Nuclear Brinkmanship – Russia’s Response to Its Threatened Borders

Nuclear Brinkmanship

This article was last updated on February 21, 2024

Canada: Free $30 Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…
USA: Free $30 Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…

Nuclear Brinkmanship – Russia’s Response to Its Threatened Borders

In two recent postings on Telegram, Russia’s former President and Prime Minister and current Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia Dimitry Medvedev clearly lays out how the future will unravel if Russia is attacked by NATO and if the nation is forced to return in its 1991 borders.  His proposal is, to say the least, alarming. 

Here’s the first posting on his Telegram account dated February 7, 2024:


Nuclear Brinkmanship

Here is a translation thanks to Yandex Translate with my bolds for emphasis:


Sunak, Scholz, Macron, Norwegian, Finnish, Polish and other chiefs from NATO countries say that “we must be ready for war with Russia.”


And although Russia has repeatedly said that there are no plans for conflict with NATO and EU countries, extremely dangerous chatter on this topic continues. The reasons are obvious. It is necessary to divert the attention of voters in order to justify the multibillion-dollar spending on the hated Bandera “Ukraine”. After all, huge amounts of money are not spent on solving social problems in these states, but on a war in a dying country alien to taxpayers, whose population has scattered across Europe and is terrorizing local residents. Therefore, every day the leaders of these countries broadcast: we need to prepare for war with Russia and continue to help Ukraine, and therefore we need to produce more tanks, shells, drones and other weapons.


But all European bosses cynically lie to their citizens. If, God forbid, such a war happens, then it will not go according to its scenario. It will not be conducted in trenches using artillery, armored vehicles, drones and electronic warfare.


NATO is a huge military bloc, the population of the Alliance countries is almost 1 billion people, and their combined military budget can reach one and a half trillion dollars.


Therefore, due to the disparity of our military capabilities, we simply will have no choice. The answer will be asymmetric. Ballistic and cruise missiles with special warheads will be used to protect the territorial integrity of our country. This is based on our doctrinal military documents and is well known to everyone. And this is the notorious Apocalypse. The end of everything.


Therefore, Western politicians should tell their voters the bitter truth, and not hold them for brainless idiots. To explain to them what is really going to happen, and not to repeat the false mantra of readiness for war with Russia.


As though that weren’t enough of a threat against the Western powers that have spent the past decade blocking Russia into a “diplomatic corner”, here’s what Medvedev had to say on February 18, 2024:

Nuclear Brinkmanship 


Here, again thanks to Yandex Translate, is the translation:

 Some time ago, I wrote here on my TG channel: “A nuclear power cannot lose a war.” Immediately, snotty Anglo-American suckers jumped out with heart-rending cries: “No, it’s not like that at all, even the United States lost in wars.” This is a blatant lie. I wasn’t talking about Vietnam, Afghanistan, or dozens of other places where the Americans waged colonial wars of conquest. I wrote about historical Wars in which the defense of one’s Fatherland takes place. Their land, their people, their values. These are the kind of wars the nuclear powers have never lost to anyone.


Why am I writing about this again? Yes, I read the words of all sorts of Pistorius and Shapps and I think: are they really such assholes or are they pretending? “The world cannot afford Russia’s victory in this war.” How is that? But here’s how.


OK. Let’s imagine for a minute that Russia lost, and “Ukraine and its allies” won. What would be such a victory for our neo–Nazi enemies with their Western sponsors? Well, as it has been said many times, a return to the borders of 1991. That is, the direct and irreversible collapse of present-day Russia, which, according to the Constitution, includes new territories. And then there was a furious civil war with the final disappearance of our country from the world map. Tens of millions of victims. The death of our future. The collapse of everything.


And now the main question is: do these idiots really believe that the people of Russia will swallow such a division of their country? That we will all think something like this: “Well, alas, it happened. They won. Today’s Russia has disappeared. It is a pity, of course, but we must continue to live in a crumbling, dying country, because nuclear war is much more terrible for us than the death of our loved ones, our children, our Russia…”? And that the leadership of the state, headed by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, in this case, will tremble to make the most difficult decisions?


And so. It will be completely different. The collapse of Russia will have much more terrible consequences than the results of an ordinary, even the most protracted war. For attempts to return Russia to the borders of 1991 will lead to only one thing. To a global war with Western countries using the entire strategic arsenal of our state. In Kiev, Berlin, London, Washington. To all other beautiful historical sites that have long been included in the flight objectives of our nuclear triad.


Will we have the courage to do this if the disappearance of a thousand-year-old country, our great Homeland, is at stake, and the sacrifices made by the people of Russia over the centuries will be in vain?


The answer is obvious.


So it’s better to let them return everything before it’s too late. Or we will return it ourselves with maximum losses for the enemy. Like Avdiivka. Our warriors are heroes!


Looking from the Western perspective, this is the kind of idiocy that passes for diplomacy in Washington when dealing with Russia, in this case, a response to Russia’s movement of nuclear weapons into Belarus which would result in all-out nuclear war with NATO should Russia use its weapons:


Nuclear Brinkmanship


Nuclear Brinkmanship


Nuclear Brinkmanship


Nuclear Brinkmanship

The “gentlemen” sponsoring this Senate resolution make themselves somewhat useful by volunteering to fight on the front lines should hostilities break out between Russia and NATO.  


Western leaders, particularly those in Washington, have convinced themselves and their voters that Russia is on the brink of a humiliating loss in Ukraine.  They seem to ignore history which shows that a cornered Russian bear is one that will act to protect its borders.  Just ask those who still remain alive among the Nazi soldiers that felt the brunt of Russia’s defensiveness when Rossiya-matushka is threatened.  Washington and its NATO puppet states would be wise to learn from the past.

Nuclear brinkmanship is an unwinnable game.  We all lose.  Even Senators Lindsay Graham and Richard Blumenthal. 

Share with friends
You can publish this article on your website as long as you provide a link back to this page.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.