Manufactured Insanity of World War III Escalates, ICBMs for 1st Time Ever, Where Does This End?

ANALYSIS: Outside the prospects of global peace, conventional thought narrows the current, expedited and escalated war trajectory to five plausible outcomes.

Where does all of this end? With laser-guided precision, I can tell you where it all began and everything that has happened in between, but where does it end? At the core, the answer to that question is all that matters. Outside the prospects of global peace, which would entail a stand-down by China from the asymmetrical, irregular and undeclared war it’s been kinetically waging against the US since no later than August 2019, conventional thought narrows the current, expedited and escalated war trajectory to 5 plausible outcomes and where time is taken time to identify ones already eclipsed: 1-threat of war, 2-limited scale regional war, 3-full scale regional war, 4-limited scale global war and 5-full scale global war.

---

Today’s article marks the 225th piece in the War, Famine & Disease series.

---

The outcomes posed represent a LINEAR TRAJECTORY from the THREAT OF WAR to FULL SCALE GLOBAL WAR.

With the aggregate analysis as our lens, here are the answers to the questions above; but they aren’t nearly as important as the reasons for them, which follow below.

We’ll add and position global peace as zero, so: 0. Global peace.

1. Threat of war: We eclipsed this long ago. Limiting war to the threat of war permits policy creation that drives national hegemony, foreign policy and profits making for the military industrial complex; and it can do this on a decades-long timeline. Limited conflicts and kinetic exchanges occur intermittently as needed to keep the pump running.

2. Limited scale regional war: Also eclipsed as the initial “special security operation” launched by Russia to counter NATO encroachment on borders and in regions contiguous and critical to Russia’s national security and sovereignty, incrementally transitioned into a conventional war in a region defined by two or more nations.

3. Full scale regional war: Russia’s use of ICBMs to counter long-range missiles fired deep into Russia caused the limited scale regional war to transition into a full scale regional war.
   
   CURRENT LOCATION: Resting on the transition line between a full scale regional war and a limited or full scale global war.
   

4. Limited scale global war: The fear is a reciprocal response from NATO which would project to the firing of its own ICBMs and whether that is possible as a proxy function [UKR] or if NATO countries [the US] would directly deploy them. If it’s the latter, the thinly veiled proxy war is veiled no more. Immediate theaters project to be Russia/Ukraine/Europe, Middle East [Iran, Syria, Israel, etc.] and China/Taiwan/South China Sea as aligned with the analysis going back to 2020. The scale of a limited war would be determined by the intensity of the warfare and specifically the degree to which nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction are used. THIS IS THE NEXT STEP IN THE TRANSITION.
   
   BIGGEST CONCERN: The ability of the IC/DoD/NATO/State conglomerate to frame the circumstances to predicate global war. From existing analysis: “Where is the threshold line to break Putin’s measured and calculated restraint? [Undetermined but encroaching closely on it. Best call: US is baiting Russia into a military response, which will be co-opted into a false-flag operation and positioned as a nuclear strike on Ukraine with attribution to Russia. This would permit strikes or counterstrikes on Russia depending on how it unpacked and that is the operational objective. Plenty of nuclear red lines already exist as issued by Biden and Putin so the existing pretext for such an operation is robust.]”
   

5. Full scale global war: Once the transition from a limited scale global war to a full scale global war occurs, which may or may not entail encompassing other nations and regions [North Korea is already vested, for example], the restraints and guardrails are removed and global warfare designed for mutual mass destruction will be immediate as nuclear and weapons of mass destruction are widely deployed. It’s important to view that plausibility as an overlay to the broader war against humanity and the depopulation agenda as it relates to mRNA injections [20 million dead globally and counting.]

All of this began with a foreign policy shift by the incoming Biden Administration in late December 2020 to move away from Trump’s hyper-focus on China and to hyper-focus on NATO’s favorite generational boogeyman, Russia: From 2020 Foreign Policy Shift to WWIII in 2024 Biden Marches Us to War.

