An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.

Ukraine and the West Now in Possession of Russia’s War Plans

It was just a few days ago, this website published a piece how Ukraine with the help of the United States was exploiting abandoned Russian equipment on the battlefield. This included interrogations of Russian conscripts, weapons, manuals and military gear. But as days go by, the Russian foot soldiers are proving to be quite unprepared and even sloppy. How so you ask?

Is the Ukraine-Russia meeting a path forward or political sideshow? - CNN source

If you don’t think our enemies and adversaries keep a close tab on all things military and political, this should change your mind. Putin’s war plan for Ukraine is for the most part the exact military strategy the United States used for the Iraq conflict.

Russia’s war plan for the battle for Ukraine was to last 15 days…it is no wonder that Putin has in fact authorized the hiring of Syrian urban war-fighters to join his forces.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine: What's going on on the battlefield source

But read on…

Source: Ukraine’s Defense Ministry said Wednesday that its armed forces had seized secret battle plans left behind by Russian soldiers. It said the documents suggested Russia’s war with Ukraine would last 15 days.

The seized documents were posted on Facebook by the ministry and showed the war plans of one of the units of the battalion tactical group of the 810th Separate Guards Naval Infantry Brigade of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, the ministry said.

An invasion map, a table of call signs, and a list of personnel were in the documents, according to Ukraine’s Defense Ministry.

The ministry’s Facebook post followed a similar disclosure on the social-media site by Ukraine’s Joint Forces Operation.

“Thanks to the successful actions of one of the Armed Forces of Ukraine’s units, Russian occupiers are losing not only equipment and manpower,” the defense ministry said. “In panic attacks, they are leaving classified documents.”

The ministry said that based on the documents, Russia approved its invasion of Ukraine on January 18.

The operation was meant to last 15 days from February 20 to March 6, the ministry said based on its review of the documents. Insider could not independently verify this conclusion.

One of the documents posted by the ministry appeared to be dated January 18, a full month before Russia attacked — while another planning document of call signs for different units spanned the dates February 20 to March 6, with daily code-name changes for different Russian commands to contact each other without disclosing their identities.

The documents did not appear to give any information about Russian forces taking any Ukrainian city.

Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his country’s invasion of Ukraine in the early-morning hours of February 24. The full extent of Putin’s plan to assault Ukraine has been unclear, but a former Russian deputy foreign minister told Al Jazeera that he had information that the Russian leader wanted to declare victory within a week — a goal that now appears extremely unlikely, with Russian forces having seized only one major Ukrainian city after six days of fighting.

Ukraine’s Defense Ministry said the “final objective” by these Russian forces who had the planning documents “was to block and seize” the southeastern Ukrainian city of Melitopol.

“That is why you should not trust when a prisoner of war is saying again that he or she came to the exercises and got lost! They knew, they planned precisely and they had been preparing,” the ministry said on Facebook.

It added, “Our response to the Russian occupiers is the following: Keep leaving your vehicles and classified documents, they will be useful for our defenders and The Hague.”

Translations by Nikita Angarski.

 

U.S. Intelligence Collecting Data on Russian Military Loses

Primer:

Ukraine is launching a Telegram bot to collect evidence of war crimes as the International Criminal Court said it would launch an investigation into Russia’s invasion.

The General Staff of the Armed Forces in Ukraine said Tuesday the country’s Security Service has launched the bot so people can record and submit war crimes Russia is committing against Ukrainians, according to a group of independent Ukrainian journalists.

The country also has a bot on Telegram where civilians can report movements for Russian troops and vehicles.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and other officials have said Russia is committing war crimes while the U.S. has confirmed Russia is going after schools and hospitals.

ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan said “allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide committed on any part of the territory of Ukraine by any person” will be investigated.

“There were numerous examples of war crimes provided by President Zelensky – mayors have been captured, imprisoned and murdered. There’s wholesale attacks on civilian targets, random, indiscriminate, and the Putin war machine, in my view, is in full blown war crimes mode,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) previously said.

