Withdrawing 25 Per Cent of U.S.Troops from Europe is Requisite for Peacekeeping

 President Trump recently ordered the removal of five thousand U.S. soldiers from Germany as part of an overdue strategy to stop swelling the E.U. takeover of N.A.T.O. following the end of the Cold War. The E.U. will never sign off on peace with Russia and share the Ukraine as long as they have the United States forming the bulwark of N.A.T.O. Instead the E.U. and N.A.T.O. will rely on the U.S.A. to support N.A.T.O. ‘s growth right to Russian borders and continue the war against Russia through other means including Ukraine.

In order to reduce U.S. military expenses a little while the President is also planning to increase it more than a trillion dollars the President might implement a 25% to 50% reduction in troop deployments in European countries that were stationed during the Cold War when Europe wasn’t nearly as able to defend itself, and Germany still had leftover fascists. While censorship fascism has migrated toward the left (although it always existed on communist countries) in the UNited States and soaked into the fabric of corporatocracy, internet and A.I., European militarism exploiting America’s troop presence in Europe evolved to prevent Russia from fully actualizing its development as a post-Soviet era democracy and compelled it to develop new social institutions while simultaneously beginning the defense of traditional Russia interests in the Crimea and Ukraine against European and Democrat Party expropriation and aggression.

If the EU need rely upon its own military for a confrontation with Russia on the battlefield its political unwillingness to normalize relations with Russia and help it to return to a path of Democratic and free enterprise development without concern of European aggression will find more political support domestically from European citizens that don’t want a new round of World War fought within its borders.

As it is Germany does plan to increase its military a lot to be the biggest in Europe and that itself comprises a threat to Russia that lost more than 20 million lives the last time Germany invaded Russia in the Second World War. European strategy- possibly one stimulated by European elites that lost most of their royal positions by the end of the first World War and were content with being deeply wealthy partners with fascists in German corporatism partnering with Hitler and the 3rd Reich for example. Rich western Europeans still have a latent, practical desire to annex Russia through force. The entire paradigm is exceptionally destabilizing in regard to world peace.

Land war in Europe that is less than nuclear level may be sustainable only with American support. The policy of protracted war with Russia in Ukraine or in general European battle is profoundly bad for U.S. interests, and is so stupid for virtually everyone in the long run that it is mind boggling that the European political and Democratic Party IQs can be so low as to fail to perceive the opportunity costs of it.

Some Chinese Rare Earth Supply for Dept. of War Might Be Replaced with Alaskan Rare Earth Minerals

 The U.S.A. relies on rare Earths from China for critical pieces of select defense items used for the military. The Democrat Party as well as Senator Graham and former Senator McConnell have been very hawkish on war in Ukraine against Russia, stimulating conflict with Russia and China over Ukraine rather than peacefully sharing with Russia and returning to normal diplomatic relations. The war will harm the Alaska ecosystem because of the need to mine rare Earths to replace those of China.

S.E. Alaska’s Prince of Wales Island apparently has those rare Earths too, and with development and utilized judiciously, might replace some of the Chinese rare Earth’s that have been put on a restricted list. It would be good not to depend on and require permission of the Chinese Government for materials required for construction of Patriot and Tomahawk missiles.

Gemini summarized the situation;

Gemini– Samarium, neodymium, dysprosium, terbium, and yttrium are critical rare earth elements used in U.S. defense for high-performance magnets, guidance systems, and sensors in missiles, aircraft, and submarines. They enable critical functions such as laser targeting, radar stabilization, and heat-resistant electronics in, for example, F-35 fighters and Patriot missile systems. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

• Neodymium (Nd): Essential for powerful magnets in missile guidance systems, radar, and motors for aircraft and unmanned systems.
• Samarium (Sm): Used in samarium-cobalt (SmCo) magnets for high-temperature applications like missile guidance systems, defense electronics, and inertial navigation systems.
• Dysprosium (Dy): Used in high-temperature NdFeB magnets for motors, actuators, and guidance systems on missiles and military aircraft.
• Terbium (Tb): Used for stabilizing and reinforcing neodymium-iron-boron (NdFeB) magnets, increasing their performance in aircraft, submarine, and missile guidance.
• Yttrium (Y): Crucial for YAG lasers in laser targeting, Yttria-stabilized zirconia (YSZ) for jet engine turbine blade coatings, and electronic weapons components. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]

Key defense platforms using these elements include Virginia-class nuclear submarines, F-35 fighter jets, and guidance systems for guided missiles and “smart” bombs

Defense Applications and Vulnerability:

• Tomahawk Missiles: Rely on samarium-cobalt magnets, which were previously identified as having a 100% dependency on Chinese processing.
• F-35 Fighter Jets: Utilize approximately 100 pounds of rare earths, with components like fin actuators and actuators relying on samarium magnets.
• Restricted Access: In 2025, China imposed export restrictions on seven heavy and medium rare earths, impacting U.S. defense contractors.
• Supply Chain Shift: While China has historically supplied these materials, the U.S. DoD is investing in companies like MP Materials and Noveon Magnetics to develop domestic, non-Chinese magnet production. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska contains all five of those elements. They are found within the Bokan-Dotson Ridge rare earth element (REE) deposit, which is currently considered the highest-grade “heavy” rare earth project in the United States. [1, 2, 3, 4]

The presence of these specific elements is documented as follows:

• Dysprosium (Dy), Terbium (Tb), and Yttrium (Y): These are explicitly highlighted by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources and project developer Ucore Rare Metals as primary high-value components of the Bokan Mountain site.
• Neodymium (Nd): This element is a key focus of the proposed extraction project because of its critical role in manufacturing high-strength permanent magnets.
• Samarium (Sm): While less frequently cited in headlines, it is confirmed as part of the overall rare earth mineral suite at Bokan Mountain, which contains a broad mix of both light and heavy lanthanides. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Key Locations on Prince of Wales Island

While Bokan Mountain is the most advanced prospect, other nearby areas on the island also show potential for these minerals: [1]

• Bokan-Dotson Ridge: The primary site of interest, containing over 63 million pounds of total rare earth oxides.
• Dora Bay: Known to host yttrium-bearing pegmatite dikes.
• Salmon Bay: Identified by the U.S. Geological Survey as another prospect within a 200-mile mineralized trend extending from Bokan Mountain. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The Bokan-Dotson Ridge project is currently in an advanced exploration and pre-development phase, with major recent milestones in resource reporting and infrastructure financing. [1, 2, 3]

Current Development Status (2024–2026)

• Upgraded Mineral Resource (April 2026): Ucore Rare Metals recently released a significant update to its mineral resource estimate, adding over 800,000 tonnes of “Measured” mineralization. This confirms the site’s unique skew toward high-value heavy rare earths (35–40% of total content).
• Financial Readiness: The project is supported by a US $145 million bond authorization from the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA), specifically for infrastructure and construction.
• Strategic Two-Phase Plan: Development is split into two parts:
  1. Establishing a Strategic Metals Complex (SMC) separation plant in Ketchikan to process materials from various sources.
  2. Full-scale mining and onsite processing at Bokan Mountain on Prince of Wales Island.
• Timeline: While earlier targets for production were delayed, current efforts are focused on completing final engineering and feasibility studies to transition into a “shovel ready” status within roughly 30 months. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]

Environmental Regulations & Concerns

The project faces rigorous oversight due to its location within the Tongass National Forest and its proximity to sensitive marine ecosystems. [1, 2]

• Federal and State Oversight: Permitting involves the U.S. Forest Service and the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, requiring strict adherence to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
• Waste Management: To minimize surface impact, Ucore plans to use underground paste backfill, where waste tailings are mixed with cement and pumped back into the mine. This is intended to leave a “near-zero” surface footprint after closure.
• Key Risks and Opposition:
  • Salmon Habitat: Concerns from groups like the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council highlight potential risks to Kendrick Creek and Kendrick Bay, which are vital for commercial salmon fishing.
  • Historical Contamination: The site neighbors the Ross-Adams mine, a former uranium mine and Superfund site currently undergoing cleanup.
  • Radioactive By-products: Rare earth extraction often involves thorium or uranium; regulators require extensive water treatment and monitoring to prevent leaching into local groundwater.

Zelensky Sides with Russia on Building Earth-Launched Anti-Satellite Weapons

 Europeans have continuously fueled the martial law President of Ukraine with weapons transfers, weapons development technology and so forth in the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Now the martial law President for Life Zelenskyy wants anti-satellite weapons in order to strike Russia’s quasi Starlink network that is gradually being assembled in low Earth orbit. Much of the west including the United States had expressed the wish for a ban on such weapons and to have a moratorium on development because blasting satellites in orbit would create dangerous space debris. Russia, India and North Korea want to develop such systems because of some tactical or strategic paradigm for war.

Ukraine has accelerated development and proliferation of low cost, effective weapons technology that will be replicated in other wars now and in the future; jeopardizing world peace more than usual. At some point even Europe might have an interest in settling the war instead of throwing more gas onto the fire since the weapons systems may find their way onto their cities down the road. Ukraine’s weapons systems are affordable for many nations and terrorist actors unlike high-end aircraft and carriers that only nations with vast public debt can afford.