Since that fateful moment, it has been an incremental march to the manufactured insanity of World War III and over the course of this week, we have seen unprecedented escalation that unfortunately indicates strong correlation with the long-projected kinetic flashpoint with an electoral genesis: 05 Nov 24 +/- 3 months.

That timing is the basis of yesterday’s analysis.

Yesterday’s analysis also focused on the location and impact of Chinese asymmetrical warfare in the Baltic Sea that impacted 4 NATO countries.

The analysis positioned the attack as an advance precursory softening attack to interfere with assets, communication and infrastructure before a major retaliatory strike from Russia.

Russia had previously defied historical precedence to align with China diplomatically, economically and militarily as the analysis projected would occur in work back in March 2021.

That alignment frames the China’s Baltic Sea attack as a quid pro quo exercise on behalf of Russia and that was an indicator for a significant Russian escalation, which played-out overnight with a Russian strike on a Ukrainian military targets using intercontinental ballistic missiles [ICBMs] for the first time ever in a war.

It is unknown whether the Chinese Baltic Sea attack and Russia’s ICBM counterattack are directly related.

Russia’s unprecedented ICBM strike on Ukraine was the latest incident in a roughly week-long period of escalations that require review.

This week’s war escalation chronology entails:

1. Joe Biden’s Sunday authorization for long-range missiles against Russia: Trump Details Plan to “Dismantle the Deep State,” Deep State Counters by Crossing Putin’s Line on Long Range Missiles.

2. Ukraine’s Tuesday leveraging of Biden’s authorization to strike Russia with US long-range missiles: US Long-range Missiles Strike Inside Russia: US Proxy Zelensky Uses Biden’s Authorization to Follow-through on Threat.

3. Ukraine’s Wednesday firing of 12 UK [NATO] Storm Shadow missiles at Russia targeting the Kursk region in Southern Russia: 12 UK Storm Shadow Missiles Were Fired Into Russia, Local Sources Say.

4. Russia’s retaliatory ICBM strike against Ukrainian [NATO?] military targets: Russia Fires ICBM Into Ukraine For First Time, Kiev Claims.

Take specific note of what the analysis depicts as ‘war reciprocity’ where attack/retaliations and strikes/counterstrikes are reciprocal in nature.

This started with a foreign policy shift in late 2020 and now ICBM have been used in kinetic warfare for THE FIRST TIME EVER.

At the present moment, we straddle the transition line from full scale regional war to limited scale global war.

When historically unprecedented events encroach on historically drawn nuclear red lines, like the firing of nuclear-capable ICBMs in war for the first time ever, the opposing sides to any World War begin to solidify immediately and a quick scan of today’s legacy media news will demonstrate that process as ongoing.

As one real-time, 2-part example, consider this from a supposed ally:

1. Russia Is The Biggest Threat To Global Peace… According To Brits

2. UK Inks Defense Pact With Moldova To Counter ‘Russian Aggression’

It’s important to note that the shaping of the sides to any global war has been a long-examined aspect of the analysis and there has been no deviation from what has been projected, which is what is currently playing out.

Overlay the fact sets and the novel aspect of ICBMs with existing analysis respective to the 1-projected timeline and 2-the notion of war reciprocity:

1-TIMELINE: “Frame the timing analysis around what was positioned in the last two articles: “Putin said it’s firing long range missiles inside Russia, Inauguration Day is 63 days out and Joe just said FIRE AWAY! Position those 63 days within the projected range for a kinetic flashpoint to WWIII that has been forever positioned in the analysis: 05 Nov 24 +/- 3 months.”

2-RECIPROCITY: “The reciprocal of long-range missile strikes inside Russia, authorized by the US President, ordered by the IC/Pentagon/NATO/State and using US missiles is this: long-range missile strikes inside the United States, authorized by the Russian President, ordered by the Ministry of Defence and using Russian missiles.”

