Ukraine does not have to defend itself from Russia’s attacks

Ukraine does not have to defend itself from Russia’s attacks
Ukraine does not have to defend itself from Russia’s attacks

In recent days,Jens Stoltenberg declared that it would be appropriate to remove the express ban on Ukraine from using Western weapons for attacks in Russia. The war situation has reached a point where Kiev’s clear inferiority in troops and armaments emerges.

The United States is discussing the issue with the secretary of state Antony Blinken in favor of removing the ban. David CameronForeign Secretary of the United Kingdom, on a visit to Kiev stated that it is up to theUkraine decide on the use of weapons received as a gift. The Swedish defense minister takes the same position. Six North Eastern European nations (Norway, Finland, Poland and the three Baltic countries) have recently launched the military program called “drone wall” with reference to an air defense system based on the massive use of missile-hunting drones and other flying weapons.

Scholz and Meloni among Stoltenberg’s opponents

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz took the opposite side to authorizing Ukraine to use Western weapons to attack Russian territory: Germany provided a limited number of cannon batteries, capable of striking at relative depth. Also Giorgia Meloni it ruled in the opposite direction, even if the Italian contribution to the war effort is, in relative terms, particularly limited. The Stoltenberg initiative it aroused strong reactions especially in Italy. To tell the truth, the anomalous and perhaps scandalous fact is constituted by the limit placed by the West and the United States onoffensive use of supplied weapons to Ukraine. Indeed, Kiev vleads a bloody and unequal war to defend the national territory, the people and the Ukrainian state: if it were not in difficult conditions, it would have been natural to refuse such conceptually limited and logically wrong help. Is there anyone around the European capitals who can define the Ukrainian war as an aggressive war?

EU naval team shoots down Houthi drones

The question brings in mind the embarrassing (due to logical and military ignorance) decision of the Union to send a naval team to the Straits area to help fight against the Houthi terrorist guerrillas, who, on mandate from Tehran, have specialized in launching missiles and drones against Western merchant ships, forcing shipping companies to abandon the cheaper route of the Suez Canal and the Mediterranean to circumnavigate Africa. The increase in transport costs is evident, all borne by European economies. While the Americans target and destroy the launch bases, the European naval team has been ordered to limit itself (if it succeeds) to shooting down the drones or missiles launched by the Houthis. The poor interpretation of the term “defense” is evident.

It’s as if during war at Red Brigades the mandate that the Italian State had conferred on Carlo Alberto Dalla Chiesa had been limited to countering their attacks, but had not included their hideouts. The ban on the use of Western weapons in Russian territory had a reason (albeit a questionable one) during the phase of the victorious Ukrainian counter-offensive: the intent not to transform the attacked into an aggressor, pushing Russia onto the path of escalation.

Today this is no longer the case. We are almost ready for Russia to spread across the Ukrainian steppes, while in the meantime Moscow’s air offensive also takes advantage of planes which, following the border, are equipped to launch so-called “flying bombs” equipped with wings that make them glide on the targets, especially civilians. The existing ban, interpreted with wit by obtuse bureaucrats, would prohibit the shooting down of those planes because they were flying over the border.

Troops from the Baltic countries to help the Ukrainians

As the Baltic countries prepare to send fighting troops to the aid of the Ukrainians, it would be better if the heirs of Neville Chamberlain and of Pierre Laval (which in 1938 allowed Hitler to occupy the Sudetenland and take over Czechoslovakia) reflected on the intensity of the risk that the nations of the Union would run in the event of a Ukrainian collapse.

Threats from Moscow and the Salvini-United Russia friendship

There is one final point to consider. I am referring to the threats expressed on behalf of the Kremlin despot by Dmitri Medvedev towards the hypothesis of the use of Western or American weapons on Russian territory: as those who deal with endemic wars in Africa or Asia know well, the threats are aimed at inducing fear in those who receive them. If the person receiving them is not “scared” and reacts firmly, the threats return to the sender. And the best way to exploit Russian threats is the one chosen by our intrepid vice president of the Northern League compliance council, Matteo Salviniwith related political friendship with United Russia, the party of Vladimir Putin.

For Latest Updates Follow us on Google News

PREV arrested. The invalid who died of starvation in Montelibretti
NEXT UniStraPg: public meeting with Lucio Caracciolo in Norcia on 28 June