| Poland’s False Flag! What Comes if Russia Loses in Ukraine? 
 
 
   
 A new poll made by the independent Russian institute Levada shows that  the Russians are growing tired of the war in Ukraine. The poll showed  that 66%, or roughly two out of three, of the participants want the  Kremlin to engage in peace negotiations with Ukraine. That is the  highest number since 2022, when the war began. If NATO attacks Russia  using a false flag, this will support the Rally Around the Flag for  Russia. Let’s face it. Russians are treated with disdain as were the  Jews before World War II. That is not a scenario that implies world  peace lies ahead.
 
 "This drone shot down in Poland from EVERY source I have states that this is a FALSE FLAG   and there is no evidence that this every invaded Polish airspace. They   desperately need to create a False Flag, get gullible people to sign   their own death wish, so these failed EU leaders can keep their  pensions. Ursula told the EU Parliament with great theatrics:"
 
 In a February 2024 speech, UK Chief of the Defence Staff Admiral Sir Tony Radakin stated that “NATO would defeat Russia quickly,”  citing Russia’s struggles in Ukraine as evidence of its military  weaknesses and NATO’s growing strength with the addition of Finland and  Sweden. Similarly, analyses from outlets like Al Jazeera and The Week conclude that NATO’s integrated command, superior training, and equipment would lead to a “quick”  conventional victory. However, they warn that this could escalate to  nuclear risks if Russia faces total defeat. As I have said, if I have a  gun and you break into my house and threaten to kill me, I think I may  shoot back.
 
 Sensational claims, such as NATO submarines “destroying Russia in 30 seconds,”  appear in YouTube videos and informal discussions but stem from  hyperbolic speculation about nuclear scenarios, not official statements.  Recent X posts echo debates on NATO’s superiority but often tie it to  broader geopolitical tensions without referencing its past defeats.  Overall, while NATO officials project confidence in deterrence, they  prioritize avoiding direct war over public victory projections.
 
 This push for war with Russia leaves out TWO critical factors
 
 (1) China will support Russia because it knows it will be next, as they plainly told Kallas.
 
 (2) This will turn nuclear, and Europe, with all its conventional power, can be turned to dust in minutes, not days.
 
 
  
 “Europe is ready to take a step forward. We are ready to  take control of the changes that are inevitable. Because we can’t let  history push us around. This means that it is necessary to act now.  Acting on a large scale is an indispensable condition for speed, scale  and strength by 2030 … By 2030 Europe should have a strong European  defense structure,” Ursula said.
 
 This drone shot down in Poland from EVERY source I have states that this is a FALSE FLAG  and there is no evidence that this every invaded Polish airspace. They  desperately need to create a False Flag, get gullible people to sign  their own death wish, so these failed EU leaders can keep their  pensions. Ursula told the EU Parliament with great theatrics:
 
 “Battle lines for a new world order based on power are being drawn right now,” von der Leyen told the European Parliament in her annual State of the EU address.
 
 “So, yes, Europe must fight. For its place in a  world in which many major powers are either ambivalent or openly  hostile to Europe,” she said.
 
 
  
 Putin is the smartest and responsible world leader at the table  today. Remove him, and we will get an emotional leader like Medvedev.  Speculating on a post-Putin Russia is inherently uncertain, as the  regime’s opacity and Putin’s tight control over security services make a  smooth transition debatable. An overthrow—whether via coup, elite  infighting, or sudden death—would likely trigger a power struggle among  siloviki (security elites), oligarchs, and technocrats, potentially  leading to instability or even fragmentation. I would emphasize that no  apparent clear heir exists, and the outcome depends on the  circumstances: a managed handover (unlikely in an overthrow) versus  chaotic removal.
 
 I would list the potential replacements, prioritize  loyalty to the current system, hawkish stances on Ukraine/NATO, and  control over key institutions like the FSB, military, or economy, which  will all come into play. Dmitry Medvedev is indeed a contender due to  his proximity to Putin, but he’s not the top pick—his role is often seen  as that of a “bad cop” provocateur rather than a unifying leader.  Perhaps, but we are looking at an outright statement from the EU that  Russia must be defeated and obliterated. We are not talking about just  pushing Russia out of Ukraine.
 
 
 Video Player
 
 In summary, Mishustin or Patrushev edge out as most probable for their  balance of competence and control, but Medvedev remains a wildcard—loyal  enough for continuity, radical enough for drama. Russia after Putin  looks more like Putinism 2.0 than reform. This is all upset if NATO  pushes its agenda to destroy Russia and break it up, strip mining its  assets. This goal, as articulated in part by Kallas, warrants a fight to  the death with nukes, and in this case, I would put my money on  Medvedev, who has the high-profile that would become more valuable when  confronted with the destruction of Russia, not with just pushing it out  of Ukraine.   armstrongeconomics.com
 |