stopped near him. The suspects… pic.twitter.com/Y3u8y8qz2z

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) August 27, 2026

Constant was a hard-working French teenager, who had been an apprentice butcher since he was 15. Around 5:30 a.m., he left on his electric scooter for a 6:30 a.m. shift, traveling along Boulevard Jean-Jaurès in Petit-Quevilly, near Rouen. A car began following him, then cut him off and blocked the road. Occupants called for him to stop, appearing to need help or simply demanding that he approach. When a truck driver witnessed the scene and tried to intervene, the men threatened him. They forced Constant into the vehicle.

The suspects took him to Grand-Quevilly. Under threat of a knife, they demanded the PIN codes for his phone and bank card. After obtaining them, they beat him almost exclusively on his head. Family members later said the attackers “went after his head,” leaving a shoe tread mark across his face.

Once he was barely conscious, they abandoned him. In a state of shock, Constant managed to walk roughly two kilometers toward home before collapsing. His parents took him to the hospital, where he was also photographed with shoe tread marks across his face.

Constant was admitted to intensive care at CHU Rouen with a skull fracture and a subdural hematoma, then transferred to neurosurgery. Relatives described his head as massively swollen. Later accounts indicate he spent approximately six days in a coma. The attackers stole his e-scooter and phone and withdrew €1,170 from his account.

A witness had already called the police. Officers arrived at the initial scene and found no one. When family members tried to file a complaint the same day, they were told the adult victim would have to do it himself; police later opened an investigation and took his statement at the hospital.

Bank withdrawals allowed police to identify one of the three men. This suspect, who has not been named, was tried in court on Nov. 14, 2025, at the Rouen criminal court and sentenced to four years in prison with immediate detention. He was banned from contacting Constant and ordered to pay damages. He refused to name his two accomplices, who have not been arrested.

Months later, Constant appeared on France 2’s “Ça commence aujourd’hui” with Faustine Bollaert. In the clip that circulated widely in August 2026, he recounted being in the back of the car, being told not to look at the man on his right, and realizing the attackers were not speaking French.

As a result, it is clear that the attackers are not native French citizens, further highlighting the deteriorating security situation in the country due to mass immigration. Countless French youths have been the victim of foreigners over the last years, include Louis, Mégan, Thomas, Lola, and Théo, just to name a few of the victims.

The post ‘They did not speak French’ – French teen Constant finally speaks out after being kidnapped, robbed, and beaten into a 6-day coma appeared first on Remix 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.

Leggi tutto

Leggi tutto

TapNewsWire.com | Pete Fairhurst

Lionel Mandrake | Worldlyturnings | 1yfgk.substack.com

(Dollyland Media) Singer Dolly Parton just passed away, reportedly after a“brief (turbo) cancer battle.”

Dolly Parton didn’t just jab in public.  She helped funded mRNA research at Vanderbilt University to help create the CV19 Vax that has killed and maimed millions.

Did they really need her money?  Of course not.  What they needed was someone to get on camera who had millions of fans who that would do anything she said.   They are devious Satanic bastards that play on our souls though our pride.

They succeeded and Dolly paid the ultimate price.

They got her to get the shot she helped produce on camera.  They even got her to adapt one of her songs to encourage people to get their CV19 Vax.  She changed the name in her hit song “Jolene” to “Vaccine.”

While she was doing this in 2021, CV19 Vax deaths and injuries were already piling up and being covered up by the CDC and FDA.  She should have known, but her myopic world was already thinned out in 2021 to declare any negative information about the Vax “misinformation”.

But, Truth is like a Lion and there was enough data out there to tell anybody with a brain that something was amiss.  Over the years since she convinced many people to Jab, the massively strong evidence against the Jab surfaced against the tide.   That evidence apparently never reached her eyes and ears.

I have no hatred for anyone, let alone someone like Parton who did a lot of great things to help people over her lifetime.   On balance, that doesn’t tip the scales for me.  So, how can we lionize Dolly Parton when she likely passed on the fate she suffered through at the end to so many of her adoring fans that followed her ignorant lead?    My left wing local R&R radio station has been playing her music ALL DAY.

Nice lady.  Good heart, good motives and jugs.   But, no brain.

