Medvedev:
“Western countries, which allegedly "approved the use" of their long-range weapons on Russian territory (regardless of whether it concerns old or new parts of our country), must understand the following:
1. All their military equipment and personnel fighting against us will be destroyed both on the territory of former Ukraine and in the territories of other countries if strikes are launched from there against Russian territory.
2. Russia assumes that all long-range strike weapons used by former Ukraine are currently directly controlled by NATO military personnel. This is not "military assistance" but participation in a war against us. Such actions could well become a casus belli.
3. NATO will have to decide how to classify the consequences of possible retaliatory strikes against the equipment/objects/personnel of individual bloc countries in the context of Articles 4 and 5 of the Washington Treaty.
In all likelihood, NATO leadership wants to pretend that it's about sovereign decisions of individual countries of the North Atlantic Alliance to support the Kyiv regime, and there are currently no grounds to apply the rule of the 1949 Treaty on Collective Defense.
These are dangerous and harmful misconceptions. Such "individual assistance" from NATO countries against Russia, whether it's controlling their long-range cruise missiles or sending troops to Ukraine, is a serious escalation of the conflict. Former Ukraine and its allies among NATO countries will face a response of such destructive force that the Alliance itself won't be able to refrain from involvement in the conflict.
And no matter how much the retired NATO blowhards chatter that Russia will never use non-strategic nuclear weapons against former Ukraine, let alone individual NATO countries, life is much scarier than their frivolous reasoning.
Just a few years ago, they insisted that Russia would not engage in open military conflict with the Bandera regime to avoid falling out with the West. They were wrong. War is underway.
They may also miscalculate with the use of TNWs. Although this would be a fatal mistake. After all, as rightly noted by the President of Russia, European countries have very high population densities. And for those enemy countries whose lands are beyond the coverage zone of TNWs, there is finally strategic potential.
And this, alas, is neither intimidation nor nuclear bluffing. The current military conflict with the West is unfolding according to the worst-case scenario. There is a constant escalation in the power of NATO weapons being deployed. Therefore, no one can exclude the conflict from escalating to its final stage today.”
“Western countries, which allegedly "approved the use" of their long-range weapons on Russian territory (regardless of whether it concerns old or new parts of our country), must understand the following:
1. All their military equipment and personnel fighting against us will be destroyed both on the territory of former Ukraine and in the territories of other countries if strikes are launched from there against Russian territory.
2. Russia assumes that all long-range strike weapons used by former Ukraine are currently directly controlled by NATO military personnel. This is not "military assistance" but participation in a war against us. Such actions could well become a casus belli.
3. NATO will have to decide how to classify the consequences of possible retaliatory strikes against the equipment/objects/personnel of individual bloc countries in the context of Articles 4 and 5 of the Washington Treaty.
In all likelihood, NATO leadership wants to pretend that it's about sovereign decisions of individual countries of the North Atlantic Alliance to support the Kyiv regime, and there are currently no grounds to apply the rule of the 1949 Treaty on Collective Defense.
These are dangerous and harmful misconceptions. Such "individual assistance" from NATO countries against Russia, whether it's controlling their long-range cruise missiles or sending troops to Ukraine, is a serious escalation of the conflict. Former Ukraine and its allies among NATO countries will face a response of such destructive force that the Alliance itself won't be able to refrain from involvement in the conflict.
And no matter how much the retired NATO blowhards chatter that Russia will never use non-strategic nuclear weapons against former Ukraine, let alone individual NATO countries, life is much scarier than their frivolous reasoning.
Just a few years ago, they insisted that Russia would not engage in open military conflict with the Bandera regime to avoid falling out with the West. They were wrong. War is underway.
They may also miscalculate with the use of TNWs. Although this would be a fatal mistake. After all, as rightly noted by the President of Russia, European countries have very high population densities. And for those enemy countries whose lands are beyond the coverage zone of TNWs, there is finally strategic potential.
And this, alas, is neither intimidation nor nuclear bluffing. The current military conflict with the West is unfolding according to the worst-case scenario. There is a constant escalation in the power of NATO weapons being deployed. Therefore, no one can exclude the conflict from escalating to its final stage today.”
Medvedev:
“Western countries, which allegedly "approved the use" of their long-range weapons on Russian territory (regardless of whether it concerns old or new parts of our country), must understand the following:
1. All their military equipment and personnel fighting against us will be destroyed both on the territory of former Ukraine and in the territories of other countries if strikes are launched from there against Russian territory.
2. Russia assumes that all long-range strike weapons used by former Ukraine are currently directly controlled by NATO military personnel. This is not "military assistance" but participation in a war against us. Such actions could well become a casus belli.
3. NATO will have to decide how to classify the consequences of possible retaliatory strikes against the equipment/objects/personnel of individual bloc countries in the context of Articles 4 and 5 of the Washington Treaty.
In all likelihood, NATO leadership wants to pretend that it's about sovereign decisions of individual countries of the North Atlantic Alliance to support the Kyiv regime, and there are currently no grounds to apply the rule of the 1949 Treaty on Collective Defense.
These are dangerous and harmful misconceptions. Such "individual assistance" from NATO countries against Russia, whether it's controlling their long-range cruise missiles or sending troops to Ukraine, is a serious escalation of the conflict. Former Ukraine and its allies among NATO countries will face a response of such destructive force that the Alliance itself won't be able to refrain from involvement in the conflict.
And no matter how much the retired NATO blowhards chatter that Russia will never use non-strategic nuclear weapons against former Ukraine, let alone individual NATO countries, life is much scarier than their frivolous reasoning.
Just a few years ago, they insisted that Russia would not engage in open military conflict with the Bandera regime to avoid falling out with the West. They were wrong. War is underway.
They may also miscalculate with the use of TNWs. Although this would be a fatal mistake. After all, as rightly noted by the President of Russia, European countries have very high population densities. And for those enemy countries whose lands are beyond the coverage zone of TNWs, there is finally strategic potential.
And this, alas, is neither intimidation nor nuclear bluffing. The current military conflict with the West is unfolding according to the worst-case scenario. There is a constant escalation in the power of NATO weapons being deployed. Therefore, no one can exclude the conflict from escalating to its final stage today.”
0 Comments
0 Shares
785 Views
0 Reviews
Deutsch
Dutch