Written by Eric Zuesse

U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media and think tanks are constantly using the phrase (or equivalents) “Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine”as-if Russia’s democratically elected President Vladimir Putin (whose job-approval-rating by his fellow-citizens is — and long has been — vastly higher than is that of America’s President) ever DID actually threaten to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

But it’s all a lie by the U.S.-and-allied regimes, because he hasn’t. The U.S.-and-allied regimes lie routinely, just as they did in 2002 and 2003 about “Saddam’s WMD,” and they’ve been doing it nonstop ever since, unapologetically, boldly — insultingly, to their public.

For an example of a think tank that pounds away on this lie as being a truth, consider the U.S. Government front NGO, “Arms Control Association,” which hypes the danger that Russia will initiate a nuclear WW III, by its arguing, as their Senior Policy Analyst, Shannon Bugos, mumbled (and stumbled, with her obvious difficulty reading her pre-prepared text) the U.S. empire’s case, in a 12 October 2022 youtube presentation, “Putin’s Latest Nuclear Threats: What’s at Stake and What Can Be Done to Walk Back from the Brink?” She says (though cleaned-up by me here, in this transcription from her droning delivery, which dripped and dropped with evident contempt of both Russia and Putin) starting at 1:50- in:

During a ceremony marking Russia’s official still illegal annexation of those four regions, Putin emphasized that Moscow will do everything it can and use all the forces and resources at its disposal to defend Russia. These two more recent threats by Putin carry with them greater concern. The September 21st threat expands the scenarios in which Russia will contemplate nuclear use, and the September 30th threat exacerbated concerns of nuclear use as Russia confirmed that an attack by Ukraine in those four regions annexed by Russia equates to an attack on Russia, and [that] if such an attack is viewed as a threat to Russia’s territorial Integrity by Moscow, then Putin may think about using nuclear weapons.

She repeatedly referred to “Russia’s illegal annexation” of Crimea, Donbass and — more recently — two other (adjoining) historically very pro-Russian southeastern regions of the former Ukraine — areas where the Obama-coup Ukrainian Government‘s imposed illegalization of use of the Russian language, and its outlawing of these regions’ main church, the Russian Orthodox congregations, and the Obama-imposed regime’s other extreme indignities against the residents — had made intensely reasonable these regions’ casting aside Ukraine and embracing Russia.

She entirely ignored the indisputable and undisputed illegality of Obama’s having seized Ukraine during a very bloody U.S coup that had been in its planning-stages by the Obama regime since at least June 2011; and, so, whether or not Russia’s absorbing those four regions into Russia on the basis of plebiscites that Russia held in each one of them and which voted overwhelmingly to support such an annexation, was ‘illegal’ in any real sense (other than America’s constant propaganda against Russia) is debatable, at best.

As regards Putin’s — and Russia’s — strict and clearly enunciated Governmental policy on the use of nuclear weapons (of ANY type, including ‘tactical’), here it is:

The conditions specifying the possibility of nuclear weapons use by the Russian Federation are as follows:

  • a) arrival of reliable data on a launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies;
  • b) use of nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction by an adversary against the Russian Federation and/or its allies;
  • c) attack by adversary against critical governmental or military sites of the Russian Federation, disruption of which would undermine nuclear forces response actions;
  • d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.

America’s is far cagier, and far less specific. In fact: leading U.S. experts on the matter have stated that the reality in America is “exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.”

After the U.S. Government and media blatantly, consciously, evilly, and intentionally, lying about “Saddam’s WMD” in order to ‘justify’ invading and destroying Iraq (and with there being so many similar instances of such vileness, by U.S. Presidents in both of America’s corrupt billionaire-controlled political Parties), how can anyone but fools trust the U.S. regime again? And yet it pontificates against other countries that are nowhere near to being so extremely dishonest, evil, and destructive, throughout the world. It’s clearly the world’s champion in hypocrisy. That’s not an emotional statement; it is the clear historical FACT about America after World War II.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.