Creating debris in orbit to collide with future space missions and existing satellites is quite a bad idea. ELon Musk should pledge to turn off Ukraine’s Starlink access if it blows up satellites in orbit. The use of anti-satellite technology would set a very bad precedent for the security of all of those satellites that unite the global economy so far as it is united.

Gemini wrote-“There is no comprehensive international treaty banning the development, possession, or use of anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons, but the U.S. and several allies have pledged a voluntary ban on destructive, direct-ascent ASAT testing that creates debris. While the 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in orbit or on celestial bodies, conventional space weapons remain legally unregulated, creating a push for new international norms. Arms Control Association +3

Current Status of ASAT Bans and Limitations

• Voluntary Testing Ban (2022): The United States announced a ban on destructive direct-ascent ASAT missile testing in April 2022, aiming to establish a new international norm against tests that create dangerous orbital debris.
• Coalition Supporters: Several countries have joined the U.S. in this voluntary moratorium, including Canada, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, South Korea, and New Zealand.
• Opposing Nations: Russia, China, India, and North Korea have not signed onto this ban and have previously tested or expressed opposition to such restrictions.
• The Outer Space Treaty (1967): This foundational treaty bans placing nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) into orbit or on celestial bodies (such as the Moon). It does not specifically prohibit conventional weapons, such as lasers, kinetic kill vehicles, or earth-based missiles that target satellites. Arms Control Association +4

Types of Space Weapons

• Destructive Direct-Ascent ASATs: Missiles launched from Earth to destroy satellites (e.g., China in 2007, Russia in 2021).
• Co-orbital ASATs: Satellites equipped with explosive devices, kinetic weapons, or robotic arms designed to disable other satellites.
• Non-Kinetic/Soft Kill Weapons: Cyberattacks, ground-based lasers, or electronic jamming designed to disable satellites without creating”

Step by Step, Inch by Inch, Zelenskyy and E.U. Leaders Escalate to Nuclear War

 I wasn't surprised by the news that Martial Law President Zelensky is finding more Ukrainian bodies to fling into the line of combat by returning expatriates and scraping the nation for 35,000 inductees each month. Russia has had somewhere fewer than 500,000 fatalities and Ukraine fewer than 200,000 fatalities in a pointless war that cannot be stopped unless Ukraine recognizes Russian sovereignty over select portions of eastern Ukraine and Crimea.

Russia is battling to recover land lost at the end of the Cold War, when it was re-emerging from more than half a century of communist rule. Russia was completely defenseless at that time in history and uncertain even of how to organize a free-enterprise economy, when all property under Soviet rule had been owned by the state. Russia needed twenty years of peace to change its economic infrastructure and prepare an army able to recover land that was integral to historical Russia before the communists.

The West began methodically expanding NATO eastward at the end of the Cold War and became an obvious threat to the new Russia. At the present stage of this protracted war in Ukraine—sponsored by the West and largely by Europe now—the conditions to end the war remain much the same as they have been since it started in 2022. Ukrainian President Zelensky has only sought ways to recover all of the land lost to Russian military advances, and European countries have provided a huge element of support, actually seeming to insist that the war continue until the last Ukrainian has been sent to the front.

Zelenskyy recently mentioned Russia's developing starlink like system as something that needs to be destroyed. He probably is likely to seek anti-satellite capabilities and create a precedent for global attacks on satellites- and that could be devastating for the economies of developed nations.

Recently, what may be the final mass mobilization of Ukrainian men available for combat has started, though the return of expatriates from European nations isn't quick. Perhaps more than 300,000 will become available in the next year. Russia may also require a mass mobilization commensurate with total war in order to survive the Ukrainian troop increase. The logic of the war remains the same, though.

Europe hopes to win a war of attrition and sanctions against Russia—a completely useless program that is creating limitless suffering for the casualties and their families, as well as costing the lives of the dead. Russia cannot really afford to just quit the war—it would never voluntarily vacate the hard-fought territorial gains—and that vacuum would be filled by European-backed Ukrainians and NATO membership too, presenting an existential threat to Russia.

Unfortunately, Europe plans to mentor Ukraine on how to build missiles for air defense that will replace the American-sourced Patriot missiles it no longer receives. Ukraine is also building its own ballistic missiles. A Zelensky without any rational option beyond total war to recover the lost land, given ballistic missiles to attack Russia, will attack Russia. That can escalate into nuclear exchange fairly swiftly. European leadership seems as irrational as Mr. Zelensky on the subject of the war.

The parameters for finding reasons to counterattack that might win are based upon some sort of status quo in war parameters continuing into the future while new plans are being implemented. When the time arrives for the new personnel or weapons systems to finally appear, the nature of the conflict often has already changed. That is why the calculus of the Ukraine war—with its increasing and high number of casualties—is rather tragic. The final situation, short of nuclear devastation, is likely to be the same as it was several hundred thousand fatalities and a million casualties earlier.

If Europe did somewhow begin winning a war of attrition and Ukraine was attacking RUssian cities with profusion of missiles it is probable the war would be upgraded to a nuclear level with Europe finding it difficult not to participate. With an end to the war and Russia finally accepted along with eastern Ukraine as part of Russia by Europe, the situation would return to normal peaceful life with little changed from the way it was before the war.

Summary by Gemini-"While Ukraine cannot currently build Patriot interceptors from scratch due to technical complexity, it is developing domestic, dual-purpose "Patriot-like" systems capable of both air defense and offense. These new Ukrainian systems are designed to operate in a ground-launched, "fire and forget" mode to act as both air-defense and, with different hardware/ammo, potentially as offensive surface-to-surface missiles. 

Key developments regarding this capability include:

• Dual-Purpose Development: Ukraine is developing mobile air defense systems, such as HMMWV-based launchers, that can use R-73 air-to-air missiles, providing high maneuverability and allowing the system to engage targets and immediately relocate.
• Alternative Systems: As of early 2026, Ukrainian defense firms like Fire Point are developing low-cost, domestically produced alternatives to the Patriot system, including new ballistic missile models.
• Sapsan Operational-Tactical Missile: Reports indicate Ukraine has begun serial production and deployment of the "Sapsan" (or Grim-2) system, a domestic ballistic missile capable of targeting long-range ground targets.
• Patriot Limitations: While Ukraine has received advanced Patriot PAC-2 GEM-T missiles, these are specialized for interception rather than offensive ground-to-ground use.
• German Partnership: Germany is establishing production lines for Patriot missiles that will support Ukraine's defense needs by late 2026 or early 2027, according to. 

Although "Patriot-like" in defense capability, the domestic systems being built are primarily new, independent designs rather than modified Patriot interceptors."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYP1OBZfFK0

Zelenskyy Asks Mertz for Help Returning Ukrainian Men Living Abroad to Ukraine for War

 Running low on bodies to put in uniform as well as cash, Ukrainian Martial Law President Zelenskyy has urged European leaders to send Ukrainian men living abroad back to Ukraine for the war. Europe will also loan 90 billion Euros to Zelenskyy to buy uniforms, drones, missiles and other goodies for the soldiery to win Ukraine for western Europe in protracted war. Apparently the new troops will learn which end of a gun to point at the enemy by 2027, unless of course a peace candidate is elected on Ukraine who takes and exit from war ramp.

Gemini- Soldiers Staying in France: Some reports indicate that roughly 20,000 Ukrainian soldiers who received medical treatment in France in 2025 have remained there rather than returning to the front lines, which contrasts with the idea of forced returns.

Increasing Proportion of Men: The percentage of adult men among refugees has risen steadily since the start of the conflict. In early 2024, men made up only about 18–20% of the population; by February 2026, that share increased to over 26%.

Youth Exodus: A significant driver for this increase was a decree issued by the Ukrainian government in August 2025, which allowed men aged 18 to 22 to leave the country more freely. This led to a record-high share of protection decisions for adult men in late 2025.

Host Country Distribution: The majority of these men live in three primary countries:

Germany: ~1.27 million total Ukrainians (hosting the largest share at 28.8%)

Poland: ~966,000 total Ukrainians

Czechia: ~400,000 total Ukrainians

German Chancellor 

Friedrich Merz recently made significant statements regarding the return of Ukrainian men. On April 14, 2026, during a joint press conference with President Zelenskyy in Berlin, Merz confirmed that Germany would "facilitate their return home" and work closely with Kyiv to limit the number of military-age men seeking asylum. 

Key details of Merz’s recent stance include:

• Limiting Asylum: Merz announced that Berlin will curb new asylum claims for Ukrainian men of conscription age, stating it is "extremely important that these men are on the ground and helping their country".
• Encouraging Returns: Germany is working with Ukraine to implement mechanisms that encourage men to return voluntarily. This includes the opening of the "Unity Hub" in Berlin, an information center designed to help refugees find housing and employment back in Ukraine.
• Targeting Specific Groups: The focus is primarily on men who have been in Germany for a long time without proper legal grounds or who left Ukraine in violation of martial law.
• Joint Responsibility: Merz emphasized that supporting Ukraine's efforts to restrict the departure of military-age men is "absolutely necessary" for Ukraine’s defense and future reconstruction

Zelenskyy supported these remarks, noting that the return of these men is a "matter of fairness" for the soldiers on the front lines who need rotation. However, while the rhetoric has shifted toward facilitating returns, there is still no policy for the mass forced deportation of all Ukrainian men from Germany.