As she was dying from what we now call Vax induced “turbo cancer”, she made a statement to her nephew.   Nowhere in her last, dying words was there any sense of humility about how she might have been wrong about the Jab and especially her financing of the project.   No regrets at all?   Were you really that brainwashed?

This makes her not just an innocent victim but an active player, even indirectly.    In my view, that is hard to forgive, except by Him.

After the last 5 years,  I have discovered how painfully hard it is for people to admit to either taking the Jab to begin with or (worse) inducing others to do so as opinion leaders in media,  government, medical and education professions.

Vaccine, Vaccine sung to Jolene, Jolene and based on the hit Two Doors Down:

Two more jabs, were laughing and drinkin’ and  having a party
And, two jabs more, and we’ll soon be not around.

Actual lyrics here….no  conspiracy.

Dolly Parton’s ego and pride to “help the world”  may have caused her fall.  There are so many out there like Dolly, aren’t there?

And, as a Christian, she should have known about Satan’s trap.

May she rest in peace.

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Source: https://www.theburningplatform.com/2026/08/26/dollyland/#more-425318

Original Article: https://tapnewswire.com/2026/08/27/dollyland/

This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Aug. 26, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.

A growing number of establishment Democrats are facing backlash from progressives for their escalating attacks on leftist streamer Hasan Piker, with critics accusing the party’s corporatist wing of obsessing over an online influencer while ignoring the economic and foreign policy grievances driving millions of voters away on the eve of the critical midterm elections.

The latest controversy erupted after Piker argued during an online broadcast that Jewish Americans’ public support for Israel could contribute to antisemitism. Piker’s comments drew swift condemnation from prominent Democrats, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY), who, without naming Piker, called them “dangerous and antisemitic.”

Other Democrats piled on, prompting rebuke from progressives, who accused the centrists of caring more about an online personality than winning back control of Congress in November.

Former progressive Michigan congressional candidate Kyle Blomquist called it an “absolute mass psychosis event.”

“Too many demotivated Democrats stayed home in 2016 and 2024. We can’t repeat past mistakes,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said on social media.

Khanna implored Democrats to stop calling Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who is Jewish—an antisemite and “stop wasting time attacking Hasan Piker instead of [President Donald] Trump’s robber-baron corruption.”

“Don’t put Israel hawks out of touch with our voters in charge of our Middle East policy,” he added. “It is time for a reckoning: Are we a party that represents corporate interests and super PACs, or will we represent the American people?”

According to Track AIPAC, pro-Israel Democrats have taken tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from pro-Israel lobby groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s United Democracy Project.

Khanna’s comments came a day after Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the leading Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, announced the appointment of Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) as ranking member of the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee. Moskowitz, who said earlier this year that he is “to the right” of Vice President JD Vance in his support of Trump’s illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran, is one of the strongest supporters of Israel in Congress.

This, at a time when three-quarters of Democratic voters oppose US aid to Israel—up from just 45% three years ago—and after the issue was a factor in former Vice President Kamala Harris’ loss to Trump in the 2024 presidential election.

A majority of Democratic voters also believe that Israel’s US-backed war on Gaza is a genocide, a position also held by United Nations experts, around 20 countries that joined South Africa’s ongoing genocide case at the International Court of Justice, human rights groups, and scholars around the world—including in Israel.

Jasper Nathaniel, a US journalist known for his coverage of Israel’s illegal occupation, settler colonization, and ethnic cleansing of the West Bank, posted on X: “The entire bipartisan political establishment has coalesced around a willful misreading of what Hasan Piker said in order to silence criticism of Israel. They’re doing the same thing to Mark Ruffalo in Hollywood. It’s all fucking gaslighting. Don’t give an inch.”

“What Hasan said is completely intuitive. Everyone knows that Israel’s genocide of Palestinians—and the Jewish institutions’ blanket support for it—has created more hostility towards Jews,” he added. “There is no good-faith argument against this.”

Jacobin staff writer Branko Marcetic asserted Wednesday that “centrists despise Hasan Piker more than they want to win.”

