Source: The Duran youtube
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
The Duran | Frontline update and Ukraine counterattacks with Stanislav Krapivnik | Feb. 16, 2026
Labels
Alex Christoforou,
NATO,
Russia,
Stanislav Krapivnik,
The Duran,
Ukraine
/
Andrei Martyanov | Losers' Ball | Feb. 15, 2026
Labels
Andrei Martyanov,
EU,
NATO,
Russia,
Ukraine
/
Patrik Baab | Europe's New Iron Curtain - Freedom of Speech Dies | Feb. 14, 2026
Labels
EU,
Glenn Diesen,
Patrik Baab,
Russia,
Ukraine
/
Source: Glenn Diesen youtube
Description:
Patrik Baab is a German journalist and best-selling author who reported on both sides of the frontline in Ukraine. Baab outlines how the freedom of speech is destroyed by a failing political elite.
Description:
Patrik Baab is a German journalist and best-selling author who reported on both sides of the frontline in Ukraine. Baab outlines how the freedom of speech is destroyed by a failing political elite.
Ben Norton | Iran Strikes MASSIVE Blow to Trump as China & Russia Arm Tehran | Feb. 13, 2026
Source: DannyHaiphong youtube
Description:
Ben Norton joins the show to discuss Iran's powerful response to Trump's threats, China & Russia's critical support which has ramped up in recent days, and why the US is on the back foot on all fronts against Iran and the multipolar world.
Description:
Ben Norton joins the show to discuss Iran's powerful response to Trump's threats, China & Russia's critical support which has ramped up in recent days, and why the US is on the back foot on all fronts against Iran and the multipolar world.
Alex Christoforou | Bondi disaster. Zelensky no elections. Merz blames Germans for economy woes. Trump commits to strike | Feb. 12, 2026
Pepe Escobar | Iran Forces US Navy to RETREAT, Trump in SHOCK as Russia & BRICS Step In | Feb. 10, 2026
Source: Danny Haiphong youtube
Description:
Pepe Escobar joins the show to discuss reports of US Navy in retreat as Iran's war maneuvers send Trump scrambling for a face saving move. Meanwhile, Russia & BRICS are engaging in naval drills themselves as the risk of global confrontation enters a new phase. What is the impact of Trump's Iran Nightmare on the world?
Description:
Pepe Escobar joins the show to discuss reports of US Navy in retreat as Iran's war maneuvers send Trump scrambling for a face saving move. Meanwhile, Russia & BRICS are engaging in naval drills themselves as the risk of global confrontation enters a new phase. What is the impact of Trump's Iran Nightmare on the world?
Col. Douglas Macgregor | What if IRAN's MISSILE DEFENSE WORKS? | Feb. 10, 2026
Labels
China,
Colonel Douglas Macgregor,
Iran,
Israel,
Lt Col Daniel Davis,
Russia,
Trump
/
Source: Daniel Davis youtube
Description:
The discussion examines a potential U.S.–Israel military campaign against Iran, emphasizing that this scenario is fundamentally different from past limited strikes. From the Iranian perspective, previous attacks were framed as narrow and restrained; this time, signals suggest a broader campaign aimed at regime collapse or even state disintegration. That shift would dramatically change Iran’s calculations and response.
The speaker argues that air campaigns alone rarely achieve decisive political outcomes. Historical examples—World War II bombing, Kosovo in 1999, and Serbia’s resilient air defenses—show that even prolonged, intensive air operations struggle to neutralize defenses or force capitulation without political or diplomatic leverage. Applied to Iran, this raises serious doubts about expectations of a short or clean operation.
Iran’s defensive capabilities are now significantly stronger than in the past. In addition to Russian systems like the S-300, Iran has integrated advanced Chinese HQ-9B long-range air defense systems, reportedly capable of engaging stealth aircraft and resisting electronic countermeasures. Even if these systems are only 70–80% effective, they could impose meaningful losses on attacking forces.
More importantly, Iran now has substantial offensive capabilities. Unlike Serbia in 1999, Iran can strike back with a large ballistic missile arsenal. If attacked, Iranian leaders have clearly stated they would respond without restraint—targeting U.S. bases, radar sites, command-and-control hubs, ships at sea, and Israel. Aircraft carriers and naval assets do not need to be sunk to be neutralized; even limited damage could render them ineffective and politically shocking.
The discussion stresses that what some planners assume would be a brief 10–14 day operation could stretch much longer, while the U.S. and its allies may face serious constraints on missile inventories and resupply. Precision missiles are complex and slow to produce, and current stockpiles may be closer to depletion than publicly acknowledged.
Although some military and political figures publicly advocate the military option as the “best” path to regime collapse, the speaker argues that this view understates the risks. A sustained campaign would likely involve massive strikes in the first 24 hours, followed by prolonged escalation in which Iran may outlast Western missile supplies.
The conclusion is stark: this would be a high-risk operation with unpredictable consequences, likely involving widespread regional damage, heavy retaliation, and escalation across all conventional means short of nuclear weapons. Historical caution—such as Eisenhower’s rejection of escalation in Korea—is offered as a reminder that wars intended to be decisive and controlled often become long, costly, and uncontrollable.
Description:
The discussion examines a potential U.S.–Israel military campaign against Iran, emphasizing that this scenario is fundamentally different from past limited strikes. From the Iranian perspective, previous attacks were framed as narrow and restrained; this time, signals suggest a broader campaign aimed at regime collapse or even state disintegration. That shift would dramatically change Iran’s calculations and response.
The speaker argues that air campaigns alone rarely achieve decisive political outcomes. Historical examples—World War II bombing, Kosovo in 1999, and Serbia’s resilient air defenses—show that even prolonged, intensive air operations struggle to neutralize defenses or force capitulation without political or diplomatic leverage. Applied to Iran, this raises serious doubts about expectations of a short or clean operation.
Iran’s defensive capabilities are now significantly stronger than in the past. In addition to Russian systems like the S-300, Iran has integrated advanced Chinese HQ-9B long-range air defense systems, reportedly capable of engaging stealth aircraft and resisting electronic countermeasures. Even if these systems are only 70–80% effective, they could impose meaningful losses on attacking forces.
More importantly, Iran now has substantial offensive capabilities. Unlike Serbia in 1999, Iran can strike back with a large ballistic missile arsenal. If attacked, Iranian leaders have clearly stated they would respond without restraint—targeting U.S. bases, radar sites, command-and-control hubs, ships at sea, and Israel. Aircraft carriers and naval assets do not need to be sunk to be neutralized; even limited damage could render them ineffective and politically shocking.
The discussion stresses that what some planners assume would be a brief 10–14 day operation could stretch much longer, while the U.S. and its allies may face serious constraints on missile inventories and resupply. Precision missiles are complex and slow to produce, and current stockpiles may be closer to depletion than publicly acknowledged.
Although some military and political figures publicly advocate the military option as the “best” path to regime collapse, the speaker argues that this view understates the risks. A sustained campaign would likely involve massive strikes in the first 24 hours, followed by prolonged escalation in which Iran may outlast Western missile supplies.
The conclusion is stark: this would be a high-risk operation with unpredictable consequences, likely involving widespread regional damage, heavy retaliation, and escalation across all conventional means short of nuclear weapons. Historical caution—such as Eisenhower’s rejection of escalation in Korea—is offered as a reminder that wars intended to be decisive and controlled often become long, costly, and uncontrollable.
Mohammad Marandi & Larry C. Johnson | U.S. & Iran on the Brink as Critical Negotiations Unfold LIVE | Feb. 10, 2026
Labels
China,
EU,
Iran,
Larry C. Johnson,
Prof. Mohammad Marandi,
Russia,
Trump,
Ukraine
/
John Helmer | Shadow Fleet Showdown: U.S. Seizes Russian Tankers as Global Power Deals Unravel | Feb. 10, 2026
Andrei Martyanov | Lavrov Unchained | Feb. 9, 2026
Labels
Andrei Martyanov,
EU,
Russia,
Sergey Lavrov,
Ukraine
/
Source: smoothiex12.blogspot.com
Description:
Lavrov using proper definitions. UK is in charge, but it fails.
Description:
Lavrov using proper definitions. UK is in charge, but it fails.