Europe is in the Middle of Confusion Without Clear Goals (Besides Expansion)

The Trump administration should realize that Iran and Ukraine both stall for time, using that interval to seek political leverage and acquire additional weapons.

Europeans often appear as a confused lot, struggling with a diluted sense of national identity that leaves them uncertain about what truly serves their long-term interests as Europeans. Historically accustomed to conflicts with fellow nations, they seem to have elevated that pattern through the structures of the European Union. In effect, President Clinton handed Ukraine over to Western Europe, yet Western Europe shows little willingness to release it or share it with Russia—its rightful owner in this view.

The American left similarly seems adrift, lacking coherent leadership or a clear vision for the future. What it pursues as a rational agenda often resembles treason in practice: prioritizing foreign interests over American ones, or aligning with the political goals of European leftists at the expense of U.S. priorities. Democrats and Governor Newsom appear ready to tolerate a Mexico influenced by drug cartels rather than firmly defend U.S. borders. They frame basic measures like requiring a valid state or federal ID for voting as “voter suppression.” Ukraine and Iran, in turn, skillfully exploit these internal divisions and anti-Republican reflexes.

Europeans, one might reflect, fail to grasp that they themselves have become a primary force of division in today’s world. By contrast, America has achieved relatively good race relations in recent decades, with equal opportunity and wages largely normalized—yet partisan animosity persists. European leadership prefers to direct its hostility toward Russia rather than pursue a pragmatic sharing of Ukraine. Driving a wedge between the West and Russia risks isolating Europe and the United States from deeper BRICS economic integration, while encouraging the growth of a parallel rival market.

Recent European efforts to restrict Russian oil tankers—potentially blocking access through the North Sea, English Channel, Black Sea, and Mediterranean—illustrate this confusion. Such measures could easily backfire, leaving Europe itself more vulnerable to energy shortages by cutting off its own supply routes. Uniting Russia, China, France, and Spain in opposition to the United States and Western Europe hardly seems like a strategic masterstroke. This outcome stems largely from Western Europe’s reluctance to compromise on Ukraine, perhaps along approximate Dnepro boundaries.

It remains possible that, in a future crisis, the United States might withhold support for European defense and opt for neutrality rather than risk entanglement in a World War Three on the continent. Letting Europe burn and not rebuilding it with another Marshall Plan would confer economic advantage onto Americans rather than Europeans.

Alternatively, a more circumspective path—sharing Ukraine equitably, renormalizing relations with Russia, and fully integrating it into the Western economic sphere—could offer the surest route to lasting peace in Europe and beyond. Deep economic interdependence provides a powerful form of transparency and deterrence: it becomes far more difficult to conceal war preparations when potential adversaries are daily business partners. History shows that rhetoric against a designated foe often escalates dangerously in the absence of such ties, as seen in German propaganda leading up to Kristallnacht and the Holocaust.

Bringing Russia into comprehensive economic integration with the West would likely serve as the strongest bulwark against renewed Muslim terrorism and any Chinese adventurism toward Taiwan. After all, China’s leadership appears foremost concerned with raising the living standards of its citizens. Detached somewhat from both Russia and the West, Beijing would be far less inclined to gamble its economy on a high-risk conflict over Taiwan.

Zelensky May Have Attacked Russia With Drones Flying Through N.A.T.O. Countries

 Ukraine's President ordered a massive drone attack on Russia that reportedly used NATO airspace over the Baltic Sea countries. According to some military analysts and maps circulating today, around a hundred drones flew safely through Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia before emerging to strike targets near St. Petersburg, including ports and infrastructure in the Leningrad region. Ukraine claims the drones flew entirely through Russian territory and that any crashes in the Baltic states were mere 'strays' — a convenient explanation that many question.

One would think the Ukrainian President is deliberately trying to start World War Three by daring Russia to intercept drones while they transit NATO countries. For those who look with disfavor on World War Three, there are few realistic options available to terminate President Zelensky's escalation tendency before it spirals out of control.

It is virtually certain that European NATO member states will not rein in their commitment to total war with Russia via Ukraine until the effort collapses of natural causes. Zelensky himself appears tunnel-visioned and unwilling to settle at any point. President Trump remains the only plausible candidate for ending the war — yet that would require decisive steps he may not be willing to take. With British Intelligence helping Ukraine with target data the urge to escalate is hard to restrain.