Additional reading

Newsweek reports:

Russian military equipment seized by Ukrainian forces throughout an explosive conflict poised to enter its third week may prove a gold mine for U.S. intelligence looking to get a rare look at Moscow’s weapons and the encrypted command and control data they contain, current and former U.S. military personnel told Newsweek.

“The gear is huge,” Mike Jason, a retired U.S. Army colonel who served in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo, told Newsweek. “It’s like capturing an enigma machine.”

The term refers to the cipher device employed by Nazi Germany during World War II to mask the Third Reich’s secret communications, a code ultimately unraveled by the Allies, constituting a major intelligence advantage.

Now as Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to argue today for the “denazification” of Ukraine through what he has deemed a “special military operation” decried by much of the international community as an unjustified invasion of the neighboring country, an opportunity may exist to listen in on Moscow’s war effort.

Should Ukraine get its hands on such assets, Jason said there are “immediate implications” and “long-term implications,” including those that involve the country’s foreign backers.

Among the potential “immediate” impacts would be that Kyiv “can perhaps listen in right now to what is happening, then exploit in real-time,” Jason said. One of the possible “long-term” effects he identified was that “the equipment can be reverse-engineered, say, sent to a major foreign intelligence exploitation lab, etc.”

Here, Jason said, even seemingly innocuous devices such as radios, if still intact, could contain important so-called “crypto” information, giving an insight into Russia’s encoded communications.

“And then,” he added, “technology can be developed to jam and/or listen in, etc.”

Given the active war effort, U.S. military officials have been reticent in speaking publicly about the extent to which intelligence was being shared between Washington and Kyiv. Reached for comment, a Pentagon spokesperson told Newsweek that “we have nothing to offer, as we do not speak to intelligence assessments.”

But one U.S. cyberwarfare officer, who asked to remain anonymous, told Newsweek that “we have covert folks attempting to acquire hardware all the time.”

And, though no reliable figures as to the extent of Russia’s military losses thus far have been made public, reports indicate they have been relatively substantial. Unverified footage promoted by official Ukrainian outlets has documented Ukrainian captures of the likes of Russian command and control vehicles, a T-72-tank-mounted TOS-1A thermobaric multiple-launch rocket system and a number of Russian aircraft, including the Su-34.

Ukrainian state-owned defense conglomerate Ukroboronprom even claimed Tuesday it would offer sizable rewards for anyone willing to retrieve “stolen combat aviation equipment of the occupiers,” including up to $500,000 for a captured military helicopter and $1 million for a warplane in working condition.

One particularly important alleged find for Kyiv was the Pantsir surface-to-air missile system, several of which have been said to have been taken intact by Ukrainian units. Jason said this would potentially be “a huge get,” as it’s assumed such a weapon “talks to friendly aircraft to deconflict friend-or-foe” and “would be tied to command and control systems at a high level.”more weapons ukraine russia source

There is certainly precedent for Ukraine to share captured intelligence and equipment with their U.S. partners.

“That is normal practice,” former Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council chief Oleksandr Danylyuk told Newsweek, noting that Ukraine’s military and intelligence engaged in such exchanges during his time in office.

“I cannot tell you what it was, but it was very beneficial,” Danylyuk said. “We were receiving some equipment in exchange…very high-tech as well,” he added. “This co-operation works. And now we will be benefiting from this even more, because whatever the West learns about Russia will be helpful to us as well.”

Asked by Newsweek what the fate of such Russian equipment was once coming under Ukrainian control, a senior Ukrainian defense official who requested to not be named had a simple answer.

“It is recovered and used against the aggressor,” he said.

A U.S. military aviator who also asked to remain unnamed gave some examples of the benefits of capturing enemy hardware.

“Getting actual equipment and manuals also helps with the human dynamic: how easy it is to operate, etc,” the U.S. military aviator told Newsweek. “Can any ‘Joe Shmoe’ use this, or does it require a Ph.D. to operate it at the same level as the glossy brochure?”

