Possible deployment of US missiles on the ground near Russian borders may trigger a missile crisis identical in scale to the Caribbean one,(Cuban, 1963), Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told the Federation Council during debates on a bill on the suspension of Russia’s participation in the treaty on the elimination of intermediate and shorter range missiles (INF Treaty).
"As far as the US plans are concerned, the White House, the Pentagon, and NATO’s international secretariat keep telling us the US and the alliance have no plans or intentions to deploy future systems of this range on the ground in Europe," Ryabkov said. "The current events, in particular, those involving the Russia-NATO Founding Act, which declares that the alliance has no plans, intentions or reasons to deploy considerable forces near Russian borders in the territories of newly-admitted NATO members, indicate that all this can be easily changed."
"We should brace for the worst scenario. There are no plans, but the Mk-41 launchers are a reality," Ryabkov said. "NATO’s intentions have been aggressive all along and they remain so.
If it comes to the real deployment of such systems on the ground, the situation will not just get worse, but aggravate to the maximum and we may find ourselves in the situation of a missile crisis pretty close to the Caribbean one."
Hal Turner Commentary
This is how NATO and the US Operate: They put missiles or other systems within range of a country on the sneak; very quietly. When that target country does ANYTHING to counter those systems, the US and NATO call that "aggression" or tell the public that "so-and-so is adopting an aggressive posture towards us."
Yet we're the ones who START the trouble.
For a Deputy Foreign Minister to PUBLICLY warn that another crisis similar in severity to the Cuban Missile Crisis is now developing, is a very stark and dangerous thing. Diplomats don't use language like that -- at least in public - unless a situation is extremely serious.
And the Deputy Foreign Minister's remarks "We should brace for the worst scenario" means an actual NUCLEAR EXCHANGE.
Think about what the man is actually saying! That would, in fact, be "the worst case scenario" wouldn't it?
There is real trouble on the horizon, folks. REAL TROUBLE. A kind we have never seen before. It is imperative that you have "preps" for yourself and your family. A list of suggested preps is HERE.
Our government is not being run by our President. It is being run by an invisible hand, (CIA / Pentagon) and that hand is setting up a world war we'll be lucky to survive. We can see that hand at work with the shoot-down of a US Drone by Iran last week. Why were they flying the drone into Iranian air space and why did they ignore at least TWO RADIO WARNINGS from Iran? Answer: They WANTED the shoot down to happen! They WANTED an excuse to go to war. They still do.
If the US is able to successfully start a fight with Iran, who's to say whether Russia and China will come to the aid of Iran? So follow this: We start a fight with Iran. Russia starts supplying hi-tech weapons to the Iranians and we decide to "deter" Russia by putting missiles in those MK-41 launchers that the Russia Foreign Minister just talked about. Russia sees them as first-strike weapons against which they cannot defend, so Russia is left with no choice but to first-strike those missiles. POW. World War 3.
REMINDER: YOU can keep this web site FREE to the General Public by clicking one or more of the 12 ads below which generates Advertiser revenue of two to three cents per click - no purchase necessary by you -- and helps offset operating costs for this web site.