OF THE
TIMES
1) Ukraine, if/when it enters NATO, will have "unresolved" territorial issues. Crime and the Donbass are in Russian hands and will remain in Russian hands. If Ukraine enters NATO with that being the case, border conflicts over that territory could spark war, which would then drag in NATO through Article V. Such a war would be extremely bloody and potentially escalate to nuclear armageddon
2) This is Putin's red line. In the 90s, when the USSR fell, America promised the Russians that NATO wouldn't expand to the East. Then, in Russia's weakness (created in large part by Goldman Sachs helping the oligarchs loot the country through privatization), it expanded to the East, doing just what it promised it wouldn't, much to Russia's chagrin. But Putin, while upset, has made it clear that Ukrainian membership in NATO is his red line that would mean war, potentially nuclear. It is utterly unacceptable and would have been like Ireland or Canada joining the Warsaw Pact. That's why he launched the war; by "demilitarizing" Ukraine by shelling its army into oblivion and by creating a constant conflict, he wants to keep Ukraine out of NATO without going to war with NATO. He thought we wouldn't be so dumb as to bring it into the alliance if it is fighting a war with Russia
The 7 March warning from US Embassy Moscow was initiated in Washington, DC from State Department. Secretary of State Blinken signed off on it. And the nature of the warning shows that it was based on intelligence — i.e., from a human source and/or electronic intercept — that was considered "credible." It also had a high degree of specificity not normally seen in these types of warnings (at least what I have seen starting in October 1985 thru October 2016).If a foreign nation warns you of a potential attack on a specific location and gives you a specific time period, how long should you be on the lookout? Another couple days, a week, a month, a year?The Embassy is monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and U.S. citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours.During the last 35 years I do not recall a single instance in which the State Department issued a warning like this specifying a specific time period for vigilance. The warning itself implies intelligence that provided a specific timeframe for the attack. So, when the attack does not happen, you need to go back to the analysts and ask, WTF!!! If the analysts had said, "Oh, wait, the Russians boosted security at the Crocus City Hall on 8 March and scared off the attack," then the next question should have been, "Do you still believe there will be another attempt?" The analysts could have said yes, no or maybe.
So, if you believe the intelligence is credible then it was incumbent on the USG to issue another warning to continue to avoid large gatherings, such as concert halls. The USG did not do that.
Nope. The USG is pushing the line that "We warned the Russians and they did not act." Sure looks like a psy-op to me designed to paint Putin as a heartless goon who ignored our intelligence. [...]
The "American intelligence experts" are misrepresenting what was publicly released. It did not say, "Starting from today, 7 March, extremists intend to attack large gatherings, including concerts; therefore American citizens should avoid these places until further notice." NOPE! Just for 48 hours. It is a very dangerous game that is being played here.
Comment: More on this low-rent "bad guy" and his group: