UPDATE (5/10/2023) the State.gov website has been updated as of May 9th, adding another half a million artillery shells (155mm type) to the list of U.S. aid to Ukraine. This brings the number of 155mm shells to 2 million, and the total, including other caliber or types of artillery shells to 2,587,000 shells. This represent the 37th Presidential Drawdown Authority order, and this most recent half-million shells is almost certainly the half million shells “loaned” to the U.S. by South Korea.
1. Russia is gravely wrong to invade Ukraine and to annex Crimea. Ukraine has a moral right to the defense of its nation, territory, society, and population. Other nations can morally assist Ukraine in its defense.
2. War can be anticipated to cause very grave harm to nations and society, and to result in the deaths of many civilians and troops. War often involves war crimes on either or both sides. War should be avoided if at all possible, though people must not be required to give up their rights and freedoms to avoid war.
3. Russia has committed severe war crimes in Ukraine, including an estimated 116000 civilian deaths during the siege of Mariupol in southern Ukraine, war crimes at Bucha, described as “Mass murder (including torture and execution), looting and rape“, and other war crimes such as murder and torture of POWs, deliberate killing of civilians, and the forced deportation of children. Far fewer war crimes were committed by the Ukrainian side of the war, per the U.N. Human Rights Commission.
When Russia annexed Crimea, the U.S. and other current allies of Ukraine were opposed to using military force to regain Crimea. At that time, it would have been relatively easy to fight Russia to free Crimea. There was as yet no Crimean bridge, nor any “land bridge” (captured territory in southern Ukraine through which Russia can send supplies to and from Crimea by land). Crimea was isolated, and Russia had not yet built up its defenses. But the West was not willing, and so now we are in a situation where it will be very difficult for Ukraine to retake Crimea.
The U.S. and European nations insisted on negotiations over Crimea, which dragged on for years, with no progress at all, while Russia prepared for war. NATO did not prepare for war. Ukraine could do relatively little on its own in that situation. We let Russia take Crimea, and were not willing to help Ukraine go to war to take back their territory. Now politicians are asserting that Ukraine must be given back all of its territory, including Crimea. But since they did not help Ukraine retake Crimea when it would have been easy, these assertions ring hollow.
If we had helped Ukraine take back Crimea in the first place, and then helped them build up their defenses, the invasion of Ukraine (in 2022) might never have happened and much suffering would have been avoided. As also happened in World War 2, we went to war too late, making the situation much worse.
In 2021, the U.S. began sending military aid to Ukraine. This was and is still done using Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA). Here is the current list of military weapons and munitions supplied to Ukraine by the U.S. When the U.S. takes military stuff from our stockpile for our own defense, a PDA is required. As of April 19th, 2023 the Presidential Drawdown Authority has been used 36 times. We have given Ukraine a vast amount of military materiel, including about 2.1 million artillery shells, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of various missiles and other munitions, and 200 million rounds of rifle ammo.
Other Ukrainian allies, including most NATO nations, have also poured weapons and munitions into Ukraine for its defense. But after 14 months (Feb 24, 2022 to Apr 24, 2023), the U.S. and other allies are low on many of these military supplies, especially artillery shells and air defense missiles. The U.S. and all of NATO together do not have enough artillery shells to continue to supply Ukraine.
South Korea, which has stored up a large number of artillery shells in case of an invasion by North Korea, has a policy not to supply arms to any region of armed conflict. But South Korea has decided to “lend” half a million artillery shells to the U.S., which we will then give to Ukraine. The U.S. is supposed to pay back those shells via U.S. production of new artillery shells. But we only make 14,000 artillery shells a month, and it would take us a year to ramp up to 24,000 shells a month (or half a million a year). It would take years of ramped up and constant production to replace the 2 million artillery shells we have given to Ukraine, and to pay back the “borrowed” shells from South Korea.
The Army is spending $1.45 billion on capacity “to expand 155mm artillery production from 14,000 a month to over 24,000 later this year,” and 85,000 in five years, Camarillo said at the Association of the U.S. Army’s Global Force Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama. [Defense News]
How long will the 500,000 South Korean artillery shells last Ukraine? Anywhere from 2 to 4.5 months.
Yahoo News: “The Financial Times writes that Ukraine appealed to the EU to send Kyiv 250,000 artillery shells a month to ease a critical shortage that is limiting its progress on the battlefield.
“In a letter to his counterparts in the 27 member states, Reznikov wrote that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are only firing a fifth of the rounds they could have because of lack of supplies.
“Reznikov wrote that artillery plays a ‘crucial role in eliminating the enemy’s military power’. On average, Ukraine was firing 110,000 155mm-calibre shells a month, he said — a quarter of the amount used by Russia.
” ‘If we were not limited by the amount of available artillery shells, we could use the full ammunition set, which is 594,000 shells per month,’ he said, referring to the capacity of the artillery systems available to Ukraine.
” ‘According to our estimates, for the successful execution of battlefield tasks, the minimum need is at least 60 per cent of the full ammunition set, or 356,400 shells per month.’ ”
[Yahoo News | Financial Times]
So the half a million artillery shells from South Korea, which have not yet arrived, would last anywhere from less than a month, with full utilization of Ukraine’s artillery, to 4.5 months at the low current level of 110,000 per month. Since 110k/month is below the “minimum need” stated by the Ukrainian defense minister, it is likely that those 500k shells will last a few months or less.
The March 20th update to the State.gov accounting of supplies to Ukraine listed an additional 500,000 of the 155mm artillery shells authorized for Ukraine. The March 3rd, 2023, State.gov list of supplies to Ukraine listed only 1 million 155mm artillery shells. It was not until April 12th that the news broke of South Korea agreeing to supply that same number of shells to the U.S. as a loan. So I have to wonder if the 500k shells added to the State.gov list on March 20th is the same 500k from South Korea, not yet provided to Ukraine (as far as we know). Similarly, in the January 25th update to the State.gov list, 31 Abrams tanks were added as being authorized by Presidential Drawdown Authority for transfer to Ukraine. But Ukraine is just now, in late April, being given those tanks. — See UPDATE at start of article. The 500k shells from South Korea have now been added to the State.gov list.
The commander of the Estonian Defense Forces’ (EDF) intelligence center, Colonel Margo Grosberg, assessed Russia’s offensive capability:
“No matter how much they are able to increase ammunition production levels, simple math tells us that they still have about 10 million (rounds) in stock. They could produce around 3.4 million more in a year, meaning they would have enough ammunition for at least another year, if not longer, of war,” the colonel said. [“EDF intelligence chief: Russia still has long-term offensive capabilities“]
Grosberg also stated that Russia began the invasion of Ukraine with 17 million rounds of artillery.
The point here is that Ukraine is running out of artillery shells, and so are the U.S., NATO, and even South Korea. None of these nations can give Ukraine the millions of shells they need to continue fighting for many more months. All of NATO does not have enough artillery shells left to defend their own territories in any major military conflict. But Russia could continue to fight with artillery for years. The EU has promised Ukraine a million more artillery shells, but they don’t have the production capability at this time, and it might take 9 to 12 months or more to ramp up production. Then a million shells only lasts about 4 months at the minimum of 250k shells a month.
In addition, Ukraine is low on air defense missiles. It is believed that Ukraine will run out of air defense missiles sometime in May of 2023. This could lead to Russia having air superiority over most of Ukraine. (They will conserve some air defense missiles to defend Kyiv and a few other positions.)
The U.S. is also low on Javelin anti-tank missiles, per a CSIS report: “the quantities of Javelins transferred to Ukraine through late August 2022 represented seven years of production at fiscal year (FY) 2022 rate before recent reprogramming actions. The number of Stingers transferred to Ukraine is roughly equal to the total number built for all non-U.S. customers in the last 20 years.”
The problem of a lack of artillery shells and air defense missiles is compounded by a reduction in Ukrainian troops. Russia added 300,000 troops via mobilization to their forces, and now they are undertaking a recruitment drive to add another 400,000 troops. But none of Ukraine’s allies are sending troops. And Ukraine has great difficulty conscripting new troops, as air strikes on their power grid over the winter caused much of the population to flee. Russia has been reducing the number of Ukrainian troops, especially the professional troops in place before the invasion. Ukraine eventually might not have enough troops to hold a 1000 km defensive line. They won’t have the artillery shells or missiles or troops, and their defenses could collapse.
If Ukraine’s defensive lines collapse, fighting will spread throughout the nation. There will no longer be a frontline. Russia could flood the country with troops currently held in reserve. And then NATO would face a difficult decision. Send in NATO troops, to go to war against Russia directly, or let Ukraine fall. In any case, a massive commitment of U.S. and NATO troops, weapons, munitions, and other supplies to the European theatre of operations would be needed. And we are low on munitions as it is.
7. Ukrainian Offensive
The promised Ukrainian Spring Offensive has not yet occurred. Maybe it will occur soon, or in the summer. But undertaking a major offensive action when you don’t have an abundance of troops, missiles, and artillery shells is extremely risky. If such an offensive occurs, it could easily fail, resulting in the loss of a vast amount of military materiel and troops. Offensive action usually requires superior numbers of troops or of munitions, or some other advantage, in order to break through established defensive positions. Ukraine does not have any such advantage, of which the public is aware. Then an offensive action commits troops and weapons to dangerous forward positions, risking their loss.
What Ukraine would like to do is to fight from Zaporizhia to the sea of Azov, cutting the Russian land bridge, and thereby isolating half of Russia’s forces from resupply. See this YouTube interview for a discussion of this tactic.
For Ukraine to succeed, this tactic would also require cutting the Crimean bridge, through which Russia brings many supplies to its forces. If half of Russia’s forces could be isolated in this way, Ukraine could much more easily recapture that territory and destroy those enemy forces — or Ukraine could negotiate from a position of strength to force all Russian forces to leave. But this will not be possible with the current low level of troops and munitions. It would take a sudden direct entrance of NATO into the war to accomplish such a purpose and thereby force Russia to entirely withdraw from Ukraine (rather than lose half its forces).
The problem for NATO is that they do not have enough troops and supplies for a protracted war with Russia. NATO does not have the air defense missiles and artillery to fight such a war; these have been largely reduced by the Ukraine war. NATO could perhaps fight a short series of battles to force Russia out of Ukraine, but not a lengthy war in any battlefield. And most NATO troops are not battle-hardened like Ukrainian and Russian troops. The risk for NATO is that if their offensive action in Ukraine fails, they will be in a war with Russia that they cannot win. Their troops will be overcommitted to dangerous forward positions, without sufficient artillery, missiles, and other supplies.
So any offensive action at this point by Ukraine or NATO would be high risk, high reward.
8. NATO and the U.S.
If the war goes badly in Ukraine, or if NATO enters the war directly, the U.S. will have to commit many troops and military supplies to defend Europe. At the very least, we would have to move troops and supplies into every nation bordering with Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine. Joining the fighting in Ukraine would require additional commitment of military forces.
This would leave the U.S. unable to defend Taiwan against a takeover by China. And China would likely take advantage of the situation, by a blockade of Taiwan by sea and air, forcing Taiwan to accept Chinese rule over them.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) recently released a 44-page report that warned U.S. stockpiles of critical weapons systems are low. In particular, it noted that, in the event of a conflict between the U.S. and China over Taiwan, the U.S. “would likely run out of some munitions — such as long-range, precision-guided munitions — in less than one week in the event of Taiwan Strait conflict.”
It added that the war in Ukraine has “exposed serious deficiencies in the U.S. defense industrial base and serves as a stark reminder that a protracted conflict is likely to be an industrial war that requires a defense industry able to manufacture enough munitions, weapons systems and materiel to replace depleted stockpiles.” [Source]
The 44-page report from CSIS is here. The report concludes that the Ukraine war has drained the U.S. and NATO of military supplies, reducing the effectiveness of a deterrence strategy, and making Western nations vulnerable to a major war they are not equipped to fight. Moreover, increasing production of necessary weapons and munitions, for deterrence or war, would take years.
CSIS report: “The history of industrial mobilization suggests that it will take years for the defense industrial base to produce and deliver sufficient quantities of critical weapons systems and munitions and recapitalize stocks that have been used up. It might take even longer to materialize facilities, infrastructure, and capital equipment, making it important to make changes now. The long timelines are manageable in peacetime but not in the competitive environment that now exists. The U.S. military services have underinvested in weapons systems and munitions for a conventional war, and the DoD’s acquisition system faces challenges in creating the incentives for industry to invest in sufficient stockpiles of key weapons systems.”
