Dehai

https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/signs-ww3-could-start-now

https://theduran.com/signs-ww3-could-start-now/

Signs WW3 Could Start Now

8 October 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M7rS1J-2TE

“US/NATO test Putin’s restraint”

8 October 2025

0:00

ALEX CHRISTOFOROU: All right, Alexander [Mercouris], let's talk about

0:02

uh some statements from Russian

0:04

President Putin and a strange statement

0:08

from uh Zelensky as well. Uh so so Putin

0:12

has been talking uh quite a bit about

0:14

the the longrange missiles from the

0:16

United States to Ukraine, and he's been

0:18

asked uh both at the Valdai and also

0:22

speaking to Zarubin about uh what Russia

0:25

would do if Tomahawks were uh were given

0:28

to Ukraine and and Putin's answer has

0:30

been very clear. Uh a breakoff of of

0:33

diplomacy with the United States. Uh the

0:36

Tomahawks not making any difference on

0:38

on the front lines and of course uh a

0:40

Russian uh response. Uh Zelensky um he

0:45

he talked about um about an air an air

0:50

uh ceasefire is what is what he talked

0:53

about a unilateral

0:54

air ceasefire but he didn't get into any

0:57

of the details as to what he meant by

0:59

unilateral or what he meant by an air

1:01

ceasefire. Obviously, this is connected

1:03

to to to the ramp-up of uh missiles and

1:06

drones uh from the Russian military

1:08

which are which are hitting Ukraine and

1:10

the fact that the Patriot air defense

1:12

systems are useless against the the

1:14

Russian onslaught. But but it is worth

1:17

pointing out Alexander that uh that just

1:19

the other day

1:21

uh Ukraine fired HIMARS into Belgorod

1:24

and they did cause a big blackout in

1:26

Belgorod. So, um, from the Russian side of

1:29

things, they they have still not been

1:32

able to, um, to deal with the with the

1:36

missiles that that do hit the the towns

1:38

on the border

1:40

and, um, the buffer zone that Putin

1:42

talks about often um, has not uh, been

1:46

able to prevent the the attacks coming

1:49

from uh, from Ukraine. I believe these

1:51

HIMARS were launched from Kharkiv uh

1:53

city from the actual actual downtown

1:55

city of Kharkiv and they were launched

1:57

into into Belgorod. But uh the the buffer

2:01

zone

2:04

the way I look at it is is going to have

2:05

to be extended after this attack on the

2:08

the power plant in in Belgorod. That's what

2:10

they hit. They hit the power plant in

2:12

Belgorod. Then they caused a blackout uh

2:14

affecting about 40,000 citizens. So uh

2:17

so interesting uh developments and and

2:19

two interesting statements. one from

2:20

Putin and and the bizarre statement from

2:22

Zelensky. So, uh where where do you want

2:24

to start?

2:25

ALEXANDER MERCOURIS: Well, let's start with Putin because

2:26

this is a very interesting statement,

2:28

not because of what Putin said, which um

2:31

repeated in substance what he'd already

2:34

said at his speech and Q&A at Valdai, but

2:41

the fact that he's had to say it all

2:43

over again. Um he said at the Valdai uh

2:48

speech in response to a Q&A that if the

2:54

United States supplied Tomahawk missiles

2:57

to Ukraine, they wouldn't really be the

2:59

United States supplying Tomahawk

3:01

missiles to Ukraine because everybody

3:04

knows that those missiles have to be

3:06

launched by the United States itself

3:09

even if they are launched from ground

3:11

launchers in some way. And that it would

3:14

be the Americans involved and that the

3:17

Americans would be launching missiles

3:19

deep into Russia and that this would

3:22

create a complete collapse in relations

3:25

between Russia and the United States.

3:29

Now, there's been a large number of

3:31

people who have come back and said that

3:35

Putin's comments in Valdai were far too

3:39

measured and far too moderate and that

3:43

what he said about the Tomahawk missiles

3:46

perhaps wasn't really strongly enough

3:48

communicated to the United States. And

3:52

there's also been criticism that in fact

3:57

Putin talking in this way, Putin talking

4:01

about Russia's ultimate success in

4:04

shooting down Tomahawk missiles was

4:07

almost an invitation to the United

4:09

States to the hardliners in the United

4:12

States to supply Tomahawk missiles to

4:15

Ukraine because of course the hardliners

4:18

actually want to see a collapse — perhaps

4:22

in relations between Russia and the

4:25

United States. They want in other words

4:27

the very outcome that Putin is warning

4:30

against. So I get the sense that

4:33

somebody obviously in the Kremlin was

4:36

not happy with Putin's statement and

4:39

Zarubin was then put up. Zarubin

4:42

to be clear is a Russian journalist but

4:45

he's very very close to the political

4:48

leadership in Russia. I mean, he's

4:51

almost, if you like, a semi-detached um

4:54

figure within the Kremlin system.

