TrueValueMetrics ... Impact Accounting for the 21st Century

Date: 2025-01-04 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00027700

THE UKRAINE WAR BALLISTIC MISSILES TimesRadio: Philip Ingram says Putin will ‘lose everything’ if he goes nuclear as intercontinental ballistics strike Ukraine PLAY YOUTUBE VIDEO Original article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEJ3XNcFZbE Peter Burgess COMMENTARY During the past week I have attended business events organizes by the 'Big Tech industry (Google)' and social events organized by friends of my family. In both cases I have been surprised that reference to anything to do with the 'state of the world' or geopolitics was completely missing. This bothers me! But to some extent it explains why the American election resulted in a win for Donald Trump in the recent US Presidential Election. There is a huge disconnect between what the electorate thinks and understands and what is political reality. In two completely different settings ... everyone was ignoring anything and everything political! I am not sure what to make of this ... but I am worried. I was born in January 1940 in the early days of World War II. When I was growing up, I remember my parents talking about the early days of the war and how it was not until Pearl Harbour in December 1942 that America declared war! Britain had been alone in the fight for around 2 years! In that time ... something like 2 years ... the USA had supplied a massive amount of military support. But it was not a gift! It most mostly supplied under the 'Lend-Lease Program' which meant that Britian got to use critical equipment 'now' but would pay for it later. For the United States this was perfect ... but not so much for the UK. Interestingly, Ukraine is going through the same process around 80 years later. In the case of the UK and WWII some of the US Lend Lease Debt was forgiven but most was not. Britain was repaying War Loans for most of my childhood and certainly until the mid-1950s. Peter Burgess
Putin will ‘lose everything’ if he goes nuclear as intercontinental ballistics strike Ukraine Times Radio Nov 21, 2024 1.08M subscribers ... 349,105 views ... 6.4K likes World In 10 \| Podcast 'If he does that, he will loose everything. His government will collapse. Russia will collapse as a country. He will lose his activity in Ukraine.' Former military intelligence colonel Philip Ingram discusses the reports of Russian intercontinental ballistic missile striking Ukraine. Join this channel to get access to perks - / @listentotimesradio 📻 Listen to Times Radio - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio 🗞 Subscribe to The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/subscribe/... 📲 Get the free Times Radio app https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/how-... Transcript 0:00 Putin knows if he does that he will lose um everything you know his government will collapse Russia will collapse as a country he will lose um his activity in in Ukraine hello and welcome to a special interview for the world in 10 the times is daily podcast about Global Security and I'm delighted today to be joined by former Colonel Philip Ingram who's previously served as a military intelligence officer in the UK armed forces and as a NATO planner and he's a regular voice on times radio philli welcome we want to speak today specifically about Russia's alleged use of an intercontinental ballistic missile against the Ukrainian city of denpro first things first what are we talking about here what is an intercontinental ballistic missile right the clues in the name so InterContinental it can go go very long distances between different continents so um and Ballistic is the way the missile fires so it goes up vertically um and then will come down vertically in a ballistic uh um 1:00 trajectory so it'll come down fast in the speed of sign um an intercontinental ballistic missile the one that they were talking of here um has the nto designation ss31 if this is the one that was used um there's some debate on that at the moment it's got a range of about 5,800 kilm um it's fired from a mobile truck or or specifically designed um and it effectively goes up to the edge of space and then comes down designed to carry four independently targetable nuclear warheads or conventional Warheads so missiles are designed to take something that will go bang the other end um it could be conventional could be nuclear um uh to have an effect and it's all range so you get short range ballistic missiles you get intercontinental ballistic missiles then you get cruise missiles which are completely different because they fly like an aircraft they don't go up to come down um very fast indeed and of course we should be clear there is no suggestion that this was armed with any kind of nuclear warhead but the very fact that Vladimir Putin is clearly 2:01 decided he wants to send a weapon designed to carry a nuclear warhead into Ukraine is pretty ominous what do you make of that decision by Russia to launch one um we've we've got a bit of um manhood weaving going on between missiles and missile sizes because of course this week we had the US decision to authorize Ukraine to use the attack's missile inside Russia um which is a a smaller missile it's a ballistic missile it's a tactical ballistic missile so um and then we had following from that um the reported use of the UK French Storm Shadow or scalp um cruise missile ins inside um Russia uh and that is you know a a tactical missile as well um in the Warhead of carries but it flies differently and then Putin's going well my missile is bigger than your missile so I'm going to fire um what has been reported as an intercontinental ballistic missile there' have been some reports out of the United States and other places to say that no it was just 3:01 a normal ballistic missile so there's there's different