How will Putin respond to the bombing of the Crimean Bridge?

By: Alexander Nazarov

Over the past few weeks, we have heard statements from semi-officials in the United States about how the West will respond if Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

For its part, Moscow was surprised.

What for heaven’s sake would invite Russia to use nuclear weapons on its future territory, especially if the situation doesn’t require it?

Now, it became clear that Washington was planning large-scale terrorist acts that would give Moscow a pretext for a nuclear strike, as the Nord Stream pipeline was blown up, and now an act of terrorism against the Crimean Bridge.

It is clear that the Anglo-Saxons are behind both events, but Ukraine, according to the statements of Ukrainian officials, was the perpetrator of the second operation.

The material damage to the bridge is much less than a blow to the reputation of the Russian authorities, who promised to protect the Russian territory by all available means, while the Crimean Bridge was called a red line.

Now, all of Russia is demanding an immediate response from Putin, however, I believe that despite the obvious costs, there will be no immediate answer.

I had written a few years ago, and defined the goals of the United States for the coming years, which stem from the inevitability of an imminent economic collapse, if Washington doesn’t militarily eliminate Russia and China, through:

1. Connecting the hands of Russia to launch a war on its borders, mainly with Ukraine, to achieve its defeat, ideally.
2. Dragging Europe into a conflict with Russia in order to destroy the possibility of China’s trade with Europe through the territory of Russia and then excluding Europe’s neutrality in the conflict between the United States and China, or ideally drawing the European Union into this war as well.
3. Using the naval blockade, bringing down the Chinese economy, and causing a revolution and civil war in China.

In the years 2020-2022, Washington ignited 3 conflicts on the Russian border: the war in Karabakh, the attempted coup in Belarus, and the unrest in Kazakhstan.

Russia was able to quell these conflicts, and by the end of February of this year, it was clear that the Ukrainian offensive against Donbas would begin in the coming weeks.

Realizing the impossibility of avoiding a fight, Putin decided to start with the first strike, which earned him several game points.

However, we see how the United States came close to achieving its goals with the first two points.

In this game of chess, the United States has a plan, a kind of aisle, to which Washington will lead its opponents from one point to another, in order to defeat them in the end.

Rather, it isn’t so much a corridor as a ladder, where every step up means an escalation, or a computer game in which moving to the next level complicates the task.

And every provocation against Russia should lead it to move to a higher level, where the West will respond more forcefully.

This will happen gradually, so that the Russian leadership has no desire to launch a nuclear strike on the United States, but at the same time it will be carried out with determination.

Putin, as now with the bridge incident, will have no choice but to escalate.

He can maneuver once on the “Nord Stream”, once on the “Bridge”, but if he doesn’t respond for the third or fifth time, people may take to the streets, or things may go wrong.

But, what happens when you move to the next level?

We’re in the process of shipments of modern Western tanks, missiles and planes, the bombing of major Russian cities, terrorist attacks against Russian infrastructure, the shutdown of the Internet and the Windows operating system, the disabling of all computers, Android and Apple systems to power mobile phones and tablets.

It’s even possible to orchestrate terrorist attacks against Russian nuclear power plants and the explosion of a dirty nuclear bomb in Moscow.

That is, they will be events that Putin won’t be able to respond to.

At the same time, there is no point in responding to Ukraine, as Washington could easily accept turning Ukraine into a nuclear desert, replacing it with Poland, Romania, Germany, Italy and others in the next round of escalation.

Washington must be answered directly, which probably means mutual nuclear annihilation.

American elites believe that Putin wouldn’t dare to do so.

Believing that Putin won’t respond, the United States will lead him along that corridor, in which one of the points will be achieved: the internal political destabilization of Russia, or the depletion of its resources, and achieve military defeat in a confrontation with all NATO members.

Well, you will say that the situation is hopeless?

I tell you: On the contrary, and my estimation is that the probability of Russia winning is about 70%, and the remaining 30% is for mutual nuclear destruction, and the probability of Russia losing with the victory of the West is 0%.

The truth is that the West has already entered the stage of economic collapse, and isn’t only standing on the edge of the abyss, but is already falling to the bottom.

The economic problems facing the West are shifting from quantitative to qualitative at the present time.

Rising inflation, the beginning of the real estate crisis in the United States, the beginning of the collapse of the European banking system, the beginning of the collapse of the global debt pyramid, the beginning of the energy crisis in Europe.

It’s all actually a breakdown, it’s just that people think that 5 years of the historical process is not a single moment, but a long period.

Russia has to be able to hold out for two years, maybe one year to win.

And I think Putin understands all of that, and he understands that it is necessary to play on time.

At the same time, it is impossible not to respond, because it could quickly destabilize the internal situation.

I would like to remind you of the situation in Syria, when Washington, with the help of chemical weapons provocations organized by the White Helmets, began to mobilize a coalition to intervene in Syria.

At the height of the accusations against Russia, Putin didn’t give in to pressure.

However, one month later, he unexpectedly announced the withdrawal of Russian forces, neutralizing the West’s preparations.

But, nevertheless, Russian forces remained in Syria.

One of Putin’s basic tenets is that his enemies remain unpredictable.

He never responds to provocations at the time and in the manner expected by the enemies.

I don’t remember a single incident that Putin took a step under the influence of any pressure.

And the response now is an announcement to move forward through the corridor prepared by the United States, then America will speed up this movement.

I think there will be a response.

But it won’t be now, but relatively soon, because soon there will be other provocations, and people no longer understand the restraint on the part of Putin.

In the current circumstances, it is difficult to achieve a complete surprise, but I think the answer will be as unpredictable as possible.

I hope the answer has to do with the economy, because there are a lot of things that should have been done a long time ago, and this area is the least likely to serve as a pretext for a military confrontation.

I may be wrong, but that is my view.