4:57

Anyway, he was then asked to put the

5:01

same question to Putin all over again.

5:05

And Putin perhaps disappointed the more

5:08

hardline people in Moscow

5:11

by in effect repeating the same point

5:13

all over again, saying, you know, if

5:15

they do resupply the Tomahawk missiles,

5:18

then it will mean that US Russian

5:21

relations will go back into deep freeze.

5:24

So on some respects you could say that

5:27

this is a very tough statement and in

5:29

substance it is a very tough statement

5:35

but it doesn't perhaps go where some

5:39

people in Moscow might have wanted by

5:43

directly threatening counteraction. I I

5:47

regard this exchange as a further sign

5:50

that there are disputes and tensions

5:53

going on within Russia uh within the

5:56

Kremlin within the political class. And

5:59

there was another thing that happened

6:02

over the course of the Valdai

6:04

discussions, which is that of course

6:06

Putin has consistently held to the line

6:09

until now that though NATO entry for

6:14

Ukraine is absolutely out of the

6:17

question — it crosses a red line — entry

6:21

into the European Union is acceptable

6:25

because the European Union unlike NATO

6:28

is a purely trade and commercial and

6:33

economic

6:36

organization.

6:37

And then again at Valdai somebody, a Russian

6:41

journalist, put to him again the

6:43

question, well, what are you talking

6:45

about? These people are now talking

6:47

about creating an army. They want to

6:50

make Ukraine the fist that they're going

6:53

to use against us. They are clearly no

6:57

longer just a political and economic

7:02

and trade association.

7:04

And Putin responded with a long answer

7:09

which didn't answer that particular

7:11

point. So I would say that we are seeing

7:14

tensions now, and that those people

7:17

within the Kremlin who are taking an

7:20

ever harder line are making it clear

7:23

that Putin should be are challenging

7:25

Putin through these interviews um

7:28

repeatedly in this way to be absolutely

7:31

clear and I think this is a point that I

7:33

really want to emphasize: there is no

7:36

question of any direct threat or

7:39

challenge to Putin's position. I know

7:41

there's been some speculations of that

7:43

kind. On the contrary, he is absolutely

7:46

firmly in control. We saw that

7:49

throughout the Valdai meeting. He was

7:51

relaxed. He was cheerful. He was

7:54

confident. He was making jokes and doing

7:58

all kinds of things. This is not a

8:01

leader who is under political pressure,

8:06

but there are starting to be debates and

8:11

discussions within the Kremlin, within

8:16

Moscow, the leadership, to take a harder

8:19

line towards the west.

8:21

CHRISTOFOROU: Yeah. I mean, the question that that

8:23

that so many people have, including

8:24

analysts like us, is is why why does

8:27

Putin continue to to insist on on things

8:30

like like, you know, membership for

8:34

Ukraine into the EU, when when everyone

8:36

clearly understands that the EU is is

8:39

the most uh aggressive uh force against

8:44

Russia? I mean,

8:47

they openly state that their goal is war

8:50

with Russia. I mean, yeah, the United

8:52

States is behind it. Yes, the United

8:54

States pushes them. Yes, the United

8:56

States funds them this. Yes, the United

8:58

States orders them to to continue to

9:00

take a hard line against against uh

9:02

Russia. But the the rhetoric, the

9:04

statements from European officials are

9:07

some of the most uh belligerent and

9:09

aggressive of of of anyone that that has

9:12

come out during this this conflict. Um

9:15

they they openly talk about creating an

9:18

army

9:19

to take on Russia. I mean that's that's

9:22

what Mertz has been saying for the past

9:23

month now. We're going to create a

9:25

German military to go to war with

9:26

Russia. Pretty much that's what he's

9:28

saying. So I mean everyone sees this.

9:31

Why why would why would Putin still say

9:35

well you know Ukraine can still perhaps

9:37

maybe enter the EU. We don't have a

9:39

problem with that because it's an

9:41

economic union. Everyone knows that it's

9:43

not an economic union. Everyone knows,

9:44

even Orban even Orban said it's a war

9:48

project. It's not an economic project.

9:50

It's a war project. Orban said that's a

9:53

direct quote.

9:54

Yeah.

9:54

So, so what is he thinking? What's

9:56

what's his his strategy in all of this

9:58

and I'm sure people around him are

10:00

telling him this as well. I'm sure

10:01

people are telling him look

10:03

look at what Arban said. This is what

10:04

Arban said.