“It’s an extreme stretch to describe Piker’s remarks as an incitement of or justification for violence and bigotry against Jews,” he continued. “The basic point he’s making—that the tendency by pro-Israel voices to conflate Jewishness with lockstep support for Israel makes Jews less safe—has been made by a number of Jewish voices, including Ezra Klein at The New York Times, David Klion at The Nation, Norman Solomon at The Guardian, union organizer Molly Kraft, and Hannah Arendt nearly 80 years ago.”

The dispute has now ensnared Michigan US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who campaigned alongside Piker during his successful Democratic primary bid. El-Sayed has somewhat distanced himself from Piker’s comments, emphasizing that the campaign represents his own views and condemning antisemitism. It hasn’t placated establishment Democrats.

Some Democrats have implored their party to keep its eyes on the proverbial prize—winning back Congress—instead of engaging in senseless internecine battles.

“Billionaires are draining our resources to develop a technology they want to replace us, millions will lose Medicaid in the new year to pay for tax cuts for the rich, and we’re spending billions on genocidal wars the voters oppose,” said Melat Kiros, the progressive Democratic nominee for Colorado’s 1st Congressional District. “But sure, let’s keep talking about Hasan Piker.”

It’s not just Democratic Socialists of America-type progressives who get it. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) admonished reporters during a Wednesday campaign rally for El-Sayed at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.

“Don’t any reporter ask me again about Hasan Piker,” she said angrily. “It’s not what November is about.”

“Republicans are… trying to divide us,” she continued. “And we’ve got to stop letting them try to divide us.”

Weighing in on corporate Democrats’ attacks on Piker from across the Atlantic, British writer and activist Owen Jones said Wednesday that “the Democratic establishment know they’ve lost their base. These smears are driven by panic.”

“The bottom line about what’s happening here is this: The American people have turned against Israel in revulsion at the genocide and want to stop facilitating its crimes. That opposition is overwhelming among the Democratic rank-and-file,” he continued.

“But the Democratic Party establishment remains invested in the alliance with Israel—and they fear being swept aside by pro-Palestinian left-wing candidates in upcoming primaries,” Jones asserted, adding that centrists “would prefer to lose to the Republicans than win with the left. They would prefer to keep facilitating Israel’s genocide and heinous crimes rather than win.”

“That’s what we are dealing with here,” he added. “And if it means destroying US democracy to defend Israel—that’s a price they’re willing to pay.”

Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and a former foreign policy adviser to Sanders, expressed a similar sentiment on social media.

“You’ve never seen corporate Democrats fighting as hard and as on message against Trump as they are against Hasan right now,” he said. “It’s insane.”

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

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize the Missile Defense System Doesn’t Work

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.

WARS in VIDEO. TRUMP HIT IRAN: Massacre in a Wedding. “US Bases on Fire” after IRGC Missiles Retaliation. ESCALATION Germany-Russia on Drone Incident

The Poseidon Problem Nobody Wants to Talk About

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.

Why 200 Megatons? The Tsunami Question

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.

TOWARD ATOMIC WARFARE… Russia launches NUCLEAR submarine Khabarovsk (VIDEO) with Poseidon Torpedo. US showed B61-13 Atomic Bomb for B-21 Stealth Bomber

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?”

The Hypersonic Reality Check

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.

PUTIN: “Decision-making Centers in Kiev could be targeted in Oreshnik Strikes. Powerful as Meteorites… ”

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.

Iran, North Korea, and the Spread of Unstoppable Systems

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.

CHINA AIR CARGO AND SHIP OF WEAPONS TO IRAN like “Carrier-Killer” Hypersonic Missile. CNN, other Sources Reported (5 Videos)

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.

The Ukrainian Factor: Arming a Proxy Against a Nuclear Power

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.

CIA-GATE – 14. Money Laundering Network Hidden under the Guise of Charity among US Intel, Soros NGO, Afghanistan, Ukraine

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.

WEAPONS LOBBY – 21. NATO’s WarCrimes! Attack to Moscow, SCHOOLGIRLS’ Massacre by DRONE of Ex CIA Chief POMPEO. Behind UAV FP-1 the Satanic Kiev Gang of Corruption funded by SOROS too

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.

What Happens When the Conventional War Goes Badly

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.

The Trump Factor: Bull in a China Shop

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.

WEAPONS LOBBY – 20. HUGE BUSINESS OF ZIONIST TRUMP’s WARMONGERS. How a German Industry Became the Golden Goose for the US

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.

What America Doesn’t Understand About the Russian Mindset

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?

What the United States Should Do

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.

Carlson & Waters (VIDEO): “HOW US, UK, EU and NATO are Triggering WORLD WAR III”. The BOJO Fake-Peace Plan in Ukraine to Provoke Russia

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.

A Final Word

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.

150 US Nuclear Weapons in Europe but Moscow Holds more Atomic Warheads in the World and the New Powerful Russian Sarmat ICBM

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

This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Aug. 27, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.

Scientists and climate action campaigners on Thursday pointed to the collapse of a glacier as a likely cause of disastrous flash flooding in Tibet and Nepal’s Rasuwa district, where emergency workers are searching for more than 1,300 missing people after water and mud poured into the Trishuli River valley, crashing through villages where thousands of people live and sweeping away bridges, homes, and miles of roads.

An initial assessment by geologists and glaciologists found that in satellite imagery taken before the flooding, a glacier was seen about 4,000 feet above the valley where at least 353 people were later killed Wednesday by the rushing waters and mudslide.

The glacier appeared about 2 million square feet smaller after the flooding, while the valley was “strewn with ice and mud” and the nearby river was “swollen beyond its banks, submerging the surrounding vegetation beneath murky brown floodwaters.

The scientists said an “ice avalanche”—a massive chunk of ice that fell off a glacier in the mountainous region and into the valley below, was likely at least partially to blame for the flash flooding, but noted that it was too early to rule out other or additional causes.

The satellite imagery appeared to show that “a glacier in the area basically snapped off in a clean break, allowing it to fall just over a vertical kilometer to the valley bottom,” Daniel Shugar, a geologist at the University of Calgary in Canada, told The New York Times. “The bottom looks like a bomb exploded—it’s just deposits from the broken-up glacier.”

The chunk of ice was likely about 2,000 feet wide, Shugar told the Times, and fell nearly 4,000 feet—a fall that would have “pulverized” the ice into water.

Aakriti Dotel, national network coordinator for the climate action group Nepalese Youth for Climate Action said the floods were “another painful reminder of the growing climate crisis facing Nepal and the Himalayas.”

“As our glaciers melt and extreme weather events become increasingly unpredictable, communities living downstream are bearing the devastating consequences,” said Dotel. “We mourn the lives lost and the livelihoods affected and call for urgent global climate action. There must be stronger support for vulnerable mountain communities, and accountability from those most responsible for the climate crisis.”

The disaster stunned officials in the area, where there had been no rainfall before the floodwaters and mudslide overtook the region.

Intense videos circulating on social media Wednesday showed people attempting to run away as water and mud crashed into villages in the region.

Tom Fletcher, the United Nations humanitarian chief, said he had mobilized $2 million from the UN Global Emergency Fund “to save lives with emergency medical care, shelter, water.”

The secretary-general of the Nepal Red Cross told CNN that about 20,000 houses have been “swept away” in the region.

“These people do not have anything,” said Rishi Khanal. “To feed them for some time, some days is a very serious thing to us… The shelter problem is there. The drinking water problem is there.”

A police officer in the village of Syabrubesi told the Times that waves of water crashed into his police station Wednesday morning, right after he got off the phone with a friend who had warned him a flood was headed toward the town.

“One of my senior officers and I were together when the wave struck. I was thrown out, but he was unlucky and was buried or swept away,” he told the newspaper. “I cannot explain how big the waves were. They engulfed several-meters-high buildings in a fraction of seconds… It wasn’t just water. It was a combination of boulders, sand, and thick sludge.”

Seven people were working at the station when the flood hit, and the officer is one of three who have been found alive. He said he was concerned that the other four are among the missing.

Homes, schools, government buildings, and the office of a hydropower project are among the infrastructure destroyed in Syabrubesi.

More than 160 glaciers in Nepal have entirely melted in recent decades, as scientists have warned that continued fossil fuel extraction is heating the planet and causing dangerous extreme weather. The area of the country’s glaciers also shrank by about one-quarter between 1970-2010.