The report also states that U.S. inventory is low for: stinger missiles, javelin missiles esp. command launch units, 155mm howitzers, 155mm artillery shells, and counter-artillery radar units (p. 07). And it would take many years to replace U.S. stockpiles of these munitions and weapons systems.
The U.S. and all of NATO is vulnerable to another war. And it need not be a world war. Even a war at the level of the current Ukraine war would be too much for the U.S. or NATO to fight. If a second large conflict occurs in the near future, the U.S. will have to pull troops, weapons systems, and munitions from bases all over the world. And we have no way to quickly ramp up production of munitions to a wartime level. Modern weapons and munitions are complex and require a supply chain from all over the world. We can’t ramp up weapon production as we did during World War 2, by just using U.S. supply sources. It no longer works that way.
9. What does Russia want?
Control of the Black Sea, by holding Crimea and southern Ukraine is valuable to Russia as it gives them ports that are free of ice year round. However, they still need to go through the Bosporus Strait in Turkey (Turkiye) to access the Mediterranean Sea and from there the Atlantic Ocean. Perhaps Russia’s next objective is to wrest Turkey from NATO and the EU, bringing the nation under Russian influence, or eventually to make Turkey a part of the Russian Federation. This would give Russia warm water ports on the Mediterranean Sea year round, and would represent control of the valuable land bridge between the Middle East and Europe. The benefits to such a plan, if it is their plan, would include much military and economic power.
Ronald L. Conte Jr.
As much as I support the morality of the Ukrainian fight for its motherland, the declared goal to defeat Russia on the battlefield first instead of negotiation, is impossible without running the risk of a nuclear war. Having that in mind, I do not understand what is it that the West hopes for, for winning the current war and avoiding the nuclear war at the same time. The hope might be that the Russians won’t do it because they won’t do it…and that is not very calming thought.
That is not to deny the Ukrainians the right of their own homeland here and now, regardless of centuries bloody history. But diplomacy should be the leading force and now we see no negotiations at all, not even the desire for such. Rumors go online that the Western leaders advised president Zelensky to at least signal a desire for negotiations for PR purposes, something that he rejected. Zelensky may be ready to fight to the last Ukrainian, but Europe and the world are not ready to fight to the last man for that. We cannot be held hostages to that. As Elon Musk said when he banned the Ukrainian drones to use his satellites for operations on Russian territory, that he supports Ukraine, he supports the use of his satellites for communication on the frontlines, but he doesn’t want WW3. The world cannot be held hostage to one just cause of one country only. We’ve already made enough sacrifices, both personal and as countries. It is not the first injustice in this thousand years world, and it won’t be the last. We need peace, not WW3. We want the era of peace, not the Chastisement.
Let remember how similar conflicts were resolved in the past. First of all there should be an Immediate Ceasefire. Then a start of negotiations without preconditions (that now both sides set). Strong international consensus of ending the conflict. I think there is where the pope’s position stands too. Unfortunately, as of now he is not being invited in Moscow.
Any formula for post war arrangement should be a negotiated peace formula, not a formula of a total defeat of the other side. Because a total defeat of Russia means the use of nuclear weapons according to their doctrine. There were warnings from Western politicians and military that Russia is very close to using one or more tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Especially if the Ukrainian army advances towards Crimea. Let not underestimate the enemy, so to speak. Let pray for peace and conversion.
Here is a good timeline video of the conflict.
2. Prophetic significance
From the analysis of the situation given by many experts, it is clear both sides or at least Russia are fully prepared to launch not only local but strategic nuclear attack. Despite the words of Biden and others that a single Russian tactical nuke won’t be retaliated with a nuclear response but only by conventional massive attack on all Russian forces in Ukraine including Crimea and the Black sea (that is large enough attack to prompt a massive Russian nuclear response). The US actions on the ground show otherwise (strategic bombers flyovers near Russian borders, placing early warning systems, patriot anti missiles, talks of nuclear weapons to Poland, etc). For the Russian readiness one does not have to second guess, they are as ready as they could to wipe out most of the West, with targets already named in their state controlled media and also by the ex-president Medvedev in his daily blogs. Still God does not allow that to happen, however we were told by approved seers (Aiello, Akita, etc) that will be permitted.