10:06

MERCOURIS: Well, absolutely. I mean the reason the

10:08

reason this is happening is because

10:10

obviously he still uh wants to keep the

10:13

door open for some kind of diplomatic

10:15

resolution to this uh problem. But as I

10:20

said that position is now being

10:21

challenged and is being tested. And to

10:25

repeat again what I've said in the past

10:26

about Putin he's not under any

10:29

conceivable threat. I mean I I read

10:32

claims I've read claims that you know

10:34

there's a a potential coup in the

10:37

prospect. I mean put all of those those

10:39

ideas completely to bed and that's not

10:41

going to happen. But one of the reasons

10:45

that Putin has been there in the

10:47

Kremlin, the leader of Russia has so

10:50

much support in Russia, is precisely

10:55

because ultimately he listens to this

10:58

kind of advice and he starts to shift

11:02

his position um as that advice gets

11:06

stronger and as the facts

11:09

push him in that direction. So the fact

11:12

that he's been publicly challenged

11:14

because this is a public challenge both

11:17

on the Tomahawks which is in effect an

11:20

attempt you know the whole issue of the

11:22

Tomahawks is deeply interconnected with

11:25

the attempts to try and sort out some

11:27

kind of way forward with the US but the

11:30

fact that he's been publicly challenged

11:32

over it the fact that he's been publicly

11:34

challenged with the EU demonstrates two

11:38

things: firstly that Putin contrary of

11:42

everything you read in the media in the

11:43

West, we've said this many times in

11:46

Russia itself remains a relative

11:50

moderate.

11:52

And secondly,

11:54

the door

11:56

for negotiations,

11:58

any kind of negotiations, any resolution

12:02

of the conflict in Ukraine that is not

12:04

military is now almost closed. The fact

12:09

that he's been publicly challenged in

12:12

this way is a sign of this and Putin

12:15

knows this knows this himself. He's not

12:18

going to put himself in a position where

12:21

he's out on a limb with this one. And

12:24

besides, and I've said this many times,

12:26

with Putin always at the end, however

12:31

far he goes to be accommodating to the

12:34

other side, we always see that in the

12:36

end, he sticks to what he sees as the

12:40

protection of Russia's interests. So

12:44

people who want to supply Tomahawk

12:46

missiles

12:48

perhaps need to understand that. And

12:50

people who want to um develop EU

12:55

armies and all of that also need to

12:57

understand that we are coming very close

13:01

now to the point of no return in

13:04

relations between Russia and the West

13:07

and when I say the point of no return

13:09

also a situation where the Russians

13:12

might themselves start to take

13:14

counteraction

13:15

of a kind that we won't like. I mean,

13:19

look at the contrast.

13:21

Missiles launched into Russia and the

13:25

Russians have remained calm about it.

13:28

You're talking about the attacks on

13:29

Belgorod which have just taken place and

13:32

these are HIMARS missiles and it's

13:35

been widely known that HIMARS

13:37

missiles can only be launched at targets

13:40

with input from the US as well. The US

13:43

plays a role, in other words, with HIMARS

13:45 launchers. And we've had previously

13:48

strikes with storm shadows and scalp

13:50

missiles and attacks missiles deep into

13:53

Russia. The Russians undoubtedly,

13:56

because this has been Putin's policy,

13:58

have responded up to now very calmly to

14:01

this. Contrast this with the incredible

14:05

panic, hysteria, and all of that over a

14:09

few

14:10

unarmed decoy drones that get into

14:14

Poland and the fact that a few fighter

14:17

jets travel from one Russian base in

14:21

Karelia to another Russian base in

14:23

Kaningrad and might have, you know,

14:26

shaved across

14:28

an uninhabited rock which is you

14:32

know part of Estonia but which is on in

14:34

the Baltic Sea. Compare that hysteria

14:37

with the calm with which Russia has up

14:41

to now responded to these extreme

14:44

provocations.

14:46

That period might be ending too. Yeah.

14:49

CHRISTOFOROU: Extreme provocations that get more

14:51

extreme. I mean the argument the

14:54

argument that many people make which is

14:55

a correct argument

14:56

yes

14:57

is that

14:58

the restraint also leads to the

15:00

provocations becoming more extreme

15:03

because the restraint is misunderstood

15:05

by the West by a lot of hardliners in

15:08

the West.

15:09

MERCOURIS: Yes. Well, this is this is I absolutely

15:11

sure what people in private are telling

15:13

Putin and whoever it is in the Kremlin

15:16

who still supports him and I'm not sure

15:18

who that is by by the way because

15:21

virtually every other official but Medvedev,

15:25

Lavrov, Patrushev as well now, I mean they're

15:29

taking a much harder uh line than Putin

15:32

himself is.

15:34

——

ERIC ZUESSE’S COMMENTS: Putin wants the Russian people to know that The West’s goal is to conquer Russia; and, so, Putin wants Russians to see the issue aired that the EU is increasingly a military organization and that Russia could soon face a choice between either capitulation and enslavement by The West, or else initiating a hot conventional war against all of NATO, including bombing all U.S. military bases in Europe. Russia would win that war, but then the West might immediately escalate to a nuclear war invading Russia, which would then unleash Russia’s nuclear retaliation, and end by destroying the world, killing an estimated 5 billion people within just the first two years after the nuclear explosions (which would be over within a few hours). Putin knows that the leaders in Europe are fixated upon successfully re-doing Hitler’s Operation Barbarossa against Russia, and Putin has been playing Trump against them by playing along with Trump’s pretenses to mediating this conflict; Putin had wanted Trump to pretend mediating for long enough a time so as to make Trump actually disassociate America from the European position; but, now that that effort has failed, and Trump is acknowledging that he sides with Europe against Russia, Putin will need to escalate the war in Ukraine and achieve total victory there.

——

ALSO:

The retired CIA analyst Larry C. Johnson, who is among the most trustworthy public geostrategic commentators, headlines October 8th “A Video Update on the West’s Faltering TNT Production and Aerial Attempts to Provoke Russia”, and reports:

Inside China Business by Kevin Wamsley, [and] BORZZIKMAN [Stanislav “Stas” Krapivnik] tell two important stories about the situation confronting the West as it scrambles to figure out some way to save Ukraine. Unfortunately, the West is on a fool’s errand. Each of these videos is less than 10 minutes running time.

Here’s a summary of Kevin’s video:

Artillery shells involve two volatile components: the explosive, and the propellant. TNT is in critical shortage in NATO militaries, as decades ago the production of TNT was outsourced abroad for environmental and safety reasons.

But another bottleneck exists for the highest-quality cotton fibers, which are used in propellants. Most of that cotton was sourced from China, who is closely allied with Russia. Military suppliers are scrambling, to locate alternate sources of high-grade cotton, and to refurbish TNT factories that have been long closed.

TNT also is used in civilian applications, for engineering, mining, and heavy construction. High demands from the defense sector are causing prices to soar for industrial users as well, increasing over four times in the past year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36O6HAKdeZk

To put it simply: The US and Europe face major supply chain challenges and a shortage of manufacturing facilities to produce sufficient amounts of artillery shells and other explosives that are essential if they plan to fight Russia or China.

Next up is BORZZIKMAN [Stanislav “Stas” Krapivnik]. NATO continues to try to intimidate Russia in both the Baltic and Black Seas, but Russia is not backing down. This is dangerous brinkmanship on the part of NATO because such actions carry the risk of an accidental confrontation that could escalate rapidly into a hot war… a war that NATO is totally unprepared to fight:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIz_LkHbRqM

I was interviewed late last week by Stanislav “Stas” Krapivnik. Stas is a Russian-American military analyst, commentator, and consultant specializing in geopolitics, military strategy, NATO affairs, economics, supply chains, and international relations. He is frequently featured in pro-Russian and independent media outlets, providing insights on conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war, global economics, and regional dynamics in the South Caucasus. Based in Moscow since around 2010, Krapivnik operates as an independent contractor and maintains a YouTube channel (@MrSlavikman) where he discusses these topics.

Stas is an American citizen who was born in Luhansk (then part of the Soviet Union, now in eastern Ukraine) during the Soviet era. His family immigrated to the United States when he was seven years old. Stas joined the US Army, rising to the rank of major until his discharge in 2004. He cited disillusionment with US military actions in the former Yugoslavia (e.g., NATO’s 1999 bombing campaign) as a key reason for leaving, which he described as conflicting with his values and involving operations near his homeland.

——

MY COMMENTS: See and hear the American Kevin Wamsley explain why he is happy to have relocated from U.S. to China though he can’t learn Chinese: https://www.youtube.com/@Inside_China_Business. It’s mind-blowing. Then just think: How does what he is reporting there compare with what Westerners ‘learn’ about today’s China from our ‘news’-media and professors?

——

MY CLOSING COMMENTS:  At the end of this day (October 8th), was posted “Douglas Macgregor: Toward War with Russia, Iran & Venezuela”, and he provided an analysis which predicts — in my view convincingly — that Trump will probably invade Venezuela and maybe Iran, but will probably not allow Tomahawks into Ukraine. Macgregor’s evidence and arguments in these matters are unique to him, and, taken together, his profound insights and wisdom there convinces me even more than I previously was, that the only real hope for America to reverse our current slide into full-fledged fascism, would be if somehow he will become America’s President. I believe that only he would have the ability to unite this deeply fractured country, so that he would inspire the best and none of the worst that is in America’s progressives and in America’s conservatives — unite BOTH sides in defense of our great Constitution, and against those who violate it. His becoming the next President would therefore be the only alternative to what would otherwise be an extremely violent Second American Revlution. That’s the three options for America: 1. Macgregor peacefully dethroning the billionaires; 2. a Second American Revolution; or 3. continuance of this country’s slide toward and into a full-fledged fascism. I think that those are America’s only available options, and I would definitely choose the first one.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest 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.