So far, President Trump has pursued half-measures to curb support for Ukraine, only to be outplayed by Zelensky and NATO, which have relied on years of American supplies, intelligence, and financing. Halting all U.S. support may no longer suffice. Restoring Starlink access to Russia could help demonstrate America's willingness to be more even-handed and not tip the balance toward protracting the war. At this point, avoiding deeper entanglement could require treating Russia as an ally and supporting its side of the conflict — or at least refusing to back any NATO action against Russia when Kiev, London, Paris, or Bonn inevitably invoke it. They will find a way to drag NATO directly into the fight once other avenues for U.S. backing dry up.

Half-measures, however, simply buy time for the conflict to drag into the next administration, which can then shoulder the blame for World War Three. In modern politics, assigning blame often matters more than substance. Should Democrats win the Presidency in 2028 with the war still raging, expect a full renewal of financial support for what remains of Ukraine. By then, the European axis of war will likely have devised numerous ways to strike deeper inside Russia, provoking a Russian counter-strike that triggers NATO's collective defense clause — the final red line before nuclear exchanges.

Ukraine and Iran's Oil Embargoes of War Bite

Like the 70s Arab oil embargo; Europe, Asia and elsewhere are experiencing a de facto oil embargo as a consequence of Ukraine's decision not to allow Russian oil exports. That policy was supported by EU and American sanctions. France apparently used submarines to sink civilian ships loaded with Russian oil.

   Iran has of course stopped vessels in the Persian Gulf and Indian ocean vessels carrying mid-east oil or seeking to load up mid-east crude from transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

  The USA probably can produce oil sufficient for itself with vast reserves and increases in oil production while the global embargo persists- if the oil wasn't already sold to foreign countries seeking to buy prime crude and increase global warming gases simultaneously.

Musk Enlists Starlink on Ukrainian Side of Europe's War on Russia

 Elon Musk's decision to enlist Starlink to support Ukraine and allow their military to have access to Starlink to guide long range, high speed drones to attack Russian targets has altered the course of the war. I asked AI to review the changes and methods; it pointed out that Starlink has in effect, implemented its own policy of space law. Following is Gemini's review of the present situation.

Gemini- "In early February 2026, Ukraine and SpaceX implemented a comprehensive "white list" system to systematically block unauthorized Russian use of Starlink terminals. 

How the System Works

• Default Block: All Starlink terminals in the Ukrainian theater are now disabled by default unless they are explicitly registered on an official government-managed "white list".
• Verification Channels:
  • Military: Ukrainian troops verify their terminals through the DELTA battlespace management system.
  • Civilians: Private users must register in person at Administrative Service Centers (TsNAP) with a national ID.
  • Businesses: Entities can use the Diia digital portal for verification.
• Daily Updates: The list is updated at least once per day to quickly restore service to newly verified Ukrainian units.
• Speed Restrictions: SpaceX also implemented a speed-based kill switch; terminals moving faster than 75–90 km/h automatically reboot, preventing their use on high-speed attack drones. 

Battlefield Impact on Russian Forces

The enforcement has caused what some Russian military bloggers describe as a "catastrophe" for their frontline units: 

• Command Collapse: Russian units that relied on "gray market" terminals for secure communication and real-time coordination have reportedly faced localized command-and-control failures.
• Drone Operations: The block has significantly degraded Russia's ability to operate Starlink-equipped long-range drones, which previously bypassed Ukrainian electronic warfare by using satellite links.
• Territorial Losses: President Zelenskyy reported that Ukrainian forces have taken advantage of this "connectivity gap" to liberate over 300 square kilometers of territory in southern Ukraine as of February 20, 2026

Counter-Intelligence Operations

Ukraine's cyber forces leveraged the confusion by launching a "sting" operation. They created fake Telegram bots posing as technical support for Russian units seeking to bypass the block. This operation successfully

Captured precise geolocations for over 2,420 Russian-operated terminals.

• Identified 31 suspected Ukrainian collaborators assisting with illegal registrations.
• Permanently "bricked" captured terminals after extracting their data.
• SpaceX has a new way to block Russian Starlink access, and ...Feb 4, 2026 — Ukraine scrambles to register terminals. That appears to be changing with the new whitelist.
• Starlink terminals on the whitelist remain operational, while ...Feb 4, 2026 — Starlink terminals on the whitelist remain operational, while russian terminals have already been blocked.
• Starlink Surprise - by Mick Ryan - Futura Doctrin. Starlink's operations are banned in Russia, preventing Ukrainian drones from being fully deployed in Russia's rear.