If that happens, that will be a part of the prophesied Chastisement (some seers say, the Chastisement will be two-fold: man made WW3 and celestial).
Can we avoid the Chastisement to enter the Era of Peace? Garabandal says the Chastisement to be conditional upon the conversion obtained during the Great Warning and the Miracle. Medjugorje 10th secret is said to be unavoidable (most likely celestial event, not WW3 that should be somewhere in the earlier secrets). Great Warning hasn’t happened yet and judging by the developments a nuclear war may precede it. So we don’t know how much Great Warning will avert from the Chastisement. Yes the Chastisement is after the Great Warning not before it, but we are approaching nuclear war fast without signs of slowing down.
Ron, I understand your timeline is different taking many decades or centuries to fulfill. But our human life does not have many decades or centuries. The seers in Garabandal and Medjugorje were promised to see the events in their lifetime. The suffering and sacrifices since 1917 to fulfill Our Lady’s requests are too many already.
And again the old question: did the consecration of Russia work? And if not why not? The Vatican should act on it now, before the full scale war to have started. It is easy to say looking back in time that should Pius XII have consecrated Russia, WW2 would’ve been avoided…What will we say 10 years from now, praying and reflecting on the nuclear ashes of cities?
Many Americans believe they will not be attacked nuclear or otherwise ever. Lucia of Fatima clearly said that if Our Lady’s demands are not met, all the world, USA included, will be invaded by Russia. Today’s conservative Catholics prefer to believe for that to be in the form of the “Cultural Communism” of the leftist ideologies in the West. They are Wrong. They have never experienced in practice the totalitarian regime in the East, that paradoxically kept the moral norms to some degree stricter than today’s West does, while at the same time denying the religious and other freedoms. Yes America can be overrun in a nuclear war. And such will happen should we not obtain the conversion of Russia first. At this point, we didn’t, despite the solemn consecration of pope Francis last year. Maybe he shouldn’t mention Ukraine in the consecration but only Russia, IDK. As a matter of fact, it didn’t work. Because if it worked, now we would be in the Era of Peace according to the promise of Our Lady. Not just the war stopping miraculously that it doesn’t, but the kingdom of peace of Our Lord on Earth as we pray “Thy Kingdom Come”.
Instead, now we have Russia together with China. China’s ambassador just questioned the sovereignty of the ex-soviet republics, three of them now full NATO members. China can shoot at Taiwan at any moment, so is North Korea against South Korea.
Let me make it clear, I am unwilling to offer such a sacrifice even for the just cause of Ukraine. The tens of millions would not be willing to die either (conservative estimates for a limited first strike targeting only nuclear silos, submarine and bomber bases and command centers).
Let Ukraine be satisfied with 80 percent of its pro-Western territory as a soon to be member of the EU, let get rid of corruption, make its population prosperous and not immigrating, and forget about those traitors who want to be inside Russia and appear to speak Russian as a matter of fact. 80 percent is preferable than the nuclear war that we all die.
And no, the West could not avert the current war by entering Crimea and having a direct clash with Russia in 2014 right after the color revolution, when the Russian senate voted for military intervention in all of Ukraine not only Crimea. Putin decided it was only Crimea then. If the West intervened, WW3 would happen then.
We are on the brink of annihilation, as Our Lady speaks in Fatima, and every next day is God’s given grace for us.
Im sorry, I cant edit past comments, and there are too many things that Ron your analysis brings up to be mentioned. It is not one thing, it is not to say, I agree or I don’t agree. I agree Ukraine is the victim and Russia is the aggressor. However, it didn’t take one afternoon for Russia to move, it took decades, and both sides know it well.