But this aviator also noted that there were limits to the amount of useful information that could be extracted from these systems alone in the modern era, when a nation like Russia would likely be quick to take action to avoid critical channels being intruded on.

“As systems move from analog to digital, the exploitation game changes a bit,” the U.S. military aviator said. “The software and source code are the critical items, because you can find zero-day vulnerabilities and build a tool to attack it if/when the time comes.”

Russia a No-Show at the International Court of Justice

We have heard that the International Criminal Court has opened an investigation into Putin and being a war criminal. Not only is it on full display for more than a week, but his war crimes go back to the conflict in Syria. At least 39 countries have sent referrals to the ICJ regarding Putin’s full scale invasion of Ukraine. The ICJ is expected to fast track the investigation. This could get messy as Russia is not a member of the International Criminal Court and for that matter neither is the United States.

Putin has justified his invasion of Ukraine claiming genocide of Russian citizens as well as ongoing military hostilities. Yeesh.

Many don’t realize that many within Putin’s inner circle have not only turned on him, and have provided intelligence to the West including Ukraine to be able to take offensive measures especially in the matters of the assassination squads sent to kill the members of the Ukraine government including President Zelensky. Additionally, there are others within Putin’s orbit that have resigned and fled Russia for fear of prosecution which really means execution.

One of Putin’s lawyers, Alain Pellet resigned last week and described the reason to be the widely known fact that the Kremlin despises law…including international law. You can read his letter here.

The truth is, the ICJ should not begin or end with Putin as a war criminal, it should included the oligarchs and other Duma operatives that have enabled this war and the illegal activities associated with it including Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin.

Prigozhin is on the FBI’s most wanted list.

Prigozhin3.jpg

He has a long list of criminal charges against him including that troll factory that was located in St. Petersburg that interfered with the 2014 U.S. election process. He has ties to Indonesia and Qatar as well.

The UK is the first country to not only step up in cooperation with the ICJ but has a team that is working the critical task to preserve all evidence of war crimes including shelling location, types of missiles including cluster-bombs and the fact that Russia violated at least 2 cease fires after agreeing to humanitarian escape corridors in Ukraine.

(rather like a feeble Nuremberg trial)

So, what is the process of the International Criminal Court you ask? In part:

The court has 123 member states, but neither Russia nor Ukraine is a party. However, back in 2015 when Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, Ukraine referred the conflict to the court for investigation. And there’s a provision in the Rome Statute — article 12.3 — which allows states that are not members of the court to refer a conflict and allegations of crimes to the court. But an investigation has to be triggered, and one way for that to happen is if one of the 123 member states asks the court to investigate. And it was just announced Thursday night that 39 states referred the Ukraine situation to the International Criminal Court for investigation. So, the prosecutor of that court announced that he is immediately opening up an investigation and will start collecting evidence. That investigation is also open into past crimes that could have occurred in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine.

Why is it important for the court to begin investigating now, rather than waiting for the conflict to end?

Investigations and prosecutions are important even before cases are brought before the court because they bring attention to the crimes that are being committed, and to the victims of these of these crimes. So, even aside from what happens in court down the road, the act of investigating and framing what is happening and naming it is extremely important.

What types of crimes can the International Criminal Court investigate?

The International Criminal Court has jurisdiction over four types of crime: war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression. And there is no doubt that this is an act of aggression by Russia against Ukraine. However, the crime of aggression has a particular requirement, which is different from all the other crimes. It can only be prosecuted by the court if one member state commits an act of aggression against another. Since neither Russia nor Ukraine is a member, the crime of aggression here does not apply. So, the International Criminal Court is focusing on war crimes, and it will also consider crimes against humanity if they arise.

There is also an International Court of Justice. What role does it play?

The International Criminal Court investigates and prosecutes international crimes committed by individuals. The International Court of Justice resolves disputes between states. Ukraine has brought an emergency case before that court, which will be heard next week. The focus of Ukraine’s complaint is that Russia has used as one of its justifications — I’ll say, phony justification — for invading Ukraine the allegation that there is a threat of genocide against Russian nationals living in Ukraine. Ukraine says this is nonsense. The ICJ should rule that there is no such threat and that assertion cannot be used as a justification for the invasion.

Any real hope for justice on this? Not really.

U.S. Military’s Frustration with White House, Diplomats over Afghanistan Evacuation

Crazy when documents eventually surface that tell a very different story than we were told by so many within the Biden administration. Hat tip to the Washington Post for this…hardly believe I can even write that.

Note that some State Department personnel were intoxicate….drunk. And also note what is not in this report….all things CIA that had a huge footprint in country.Passport control - Kabul Airport style - CONTACT magazine source

Senior White House and State Department officials failed to grasp the Taliban’s steady advance on Afghanistan’s capital and resisted efforts by U.S. military leaders to prepare the evacuation of embassy personnel and Afghan allies weeks before Kabul’s fall, placing American troops ordered to carry out the withdrawal in greater danger, according to sworn testimony from multiple commanders involved in the operation.

An Army investigative report, numbering 2,000 pages and released to The Washington Post through a Freedom of Information Act request, details the life-or-death decisions made daily by U.S. soldiers and Marines sent to secure Hamid Karzai International Airport as thousands converged on the airfield in a frantic bid to escape.

Beyond the bleak, blunt assessments of top military commanders, the documents contain previously unreported disclosures about the violence American personnel experienced, including one exchange of gunfire that left two Taliban fighters dead after they allegedly menaced a group of U.S. Marines and Afghan civilians. In a separate incident a few days later, U.S. troops killed a member of an elite Afghan strike unit that had joined the operation and wounded six others after they fired on the Americans.

The investigation was launched in response to an Aug. 26 suicide bombing just outside the airport that killed an estimated 170 Afghan civilians and 13 U.S. service members. But it is much broader, providing perhaps the fullest official account yet of the evacuation operation, which spanned 17 nightmarish days and has become one of the Biden administration’s defining moments — drawing scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats for the haphazard nature in which the United States ended its longest war.

Military personnel would have been “much better prepared to conduct a more orderly” evacuation, Navy Rear Adm. Peter Vasely, the top U.S. commander on the ground during the operation, told Army investigators, “if policymakers had paid attention to the indicators of what was happening on the ground.” He did not identify any administration officials by name, but said inattention to the Taliban’s determination to complete a swift and total military takeover undermined commanders’ ability to ready their forces.

Vasely could not be reached for comment.

The report includes witness statements from dozens of people interviewed after an Islamic State-Khorasan operative detonated a suicide vest at the airport’s Abbey Gate. Senior defense officials announced Friday that the investigation had determined that a single bomb packed with ball bearings caused “disturbing lethality” in the tightly packed outdoor corridor leading to the airfield.

The operation evacuated 124,000 people before concluding about midnight Aug. 31. It required U.S. commanders to strike an unusual security pact with the Taliban and rapidly deploy nearly 6,000 troops to assist a skeleton force of about 600 left behind under Vasely’s command to protect U.S. Embassy personnel. U.S. officials have lauded the effort, but critics have said that although U.S. troops performed heroically, the evacuation was flawed and incomplete, leaving behind hundreds of Americans and tens of thousands of Afghans who supported the war effort and were promised a way out.

John Kirby, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, said in response to questions about the report that while the airlift was a “historic achievement,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has acknowledged it was “not perfect.”

“We are committed to, and are intensely engaged in, an ongoing review of our efforts during the evacuation, the assessments and strategy during the conflict, and the planning in the months before the end of the war,” Kirby said. “We will take those lessons learned, and apply them, as we always do, clearly and professionally.”

Marine Gen. Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie, chief of U.S. Central Command, said in an interview Tuesday that he was “not surprised” commanders had different opinions about how the evacuation could have gone better.

“But remember,” he said, “what did happen is we came together and executed a plan. There are profound frustrations; commanders, particularly subordinate commanders, they see very clearly the advantages of other courses of action. However, we had a decision, and we had an allocation of forces. You proceed based on that.”

There “might have been other plans that we would have preferred,” the general added, “but when the president makes a decision, it’s time for us to execute the president’s decision.”

Military officials told investigators that although the evacuation was in many ways cobbled together on the fly, planning within the Defense Department began months earlier. Initial discussions presumed the possible use of Bagram air base, a sprawling U.S. military installation 30 miles north of Kabul, and assistance from Afghan government forces to help secure the path there, Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Farrell J. Sullivan, who was involved in planning and oversaw the Marines sent into the capital, told investigators. Those plans evolved from incorporating both airfields to “just HKIA,” the Marine general said, using the military’s shorthand for Hamid Karzai International Airport.

U.S. officials have said previously that the decision to turn over Bagram to the Afghan government was made because it was deemed too far outside Kabul, where the majority of evacuees were expected to be, and because it would have required a significant number of U.S. troops.

“Everyone clearly saw some of the advantage of holding Bagram,” McKenzie said Tuesday, “but you cannot hold Bagram with the force level that was decided.”

Brig. Gen. Farrell J. Sullivan oversaw Marines involved in the chaotic U.S. evacuation effort from Afghanistan in August. (Sgt. Benjamin McDonald/U.S. Marine Corps)

Disagreement between U.S. military officials and American diplomats in Kabul about when to press forward with an evacuation appears to have gone back months. Vasely, who took command as the top officer in Afghanistan in July, said he was told by the departing four-star commander, Army Gen. Austin “Scott” Miller, that there would be opposition among senior officials at the embassy to shrinking its footprint in Kabul.

Ross Wilson, the acting U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, was focused on maintaining a diplomatic presence there, Vasely said, and questioned how the United States was supposed to preserve its influence without an embassy, the admiral added.

Wilson did not respond to requests for comment.

Vasely told investigators that he was advised by embassy staff that he should provide those close to the acting ambassador with data illustrating the country’s rapid collapse to the Taliban, “so it could be sold as a collective approach and not a power grab by DoD.”

Wilson wanted two weeks to evacuate the embassy and leave a skeleton staff at the airport, military officials said. But by Aug. 12, three days before Kabul’s fall, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan called Wilson and instructed him to move more quickly, Vasely told investigators.

Vasely “was trying to get the Ambassador to see the security threat for what it really was,” said another military official, whose name is redacted from the report. As many as 10 government-controlled districts were falling to the Taliban daily, this official noted, adding, “The embassy needed to position for withdrawal, and the Ambassador didn’t get it.”

By mid-July, Sullivan, the senior Marine officer involved in planning the evacuation, wanted to stage supplies to host 5,000 evacuees at the airport, but his effort was complicated because he was not permitted to discuss the possibility of a full-scale evacuation with anyone other than British officials, he told investigators. Other U.S. military leaders, whose names were redacted from the report, said there were fears among administration officials that if the United States, by raising alarm, inspired other governments to quickly leave Afghanistan, it would accelerate the central government’s demise.

President Biden on July 8 said that the United States’ military mission in Afghanistan would end on Aug. 31. (The Washington Post)

The Marine general told investigators that trying to engage the embassy in discussions about an evacuation was “like pulling teeth” until early August. “After that,” he said, “it became more collaborative.”

A spokesman for Sullivan referred questions to McKenzie.

During an Aug. 6 meeting, a National Security Council official, who is not identified in the report, appeared to lack a sense of urgency and told others involved that if the United States had to execute an evacuation, it would signal “we have failed,” Brig Gen. Sullivan recalled. “In my opinion, the NSC was not seriously planning for an evacuation,” he said.

The White House declined to comment.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan speaks during a news briefing at the White House in January. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

National Security Council officials convened meetings in July and early August to discuss embassy security in Kabul and assess whether the Taliban’s advance met previously identified benchmarks for taking further action, a person familiar with the situation said. Like some others who discussed the investigation’s findings with The Post, this person spoke on the condition of anonymity because the issue remains highly sensitive.