How has SpaceX's partnership with Ukraine evolved since the white list implementation?

Following the implementation of the "white list" in early 

February 2026, the partnership between SpaceX and 

Ukraine has transitioned from a loose commercial arrangement into a tightly integrated, state-level strategic alliance. 

The evolution is characterized by the following developments:

1. Joint Operational Coordination

• Rapid Response Protocol: Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov noted that SpaceX leadership, including President Gwynne Shotwell and Elon Musk, now responds "within hours" to reports of unauthorized terminal use.
• Daily Verification Cycles: SpaceX and the Ukrainian Ministry of Digital Transformation have established a 24-hour verification cycle for all terminals geolocated in the theater. This allows for the immediate blocking of stolen or black-market devices before they can be effectively utilized by Russian forces. 

2. Technical & Legal Formalization

• Weaponized Terms of Service: Legal analysts observe that SpaceX has effectively "weaponized" its Terms of Service to enforce sovereign sanctions. By blocking unauthorized military use by a sanctioned entity (Russia), SpaceX is now acting as an unofficial enforcer of international space law and US sanctions.
• Hard-Coded Restrictions: In addition to the white list, SpaceX has implemented speed-based "kill switches" that automatically reboot terminals moving at speeds exceeding 75–90 km/h, specifically to prevent their use on high-speed attack drones. 

3. Institutional Integration

• DELTA System Linkage: The partnership now bypasses traditional retail registration for military units. Instead, Ukrainian frontline troops verify their equipment through the DELTA battlespace management system, which is directly synced with SpaceX's backend.
• Civilian Verification Infrastructure: For non-military users, the Ukrainian government has repurposed its Administrative Service Centers (TsNAP) as the official physical hubs for Starlink registration, creating a state-managed gateway for SpaceX services. 

4. Strategic Impact

Restored Ukrainian Advantage: The collaboration has allowed the Ukrainian army to regain a clear advantage in secure, high-bandwidth communications, which contributed to the liberation of over 300 square kilometers of territory in the weeks following the whitelist's launch. 

Russian "Blackout": This heightened cooperation led to a "mass Starlink blackout" among Russian units by mid-February 2026 causing what Russian bloggers described as a "catastrophe" for tactical command and control."

Chancellor Merz Wants Nuclear Weapons for Germany (shared with France)

 German Chancellor Merz wants to have nuclear weapons and share them with France. That is not a surprising development or a German Chancellor; following in the footsteps of Adolph Hitler. Democrats however would be down with the idea I am fairly sure, and would also like a U.S. Senator representing the military interests of Ukraine in the U.S. Senate.

Chancellor Merz expressed the usual worst case direction politicians love to take. Instead of ending the war with Russia, Europe has pledged several billion dollars more and is developing joint missile development with Ukraine. The European community in the wake of the Soviet Union feel quite swollen with their European Union economic power and hate to prioritize peaceful political developments- especially with Russia, when they can extend the war indefinitely and build up their military power.

Should Americans be concerned about a potential 4th Reich with nuclear weapons that may emerge, albeit with other European nations joining their alliance? My late father was a veteran of the Second World War in the U.S. Navy, so I view the prospect of a nuclear armed Germany quite unfavorably. Chancellor Merz declared ‘the rule based world order is dead’. The inference is that Germany need be a lion in the jungle- even if most other nations feel there is a rule based world order prevail- the rule of common sense- it is the latter that is dead in Germany and much of the EU regarding peace with Russia and returning to a normal world order of peaceful international trade and ecological sustainability with freedom and justice for all..

Germany and Europe would require a large number of nuclear weapons to serve as a deterrent to Russia. Russia has several thousand nuclear weapons and numerous means to deliver them including suitcase nukes a drone could carry to a ground zero in the dark. Fundamentally increasing nuclear proliferation in an era of biological weapons with designer qualities able to attack specific genomes is crazy. The world needs peace and trust rather than war.

A godless Europe logically presents a recrudescent existential threat to the world when led by Germany. Assuredly China, Russia, India, Pakistan and other nations present similar risks to the survival of humanity, yet the presence of nuclear weapons will not deter Russia from their use should the need arise to use them for defense against European aggression with overwhelming force in conventional weapons should that circumstance ever arise.

Deterrence policy in the Cold war was effective because of M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) facts; Russia and the U.S.A. both were and still are capable of incinerating each other several times over- taking down the rest of the world collaterally in nuclear winter. A M.A.D. policy involving western Europe and Russia is truly an asinine goal for Chancellor Mertz to pursue. Adding another player to the list of those able to destroy life on Earth will not create an era of peace or a pax Europa.