At The Conversation, Levan Tielidze, a research fellow in glacial geomorphology at Monash University, wrote that “it’s too early to say this was the exact cause. But we know that the great ice stores of the Himalayas—known as the world’s ‘third pole’ because it contains the largest amount of snow and ice after the Arctic and Antarctic—are no longer safe.”

Tielidze continued:

What happened in Nepal is likely due to an enormous ice-and-rock landslide sweeping down a mountain pass and gathering up ice, water, rock, trees and dirt.
The landslide was so large it was originally thought to be an earthquake, as the seismic energy registered as a 4.4 magnitude quake on seismographs.
By the time it reached Gyirong Port—a China-Nepal border crossing—the wall of debris resembled a tsunami of dirt. Early estimates suggest the wave may have been 30 meters high.

Rising global temperatures have been linked to previous collapses of glaciers, including in Switzerland last year when the Birch Glacier wiped out nearly an entire town of 300 residents, who had evacuated before the disaster. Eleven mountain climbers were also killed by a glacier collapse in Italy in 2022.

“Every destabilized glacier in a warming Himalaya is a ticking time bomb that can go off unannounced, and when it does, those least responsible for the climate crisis pay with their lives,” said Savio Carvalho, head of campaigns and networks for 350.org. “This moment of grief has a clear message for world leaders: Delay is deadly. Rich countries must finally deliver the finance and protection they owe frontline communities. Without a rapid transition away from fossil fuels, the planet will continue to heat up and lives can be lost in a flash.”

The truth is told very well with images. A picture says a thousand words, and memes a few more. These pages have lots of images and memes that focus on the truth. Click image to enlarge + use arrows to navigate.

Images + Memes Pages • Sent To Your Email

Truth Warriors become a Truth11.com subscriber. Support Independent Media and get the Images + Memes pages plus all articles sent to your email.

Subscribe For $3 or $11 USD Per Month

A young German woman from the feminist group Lukreta has posted a video decrying yet another gang rape by foreigners in her country, this time involving three Afghan suspects who are accused of gang raping a 17-year-old girl in Dortmund, filming the rape, and then laughing as they traumatized the victim.

The three men – 20-year-old Quais W., 19-year-old Burhanulla N., and 25-year-old Kambiz H. – are currently on trial in Dortmund Regional Court involving a range of serious charges, including rape and the filming of a pornographic video of a minor.

"Three Afghan men raped a 17-year-old girl in Dortmund, filmed the act, and even laughed while doing so."

A young German woman says the case was "covered neither by public broadcasters nor by the political Left."

Why? Because the suspects were Afghan.

The suspects are… pic.twitter.com/7rOIcag13I

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) August 26, 2026

The three men reportedly lured the girl to their apartment in September 2024 in the city of Dortmund under a false pretext. However, once in the apartment, the suspects got the girl so intoxicated with alcohol that she lost consciousness.

“During the night, the witness lost consciousness as a result of alcohol consumption. The accused then took advantage of this situation,” said prosecutor Fabian Weishaupt.

The three men then systematically raped the girl and filmed themselves laughing. One of them even opened the unconscious girl’s eyes with his finger.

According to Bild, the three suspects all have extensive criminal records, including robbery, attacks against law enforcement, drug trafficking, assault, and other offenses.

As for the Lukreta feminist group, one of their members stated that the case was “covered neither by public broadcasters nor by the political Left even though it can hardly be surpassed in terms of abnormality and misogyny.”

“The reason, of course, is that the three perpetrators are all of Afghan origin and known to the police,” she said.

In other words, the media and left-wing feminist groups are very careful when perpetrators of such attacks are foreigners, but only because such cases are rapidly fueling the rise of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. The data is also clear. Remix News reported that last year, a record-high number of suspects involved in gang rape were foreigners, reaching 53 percent for the first time.

The young woman from Lukreta also has little faith in the German justice system and questions whether the Afghan men will be deported if convicted, stating: “Whether the three Afghans will even be justly convicted is questionable. What is certain, however, is that in the event of deportation, far-left Antifa activists will be at the airport to prevent the flight of the rapists.”

The post Germany: 3 Afghan men gang filmed themselves laughing as they gang raped a young girl appeared first on Remix News.