ranges that can that can be fired you know effectively the missile is bigger it's longer it's got more fuel that gives it more range um and they can carry similar or bit you the bigger missiles carry bigger payloads because they've got more thrust and more engine power in them how seriously do you think we should take the nuclear Threat by Russia I mean Vladimir Putin in recent weeks has changed the Russian nuclear Doctrine he's essentially lowered the threshold that would be required for Russia to launch a nuclear strike and this clearly will alarm a lot of people this use of this intercontinental ballistic missile so how seriously should we take that risk well I think as soon as anyone starts threatening nuclear responses we should take it seriously because we're not in a position to be able to react to that and it and you can't get there quickly at all so we need to start preparations in case someone uses it is Vladimir Putin going to use a nuclear weapon anytime soon or are there any indications to suggest he going to no and the reason why even if he uses a 4:02 tactical nuclear weapon and that uh is usually defined on the range of the the the weapon and the yield that comes out of it which is which is very important um even if he uses a tactical nuclear weapon um against the ukrainians or as a demonstration um of his intent if as soon as he explodes that as soon as he uses it he will lose immediately the taset support that he's relying on from China and from India and those are the two big ones that would hurt him Iran North Korea wouldn't really care but um as soon as he does that India will not want to accept any Russian oil to process into um from crude oil into petroleum products and others that they can sell back to us at huge inflated prices um and China will suddenly go we can't get associated with this because of the trade sanctions that could come in and we're going to have to condemn it and push you away Putin knows if he does that he will lose um everything you know his government will collapse Russia will collapse as a country he will lose um 5:01 his activity in in Ukraine Moscow has also declared that the new American ballistic missile defense base in Northern Poland which was opened only last week is a threat to Russia and we've also had this week the temporary closure of the US Embassy in ke because of fears of a a potential Air Attack is Putin trying to deliver a warning to the west and the US in particular at the moment Putin's playing the information game what he wants to do is threaten us and you he he's the bully with a big stick and as soon as he thinks that the stick isn't big enough he gets another one and he'll stand there slapping the stick in his hand and he slap it even louder um because he knows that that will take up political capital in debating it it'll create doubt in people's minds you know he knows that there's a change of regime coming in um in uh the United States with the Trump presidency taking over from Biden he's trying to influence that it's all about influencing he knows that there is going to be an election in Germany in in 202 because the German government's 6:00 collapsed he knows that there's debate going on around other parts of of Europe and other parts of the world so he and he's trying to maintain this strong man stance to those that are supporting him so to China you're showing that he's he's he's strong to to India to Iran to North Korea and to the The Wider bricks community that that that that he's part of to try and suggest that Russia is still this strong um country that's that's out there and that's important to him but it's all rhetoric and but if we look at how much debating time is taking up with our politicians um in in um the commentary that's going on not just in the UK but across the globe he's succeeding in doing that if a nuclear strike by Russia remains highly unlikely are we likely to see an increase in other kinds of tactics I mean specifically this so-called hybrid Warfare things like cyber attacks on critical infrastructure sabotage even targeted assassinations the times has been reporting about exploding parcels distribution centers in the UK and 7:01 Germany are those the kind of tactics we may see more of now oh 100% we are seeing more of it you know only in the past couple of days we've had the Chinese Flagship um allegedly captained by a Russian in the Baltic um being accused of damaging or or cutting um internet cables between different states in the Baltic um and you the Danish Navy went and have intercepted that ship and it's currently at anchor while the investigation's ongoing um you mentioned the Parcels in the DHL distribution centers one in the UK and one in leig and Germany these were Parcels that were going to go on aircraft that could have brought aircraft IR um and they've been linked back to the Russians we've seen um uh there's been confirmed Russian activity in burning the deal um Factory down in Berlin now deal is a huge um arms manufacturer um and that mysteriously caught fire we've had warehouses that have been um storing and sending stuff to Ukraine in London that have caught fire and individuals have 8:00 been prosecuted and as part of that the the court cases their links to Russia has come out and of course you going back historically we've got the novit talk attack on Sergi scripal in 2018 and then going even further back we've got the polonium 210 attack on Alexander laneno um it's always been there in the background but yes we are seeing a ramping up of activity but the biggest area we're seeing a ramping up of is in the areas that is is causing um fractions between intern AAL organizations or in political structures within countries it's it's getting that proverbial information knife in and wiggling it to to try and create debate to try and take up political time debating things that um will mean that that time can't be spent on dealing with um issues that are coming out of Russia and of course it's stimulating other things that around the world you know if we look at what's going on in the Middle East in particular with Israel who's the big winner out of the 7th of October attack it's Vladimir Putin because he came off the front page headlines um and 9:01 everything then focused elsewhere and lots of political effort military effort and diplomatic effort is focused on what's going on um with in in Israel and going on in the Middle East Putin's been quietly continuing what he's doing um in in inside Ukraine and has been off the headlines on the attacks and the Storm Shadow missiles of course the attacks are us supplied longrange missiles and the storm Shadows of UK supplied longrange missiles what explains the kind of difference in messaging around their approval because with the attacks we had this kind of briefing last weekend saying Biden is going to allow Ukraine to fire them in the KK region of Russia and yet with the Storm Shadow the first that we knew that they obviously had been approved for use inside Russia was that they had been used what explains that difference and is one better than the other I suppose it depends on whether you look at things militarily or diplomatically well that that's that's the reason why there's a difference from a military perspective the the best uh proof of use um whenever 10:01 you're dealing with an enemy is for for it to land on them and go bang um without them being told it's going to come at some stage because they can prepare some form of defenses or start to look out for them and why was there a difference well as you said the US attackers missile is is US owned um I think the authorization only came in now because what um President Biden didn't want to do was whenever the polls were saying that the US presidential election was on a um you a shoestring there was a hairs breadth between the two sides as all the polls did say um he didn't want to push any voters one way or the other and that's why he was indecisive so it was us domestic politics that stopped the decision to allow the use of these um uh weapons inside Russian territory um neither Donald Trump's come in um it's right and proper that he makes that decision and says get on with it I I even think and I've I've got no evidence of this but it could have been Donald Trump's team that's come in and said we support you in doing this because you 11:00 make the decision and then when we when we come in we don't have to make the decision that gives us more maneuver room when it comes to negotiations with each side on the British side it's slightly more complex because the Storm Shadow missile is a joint venture between um the UK and France um and therefore there are two Nations involved and they have to both get their decisions uh give their decisions for for its appropriate use but also because it relies on certain electronics that come from the United States um from a guidance perspective and these are military guidance levels so so it relies on um components that are what are called itar um controlled which are supplied to the US government under very specific rules as to how they can be used and everything else um because they're they're military grd and it's using us systems there was the US um authorization that was needed for them to be used as well as soon as the decision was made for uh the attack hims to be done that automatically meant that they'd make the decision on the Storm Shadow or scalp as the French call it um 12:00 and therefore it could be used and just finally philli you know given the events of the past few days of the past week or so and we've seen the approval of the attacks and the Storm Shadow we've seen Putin changing Russian nuclear Doctrine now we've got the use of this intercontinental ballistic missile which is pretty unprecedented the use of it on a on a city is this the most volatile the war in Ukraine has been since the early days of Russia's fullscale Invasion um yes um and and your both sides are are hurting very badly um especially with the Manpower that they've got to to continue to fight the Tactical battles um and you know you you get two wounded rats and have them in this in the same pen and that's when they become desperate and that's when when they become more dangerous so we have to be very careful about this however the the one thing I will say is we have to be careful about analyzing who's winning and losing by just looking at the Tactical battle and the analogy I'll use here is if you look at Vietnam the United States didn't lose a single Tactical battle in Vietnam they lost the 13:02 war and therefore by trying to suggest that Putin is winning tactically in the East when we look at you know his economy collapsing um you know potatoes have gone up 65% in price in the last year Butter's gone up 30% in the last year Chinese banks are turning around and doing extra checks on um credit lines whenever they're U doing business into into Russian companies and all the rest of it um you look at the Russian economy in the whole and it's on the edge of collapse where we're going to get to the end of this war is not necessarily a military Victory on the battlefield it's going to be um a victory that will influence what's going on in the battlefield and that could be the collapse of um the country's economy the collapse of a government the collapse of Putin and all the rest of it where uh you Russia is forced in into that position it could equally be the same for Ukraine where if there isn't the military support that's in there um they don't have the economic with all and Europe isn't giving it that level of 14:01 political support um and you get that political collapse rather than it being something decisive on the battlefield Philip we always appreciate your time thank you so much thank you

SITE COUNT