A lot of ground was covered between these two things: FOREIGN POLICY SHIFT BY BIDEN TO TARGET RUSSIA >>> RUSSIA’S USE OF ICBMs IN THE PROXY WAR THE U.S. STARTED.

Now ask yourself how much ground is left between these two things: RUSSIA’S USE OF ICBMs >>> US/NATO USE OF ICBMs?

How long does it take to cover that ground given the incidents of this week?

And how much between these two things: US/NATO USE OF ICBMs >>> FIRST TIME USE OF NUCLEAR MISSILES?

How long to cover that ground?

How much between these: FIRST TIME USE OF NUCLEAR MISSILES >>> LIMITED SCALE GLOBAL WAR?

And how long to get there?

Don’t think for one second that if this war goes nuclear and global that CONUS evades the warfare.

So, then, how much ground is left and how long does it take to cover it to get to what is outlined above: the reciprocity of nuclear strikes on US soil?

The answer as based on the events from Sunday to now: Not long at all and perhaps just a flash [to be taken figuratively and literally.]

The initial use of any such nuclear weapons would likely entail low-yield tactical devices but they are nuclear nonetheless and that is what the IC/DoD/NATO/State conglomerate requires in order to predicate the operational green light to do what it has always desired to do: FIRE ITS OWN NUCLEAR MISSILES DIRECTLY AT RUSSIA.

CRITICAL LENS/Justification to achieve operational objectives: If Putin elects to use low-yield tactical nuclear weapons [or higher yield nuclear weapons] in response to any US/NATO ICBM strike inside Russia, the US/NATO would reciprocate in-kind with its own nuclear strikes and because the strikes could be justified in order to prevent Putin conducting further nuclear strikes, it’s reasonable to think the US/NATO would target the facilities and assets used to manufacture and deploy them.

Any such scenario is sufficient to plunge us into World War III.

Two points of emphasis carry over to illustrate this:

Point of Emphasis-1

“Where is the threshold line to break Putin’s measured and calculated restraint? [Undetermined but encroaching closely on it. Best call: US is baiting Russia into a military response, which will be co-opted into a false-flag operation and positioned as a nuclear strike on Ukraine with attribution to Russia. This would permit strikes or counterstrikes on Russia depending on how it unpacked and that is the operational objective. Plenty of nuclear red lines already exist as issued by Biden and Putin so the existing pretext for such an operation is robust.]”

Most concerning could be the ability of the IC/DoD/NATO/State conglomerate to carry-out false flag operations that would box Putin in, force his hand and leave him no other options as described.

Point of Emphasis-2

It’s a race against time to see if Donald Trump can survive to be inaugurated and as Commander in Chief to intercede on this deliberate and insane 4-year march to Armageddon by Joe Biden and the Biden Administration as a proxy for the IC/DoD/NATO/State conglomerate.

Fit all of that in to the projected 05 Nov 24 +/- 3 months timeline framed by the 20 Jan 25 inauguration of Donald J. Trump as 47 to evaluate the timeline on the current escalated trajectory and the forecast is a dark one.

SUMMARY REMARKS

If Tom shoots your brother, that’s one thing and you have one declared enemy.

If I spend years and billions grooming Tom, put Tom in place, hand Tom the biggest gun you can buy, order Tom to fire and kill your brother and then Tom fires and kills your brother, that’s a completely different thing and now your enemies form a list.

Like I said, manufactured insanity.

If:

1. Putin can continue exercising measured restraint in avoiding the nuclear red line false flag trap to which the IC/DoD/NATO/State conglomerate is carefully and incrementally advancing him towards and

2. Putin can apply the same measured restraint to whatever else is directed at him and Russia and

3. Nuclear weapons can continue to be excluded from the war theater[s] and

4. Donald Trump can survive to be inaugurated on 20 Jan 25

Then maybe Mr. Trump can intercede on the insanity of a manufactured march to a global thermonuclear war in order to reset us back to 0. Global peace.

Let’s pray that happens.

Let’s make the world great again.

Let’s start that process here in America and lead by example.

MAGA.

-End-