However unpopular today in the frensy of expectation of battlefield defeat and humiliation of Russia that the West takes as granted, the negotiated settlement between the West and Russia instead is the best outcome. Statesman such as Kissinger, and businessman such as Elon Musk favor that outcome, whatever you might think of them. While it is unrealistically for NATO to go back to 1997 as the Russian proposal in 2021 for such a settlement, still there could be found a peace formula. Instead, now we are left with NO treaty between the West and Russia, except for the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty that already Russia said it could be breached by new nuclear tests (never ratified by US Congress). Is that what we want 33 years after the end of the Cold War?
On the other side, as the German federal president Frank-Walter Steinmeier said in a broad historic view how we reached to here, Russia allegedly abandoned its cold war posture in 1989 and should behave in a better way today respecting sovereignty of others etc. That was said in a large speech explaining the German position that drove so much criticism from the Western allies with the reluctance of Germany to provide hardware to Ukraine. Finally they managed to pushing Germany to send Panzers with Teutonic crosses on them again to Russia (the decision in the Bundestag brought back memories for the last time Germany sent tanks to Russia and how that finished for them).
What is seen instead of negotiations, is nothing else than the final touches before an all out world war on several theaters. The secular media would call it Armageddon (however wrong that name might be). It is hard to predict how the post nuclear world would look like and who would have an upper hand over the survivors underground or otherwise.
Macron and Baerbock decision not to get involved with Taiwan is the right one, because certainly the EU doesn’t want a war with China after its involvement with Russia. However, Borel thinks it would be a good idea to send EU ships patrolling Taiwan straight. Hard to convince the French rioters and the German workers striking that is good to fight a war thousands of kilometers away with the world’s largest army and country. It is just a madness. Unfortunately, the fear to speak blocks many people to say what they think in the democratic societies, and repeat mantras instead.
Ukraine should never enter NATO and what Stoltenberg said the day before in Kiev that Ukraine will be a member when it defeats Russia, may be just that last sparkle to ignite it all. Those people are wrong, they play with our lives and with the Western civilization as well. If they count on a secret space based weapon, why don’t they tell us to assure there are enough shelters for us all when the Russian missiles will start raining? Yesterday Auroras as far south as Texas might be that Fatima sign of WW2 repeated (a second time in a month).
The pope must act NOW. He knows better than everyone else what wasn’t done correctly about the consecration.
Last comment, because someone may think I am pro Russia. I am not. I cannot accept the post Cold War change of heart of Russia, from Perestroika of Gorbachev with freedom of speech and style of life, with the end of the nuclear threat for the entire humanity, to a new style of blood freezing dictatorship, with arms race and blackmail to the whole world with nuclear annihilation. For the made up excuse of 5-10 cities in Eastern Ukraine that nobody really wants to live there in first place .
As much as I do not accept the Ukrainian desire to fight not only to the last Ukrainian but also to the last of us. Are they really so much without reason? Let go the traitor territories to where they belong, if their occupants prefer to be Siberian province and not a dignitary part of the EU.
That doesn’t excuse the Russian elite who know what they are doing and who planned it all along since the color revolution in Kiev that their own president Yanukovych allowed to succeed in first place. That new militaristic elite do not have power over 8 bln people to dictate how we believe, think or talk. We are no more in the Middle Ages, an Orthodox version of it. They do not have power over all Ukrainians too (and I will not talk of the Russian people here). Free and fair elections are what decides the future of a country, of a region. Ukraine had such elections several times. (And here I support Elon Musk who proposed new Free elections of the occupied territories under UN mandate). Not police dictatorship, not military operation, and not the threat of a total nuclear war can decide that. Not the will of the Caesar whom the mortals are destined to hail until they die. Shame on Putin for making us all hostages for his endless reign and political ambition! He threw in prison three young women for saying a “prayer” in a church asking God for his removal! Is that the face of an anti NWO version of the world, or is that the real NWO that endangers us?
Yes Russia have their reasons but those are the reasons from the Cold War, that ultimately come down to the right of the stronger, the right of the one with more nukes who is not afraid his people will die too. It is unbelievable the world is back to the Cuban crisis. So all talks of freedom in Russia were fake then, to buy those 33 years?