On Aug. 9, three days after the first provincial capital fell to the Taliban, Biden’s advisers convened meetings to discuss whether to begin closing the embassy, but senior officials unanimously decided it was still premature, the person said.

Another senior administration official on Monday defended how the State and Defense departments coordinated to execute Biden’s decisions. The State Department “steadily drew down our diplomatic presence in Kabul starting in April 2021, nearly four months before the fall of Kabul, when the Embassy went on ‘Ordered Departure’ status,” the official said.

The official declined to address criticism from senior military officials that the State Department showed a lack of urgency initially, but said the U.S. government “swiftly and nimbly” assembled a network of nearly two dozen overseas locations that hosted tens of thousands of Afghans, while also working to ensure “they’d pose no security or health threat” to American communities before being resettled in the United States.

By Aug. 14, Vasely believed Afghan President Ashraf Ghani’s government would collapse, he told investigators. The United States carried out 10 airstrikes against the Taliban that day 10 miles south of Kabul, killing about 100 fighters, but it did not halt its advance.

“We were killing them in bunches, destroying tactical vehicles, and they kept coming,” he said.

After word spread the next day that Ghani had fled the country, the airfield in Kabul descended into chaos, as thousands of desperate people sought a flight out. One medical officer interviewed by investigators compared the atmosphere that week to “Lord of the Flies,” the classic book in which teenagers stranded on an island fail to govern themselves. Several military officials recalled U.S. Marines coming under fire that night by Taliban fighters, and the Marines, in turn, killing two.

Army Maj. Gen. Christopher Donahue, who arrived after the collapse and oversaw airfield security, recalled that early discussions with the Taliban were tense.

“We told them that we would control the gates and they would push people out,” said Donahue, commanding general of the 82nd Airborne Division. “We expressed that they will comply, because if they fight us on this we would be able to kill more of them than they would ever hope to kill of us. After that their tone changed.”

At the embassy, U.S. troops went room to room on Aug. 15, pressing people to meet deadlines and get ready to go, an Army officer from the 10th Mountain Division told investigators. Some State Department personnel were “intoxicated and cowering in rooms,” and others were “operating like it was day-to-day operations with absolutely no sense of urgency or recognition of the situation,” the officer said.

An administration official said they had not previously heard that allegation. “Were there any truth to it, we presumably would not be learning of it six months after the fact,” the official said.

The mission eventually hit a rhythm in which thousands of people were screened and allowed to enter the airport each day to board outbound flights. But it remained dangerous.

>>>

Video shows Marines at Abbey Gate entrance to Kabul airport before attack
The Defense Department released video footage of Marines at Abbey Gate before the Kabul airport attack in August 2021. (Department of Defense)

Four Afghans were crushed to death in the first four days, and U.S. troops remained concerned that crowds could break open a gate and riot, service members recalled to investigators. A Marine officer reported that a stun grenade used for crowd control killed a civilian, an incident that should be further examined, the report says.

Between 40 and 50 people were detained each night after jumping fences, the report says.

Sullivan, the Marine general, told investigators that there were changing expectations about how many people associated with Afghan paramilitary units aiding the evacuation needed to be taken out of the country. He initially thought it was 6,000 people — including strike unit members and their families — but later learned the correct number was about 38,800, and advised that it would be wise for the military to request commercial airline help through the Civil Reserve Air Fleet to increase overall flights.

Additionally, U.S. troops were overwhelmed with thousands of requests from the White House, Congress and as far as the Vatican to locate and rescue specific people in the crowd, including some who would not otherwise have been eligible for the evacuation.

The bombing on Aug. 26 set off a scramble to save as many people as possible, but there was little the on-site medical personnel could do for those who died, they told investigators. The survivors relied on tourniquets and other first-aid equipment to help anyone they could, the report says.

Officials said on Friday that, in addition to the 13 service members who died, another 45 were wounded in the blast, with some suffering brain injuries that surfaced later.

On Aug. 29, an errant U.S. drone strike killed 10 Afghan civilians, including seven children. Top Pentagon officials initially justified the attack, saying they believed it had targeted another would-be suicide bomber. The victims included an aid worker and several members of his family.

