World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily

"The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow."

What You Aren’t Being Told About The World You Live In

How The “Conspiracy Theory” Label Was Conceived To Derail The Truth Movement

How Covert American Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive and Destroy Reputations

March 16, 2025

Trump Blasts Fake News “Sick Degenerates” As Zelensky Warned Is “Dead Man Walking”

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

A thought-provoking new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting President Donald Trump fired off the blasting post yesterday: “The Fake News, as usual, is at it again!...Why can’t they be honest, just for once?...Last night I read that President Vladimir Putin of Russia kept my Highly Respected Ambassador and Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff, waiting for over nine hours when, in fact, there was no wait whatsoever...Other meetings with other Representatives of Russia did take place and, obviously, they took some time, but they were very productive...From there, things went quickly and efficiently, and all signs seem to be, hopefully, very good!...In conclusion, there was no nine hour wait, or any wait at all!...The only reason they made up that story is to try and DEMEAN, because they are sick degenerates, that have to start reporting the News correctly...This is why they have lost their ratings, their audience, and respect...Thank you for your attention to this matter and, GOD BLESS AMERICA!”, says his State Department then announced: “Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke today with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov...They discussed next steps to follow up on recent meetings in Saudi Arabia and agreed to continue working towards restoring communication between the United States and Russia”.

After President Putin accepted the plea from President Trump to show mercy to the Ukrainian soldiers surrounded by Russian forces in the Kursk Region, this report notes, unelected usurper Ukraine Dictator Vladimir Zelensky declared: “There is no encirclement of our troops...Our troops continue to hold back Russian and North Korean groupings in the Kursk region”—and was a declaration followed by the news: “Ukraine's General Staff on March 16 confirmed Ukrainian troops' withdrawal from the logistics hub of Sudzha in Russia's Kursk Oblast...Without confirming the withdrawal with a statement, the General Staff posted the latest battlefield maps on social media, which showed a complete retreat from Sudzha”.

In assessing the mental stability of Dictator Zelensky, this report continues, world-renowned American international relations expert Professor John Mearsheimer at the University of Chicago observed: “Just listening to the way Zelensky speaks, you realize very quickly that this person is delusional...And the fact that he is delusional partly explains why he has been leading his country towards disaster since February 2022”—an observation joined by former United States Marine Corp intelligence officer Scott Ritter warning yesterday: “Zelensky has about two weeks left, he is a dead man walking”.

Along with branding Dictator Zelensky “delusional”, this report concludes, Professor Mearsheimer assessed: “Zelensky and the West are detached from reality in believing Russia can be defeated”—an assessment followed by top American intelligence expert Rebekah Koffler bluntly explaining the truth last week that Russia is impervious to sanctions and it would soundly defeat the United States and NATO in a war—all of which was joined by world-renowned British defense expert Commodore Steven Jeremy, who, in his just released open letter “Right Now NATO Could Not Win A War With Russia”, warningly observed:

In 2024, reflecting a popular Western belief, former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said: “NATO is the most powerful and successful alliance in history”.

Yet just two years earlier in 2022, after a 15-year campaign, NATO was defeated by the Taliban, a rag-tag group of poorly armed insurgents.

How can NATO’s humiliating defeat and Austin’s view be reconciled?

Of course NATO was never the most powerful military alliance in history — that accolade surely goes to the World War II Allies: the U.S., Russia, Britain, and the Commonwealth nations.

Since the Berlin Wall’s fall, though, its record has become tarnished. Satisfactory in Kosovo. Humiliated in Afghanistan. Strategic failure looming in Ukraine. Are we really sure NATO is up to the job of defending democratic Europe from a supposedly expansionist Russia in the doomsday scenario of a conventional NATO-Russia war?

The doomsday NATO-Russia war scenario is the defining way to explore this question. “Amateurs talk tactics, professionals study logistics”, and our strategic analysis needs to start all the way back in NATO’s logistics rear areas, then work forward to a future line of battle on the continent of Europe.

First, unlike Russia, no major NATO nation is industrially mobilized for war, as evidenced by the fact that Russia is still outproducing NATO on 155mm shells for Ukraine. Which, incidentally, gives the lie to the view that Russia is poised to take more of Europe — if we in NATO truly believed this, we would all be mobilizing at speed.

More importantly, it is not clear that NATO could mobilize at the speed or scale needed to produce the levels of equipment, ammunition, and people to match Russia. And certainly not without a long build up that would signal our intent. This is not just about lost industrial capacity, but also lost financial capacity. Of the largest NATO nations, only Germany has a debt to GDP ratio below 100%.

Second, to have the remotest chance of success in this doomsday scenario of a NATO-Russia war, U.S. forces would need to deploy at scale into continental Europe. Even if the U.S. Army was established at the necessary scale — with a 2023 establishment of 473,000, under one third of the current Russian Army, it is not — the overwhelming majority of American equipment and logistics would have to travel by sea.

There, they would be vulnerable to Russian submarine-launched torpedoes and mines. As a former underwater warfare specialist, I do not believe that NATO now has the scale of anti-submarine or mine-warfare forces needed to protect Europe’s sea lines of communication.

Nor, for that matter, would these forces be able to successfully protect Europe’s hydrocarbon imports, in particular oil and LNG so critical to Europe’s economic survival. Losses because of our sea supply vulnerability would not only degrade military production, but also bring accelerating economic hardship to NATO citizens, as soaring prices and energy shortages accompanying an outbreak of war rapidly escalated the political pressure to settle.

Third, our airports, sea ports, training, and logistics bases would be exposed to conventional ballistic missile attack, against which we have extremely limited defenses. Indeed, in the case of the Oreshnik missile, no defense.

An Oreshnik missile arriving at Mach 10+ would devastate a NATO arms factory, or naval, army and air force base. As in Ukraine, Russia’s ballistic campaign would also target our transport, logistics, and energy infrastructure. In 2003, while I was working for the British MOD’s Policy Planning staffs, our post 9/11 threat analysis suggested a successful attack against an LNG terminal, such as Milford Haven, Rotterdam, or Barcelona, would have sub-nuclear consequences. The follow-on economic shock-waves would rapidly ripple across a European continent, now increasingly dependent on LNG.

Fourth, unlike Russia, NATO nations’ forces are a heterogenous bunch. My own experience, while leading the offshore training of all European warships at Flag Officer Sea Training in Plymouth, and later working with NATO forces in Afghanistan, was that all NATO forces were exceptionally enthusiastic but had very different levels of technological advancement and trained effectiveness.

Perhaps more contemporarily important, other than a handful of NATO trainers forward deployed in Ukraine, our forces are trained according to a pre-drone “maneuver doctrine" and have no real-world experience of modern peer-to-peer attritional warfighting. Whereas the Russian Army has close to three years experience now, and is unarguably the world's most battle-hardened.

Fifth, NATO’s decision-making system is cumbersome, hampered by the need to constantly communicate from Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe to national capitals — a complexity made worse each time another nation is admitted.

Worse still, NATO cannot do strategy. Shortly after arriving in Afghanistan in 2007, I was shocked to find that NATO had no campaign strategy. In 2022, notwithstanding numerous Russian warnings about NATO expansion constituting a red-line, NATO was wholly unprepared, strategically, for the obvious possibility of war breaking out — as evidenced again by our inability to match Russia’s 155mm shell production.

Even now, in 2025, NATO’s Ukraine strategy is opaque, perhaps best summarized as "double-down and hope”.

In summary, NATO is positioning itself as Europe’s defender, yet lacks the industrial capacity to sustain peer-to-peer warfighting, is wholly dependent on U.S. forces for the remotest chance of success, is unable satisfactorily to defend its sea lines of communication against Russian submarine, or its training and industrial infrastructure against strategic ballistic bombardment, is comprised of a diverse mix of un-bloodied conventional forces, and lacks the capacity to think and act strategically.

An easy NATO victory cannot be assumed, and I am afraid that the opposite looks far more likely to me.

[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]

March 16, 2025 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.

[Note: Many governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human being’s right to know the truth. Due to our mission’s conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their ‘agents’ has been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit us, and others like us, that is exampled in numerous places, including HERE.]

[Note: The WhatDoesItMean.com website was created for and donated to the Sisters of Sorcha Faal in 2003 by a small group of American computer experts led by the late global technology guru Wayne Green (1922-2013) to counter the propaganda being used by the West to promote their illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq.]

[Note: The word Kremlin (fortress inside a city) as used in this report refers to Russian citadels, including in Moscow, having cathedrals wherein female Schema monks (Orthodox nuns) reside, many of whom are devoted to the mission of the Sisters of Sorcha Faal.]

Western Heads Explode After Trump Attacks “Dictator Without Elections”

Trump Is Winning Dangerous Global Chess Game

Return To Main Page