And the Russian patriarch absolves the new nuclear crusade by raising a new flag – that of anti-LGTB agenda as a new banner that can sum up all the Gospel of Jesus Christ? How about some words on abortion or on rampant corruption in a country that sees millions to immigrate or marry for the sake of foreign passports? It is a public secret that many beautiful Russian women do exactly that and now are everywhere in Europe and Middle East – everywhere only not in Russia. But they are not to blame, they are not gay, they marry according to all prescriptions of the Russian orthodox church, for the time being until the next divorce that is allowed, until the higher husband bidder. Shame on the Russian orthodox Church! She does not have a mandate from Jesus Christ to turn to nuclear dust all the gays on the planet, and as a co-lateral damage all the rest of us! Let remember what Lenin said, that it would be OK for the revolution 75 percent of the world population to die off, if the remaining 25 percent would accept the revolution. Terrible even to think of it. It is God who judges ALL THE SINS not just one two selective sins. It is not the Russian church to judge, and Putin is not the planetary executioner from some absurd Marvel movie of a new tyrant armed with superweapons. A religion that promotes the nuclear fire from heaven of an all powerful political leader? Does it sound familiar from the Revelation? Seems “antichrist” in this case is not in the West. And I do not write The Antichrist who may not come for the next decades or longer. He will come to deceive even the elect ones. The elect ones will not be deceived by pornography or money. They will be deceived by fake proud righteousness similar to that Jesus criticized in the Pharisees.
In that view, the West is right to do what it is doing, if we indeed have the rise of such fanatical power that is not ashamed to threaten times and again the whole world with nuclear annihilation. The only problem here is, how the Western civilization will be saved when the Russian missiles fire up – 10 minutes to most of Europe, and 30 minutes to the USA. Is there a way out, some new modern counter measure? I hope somehow God will give enough strength to the West to stop that new and very dangerous wave of militaristic religious cult that comes from the East, backed with the Chinese endless resources and manpower. Because their cultist NWO will make the current version of Elon’s NWO as a sci fi movie where the good guys always win, despite they remain each on their own views – you don’t expect Iron man to agree with Thor and Hulk on everything, do you? But Thanos has no room in that NWO, and what we see is exactly a Titan rising from Russia.
War is not just about artillery shells. If it was, Russia would have already taken Kiev with their significant numerical advantage in that area. When the enemy is fighting one specific way, you adapt and find a different way to defeat the enemy’s strategy. The Ukranians have been adapting to Russia’s artillery focused war, which is why Russian offensive is stalled. Also, the West may not have woken up when Russia annexed Crimea. But it certainly was a wake up call to Ukraine. They were preparing for this war. Also, please don’t listen to Elon Musk on Geopolitics. He has no idea what he is talking about. I say this as a long term supporter of Tesla and SpaceX.
Just a Thought —–
I myself would not be surprised should Russia become an ally to the free-world within two years. Its very possible that Russia will convert to a type of democracy where its government shuns the antics of China, N. Korea and Iran. All this talk of nuclear war between the powerful nations is all hot air.
Should the day arrive where nations do not protect their sovereignty and seek appeasement over principles — those countries will be destroyed from within and there will be no need of war.
War is real, only God and Our Lady still prevent the real big war, and we know from prophecies that will not go on forever. If one year into the Consecration we don’t see any miracle of even returning to pre-war status quo (that wasn’t the era of peace), I don’t see how it will be achieved anytime soon.
Washington Post published a shuddering info “US ‘Thwarts’ Ukraine’s Plan To Bomb Moscow Using NATO Weapons Fearing Massive Russian Retaliation” https://eurasiantimes.com/us-thwarts-ukraines-plan-to-launch-attacks-on-moscow-using/ I may not approve Russia’s actions, but what Ukraine is doing in response will make us all dead. How would an attack on Moscow advance the Ukrainian cause of retaining its occupied and devastated territories? Wouldn’t it bring a bigger Russian response, as it happened with the bombing of Crimea bridge? Now we have a refinery burning in Sevastopol. What is the overall plan of the West, if it is clear that any major success on the ground will bring even bigger Russian reaction, up to the nuclear level? Only God knows. I do not agree with those seers who only say peace and love now, who criticize those who reflect upon the secrets, while they themselves know the secrets and their early interviews in younger years spoke otherwise. Let not forget the seers are human and sinful too.