Sullivan, the Marine general, suggested that those tense final days of the war in Afghanistan would have a lasting impact on those exposed to danger. Commanders, he suggested, should stay vigilant and watch for any further fallout.

“I am not particularly soft, as adversity comes with our duties,” he said, “but this was an extremely challenging situation.”

Terminate Germany’s Membership in NATO, Consider Georgia and Finland

Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said Germany would spend 2% of its economic output on defense by 2031, belatedly reaching the goal set by NATO leaders at a 2014 summit, months after Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula.

“NATO is and will remain the anchor of European security. But it is also clear that Europe must increase its own complementary ability to act,” Kramp-Karrenbauer told a private event to honor NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg on Wednesday night.

“This starts with the defense budget. We need (to spend) 1.5% by 2024 and 2% by 2031 at the latest,” she said.

***

Germany has prohibited Estonia from shipping weapons to Ukraine. Is Germany agreeable to a Russia/Ukraine military conflict and the destruction of a country’s sovereignty while casualties and refugees are likely? Think about that. Did Germany ever criticize Germany for the poison deaths by Russia of those living in the U.S. and in Britain? How about when Russia shot down a commercial airliner killing all the passengers? What about the countless times Russia threatens allied naval vessels or buzzes military aircraft in sovereign airspace? We also cannot overlook Russian hackers when they struck Ukraine several times. Hello Germany…you out there?

Putin Targets Germany, NATO's Weakest Link - by Peter Rough source

Meanwhile, beginning with Chancellor Merkel and now with Olaf Scholz, Germany has gone more rogue if that is possible which means they are ‘all-in’ with Russia mostly due to needing energy. Under Merkel, Germany is terminating nuclear power as an energy resource and is going in with natural gas and bio-mass along with on shore and off shore wind. Fully going green including solar. Germany's Russia problem: Ukraine crisis tests new government | Financial Times source

Meanwhile, remember a few years ago when Germany took in millions of Syrian refugees? Germany has been facing a labor shortage for many years so rather than crafting a domestic policy for the good of Germans, it was decided that refugees and migrants were the solution and this is not a new phenomenon as it began years before with Turks. An aging workforce and a low birthrate caused Germany to go outside the country to get workers. Audi and Mercedes considered this move to be an economic miracle but while some of that has been positive, the larger picture tells another story. Language skills, education, work ethics, bureaucracy, culture and training has been a bigger problem.

Oh….exactly what countries are the best customers for German cars? Yup….Russia and especially China….go figure. That Chinese human rights violation of the million Uighurs in prison and working in slave conditions is not exclusive to China by the way….as German companies profit from exploiting Uighur slave labor. Ever heard of Hugo Boss or Aldi? Yup and then there are American companies doing much the same…such as Nike or Puma, Amazon and Abercrombie and Fitch. Details here.

For more details on the raw truths go here.

Germany’s economic condition relies fully on raw materials from foreign countries and it’s supply chain is much worse than most of Europe or the United States…for this reason, we see how Germany side-steps the NATO doctrine while a few other countries including Finland and Georgia would be good replacements if they meet the fundamental requirements, perhaps even Bosnia and Herzegovina and least of all Ukraine.

Fundamental NATO membership includes the following:

NATO membership is potentially open to all of Europe’s emerging democracies that share the alliance’s values and are ready to meet the obligations of membership.

There is no checklist for membership.

Candidates for membership must meet the following five requirements:

–New members must uphold democracy, including tolerating diversity.

–New members must be making progress toward a market economy.

–Their military forces must be under firm civilian control.

–They must be good neighbors and respect sovereignty outside their borders.

–They must be working toward compatibility with NATO forces.

Again, while these criteria are essential, they do not constitute a checklist leading automatically to NATO membership.

New members must be invited by a consensus of current members.

Decisions to invite new members must take into account the required ratification process in the member states. In the case of the United States, decisions are made in consultation with Congress.