I would be very careful of any stories being published by the Washington Post. The overriding problem with the Ukraine and Russia war is a battle of attrition. The outcome of such a war can only achieve a stalemate at best where both countries agree to terms acceptable to both parties. Ukraine did not want this war and has shown great restraint. If Ukraine had the military might – they would be in the right to achieve as much damage to Russia as possible. I know NATO would be taking out the infrastructure in Russia today should they be attacked by Russia. Mankind for the most part has abandoned God and if there is an escalation of this war with a greater number of countries involved so be it. Life on earth is paltry compared to everlasting paradise.
So you think Washington Post report is wrong? I think it is rather underestimated. Zelenski doesn’t have the right to play with our lives. If Ukraine was stronger, if it had nuclear weapons, as Zelenski asked in Munich conference DAYS before the Russian attack, then we wouldn’t be writing here now. NATO will not attack Russia first, because NATO is not suicidal. Poland could send troops though, and that may lead to a Russian attack on Poland. Then only God knows how far the things can escalate and how soon.
As of the massive loss of human life that some people in the Church and politics contemplate as acceptable even as desired sacrifice by God, as also transpire from John Paul II statements in Fulda reported by Malachi Martin (not what we all know already, although it is quite significant too), I want to ask the simple question: who will spread God’s kingdom in the aftermath? Who guarantees that Catholic countries will predominantly survive and not for example Muslim or Asian countries? What we will have at best will be sparse pockets of survivals fighting with each other for food, spread disease, and the luckier ones in deep underground bunkers ruled by marshal law. Is this the Kingdom of God and Era of Peace? Because here we are not talking of the Second Coming yet when everyone dying or not, appears in resurrected body before the Lord for the final judgment. We are rather in a different chapter. And if they know of an escape plan, why don’t they communicate it to us sooner to prepare for it? Spiritdaily has something today that signals such communication has started with snail movement. I will not comment it unless Ron decides to dedicate a separate topic on it. It is clear from John Paul II’s words in Fulda that such rescue will be communicated but shortly before the cataclysm. Sorry the video record of Malachi Martin is not before me to post it, did I already posted its link? Forgot already, every next day brings so many news.
As we speak, Russia retaliated yesterday against the insane attack on Sevastopol (insane because it helps nothing than to provoke further escalation). Now let Ukraine do the next step, to target some nuclear silos because that will definitely advance its just cause…sorry for the sarcasm but it is just too much! By now, 33 years after Communism and about 2000 years after Jesus, after the era of Christian monarchs… we should’ve built the Kingdom of God on Earth. Instead, we are about to kill each other as some unintelligent wild animals, let alone religious, and to leave nuclear dust for Jesus to restore it in His Second Coming…that may be after centuries. Centuries survival from a nightmare zombie film? No, thanks! Not even for Ukraine, for “apparition”, for a prelate, or for anyone. That is NOT the will of God. Because God is not evil, He is good.
unique live video of Malachi Martin in 1992 speaking of a number of topics including St John Paul II talk in Fulda with some NEW INFORMATION that was not publicly known before. Better watch with subtitles on (after 16 min but all is interesting). One nation will be completely wiped out, Sun will be darkened, and so on. The Soviets would have received advantage over the West, if the Vatican told openly the secrets and visions (whatever your interpretation is, apparently there are more than one vision of Lucia). This new info deserves a separate discussion. Indeed all is in IF mode, but it is said clearly enough.
I don’t agree with Malachi Martin, and I think he is not a reliable source for information on the End Times and prophecy.
thank you for approving the comment then. I do not post the vid for myself, I gain nothing from it, but for the people to know it exists. I also have my reservations of what Malachi Martin relates, but for a different reason. Well I guess I will take a break from posting so contradicting to each other posts, until it becomes clear from the international arena where we are going to. Because nobody knows, me included. Sadly, we are being kept in dark until the last moment, and then it will be too late for many.
I think Jesus said it the best – “When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed; this must take place, but the end is still to come” (Mark 13:7, also Matt. 24:6, Lk. 21:9).
The loss of human life by wars is atrocious, mankind with their free will have been self destructive from the beginning of time. Nothing has changed except for the coming of Our Savior Jesus Christ is getting closer.