This isn't the place to discuss the numerous varieties of deterrent policy. It is worth noting that peace is the best deterrent policy, and a Europe swollen with power sufficient to feel that it need not, and cannot share Ukraine with Russia- its historical owner, is the problem. Without a smattering of wisdom European hegemony over Russia builds global dangers exceeding those present. Deterrence policy with nuclear weapons worked when there were just two nuclear super-powers and prior to Craig Ventor's development of CRISPR and gene decoding technology. Biological war is the like avenue of egress for an era where existential threats of nuclear holocaust precludes their use by rational political leaders. Biological war is eschewed by the United States, yet the acceleration of military power Europe has started onis likely to change that policy Universally; and no one is likely to survive that even if the nukes are not unpacked.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4wpv0wx43o Rule Based Order No Longer Exists

Grok Analysis of this post-

"Alexander Vindman jumping into the Florida Senate race does scream "Ukraine partisan" vibes, given his background as a Ukraine-born Army vet and key whistleblower in Trump's first impeachment over that infamous Zelensky call. He's been a vocal advocate for U.S. support to Ukraine since Russia's invasion, so yeah, that tracks with your take on him as a "rabid" backer. He actually announced his Democratic bid back on January 27, 2026—though he did kick off his first campaign event in Sunrise, Florida, just a few days ago on Feb 9. Raised a cool $1.7 million in the first 24 hours, which is no small feat for a special election to fill Marco Rubio's old seat (now held by GOP appointee Ashley Moody).

You're absolutely right to chuckle at the evolution (or devolution?) of Democratic anti-war creds. Back in the Vietnam era, the party was a hotbed of peaceniks—think Kent State protests, draft dodgers, and folks like George McGovern railing against endless quagmires. Fast-forward to the Biden years (2021-2025), and bam: Over $175 billion in U.S. aid to Ukraine, with Dems leading the charge for more weapons, sanctions, and no-fly zone talk. It's a stark flip from "make love, not war" to "send the HIMARS." Part of it stems from the post-9/11 shift toward interventionism (hello, Iraq and Afghanistan), plus Russia's aggression making Ukraine a bipartisan cause—at least until isolationist voices grew louder on the right. But yeah, the hypocrisy meter spikes when you contrast that with the 2020 Minnesota riots (George Floyd aftermath), where the focus was laser-sharp on defunding police/ICE, racial justice, and anti-Trump fervor, with zilch on foreign wars. Those crowds were chanting "No justice, no peace" domestically, not fretting over Donbas borders. It's like the party's anti-war muscle atrophied when the "bad guy" was Putin instead of Nixon or Bush."

US Shouldn't Guarantee Automatic Escalation to W.W. 3 in Ukraine if Conflict Occurs Down the Road

Pres Trump should not sign anything like an idiot's promise to start WW 3 fighting Russians as part of a peace agreement. That would be such a good mistake as to be comparable to treaties leading to the First World War. Europeans being daft and hillbilly regarding Russia shouldn't be allowed to draft the USA into their preferred spiral of idiocy.

  Europe with rational diplomacy could easily bring the war to a halt with an understanding from Russia that they won't one day attack West of the Dnepr except to support Transnistria perhaps.

Paper agreements don't guarantee peace or prevent war- good social relations and a lack of paranoia do that. A guarantee to engage Russia to fight World War Three is stupid. If a  future President wants to start a war with anyone he won't need a paper to do that; just a rational reason and lack of imagination for finding peace.

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world. " - George Washington, Farewell Address to the People of the United States | Monday, September 19, 1796

https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/past-projects/quotes/article/it-is-our-true-policy-to-steer-clear-of-permanent-alliance-with-any-portion-of-the-foreign-world

Ukraine is a Training Space for Drug Cartel Members on Anti-Drone Tech

Drug cartels are among those profiting from experience in the Ukraine war for applications on smuggling toxic substances into the U.S.A. Gemini provided a summary of some of the drone situation with the Coast Guard and Border Patrol.

Gary- The armed forces of Ukraine are fielding anti-drone drones; do illegal drug importers use that sort of thing to take down border patrol drones?

Gemini- "In 2026, illegal drug importers, primarily Mexican cartels, have significantly escalated their use of drone technology to counter U.S. law enforcement, though their "anti-drone" tactics differ from the kinetic dogfights seen in Ukraine. Rather than solely using "anti-drone drones" to physically ram or take down border patrol assets, cartels primarily use electronic warfare, surveillance, and offensive weaponization to disrupt government operations. 

Cartel Anti-Drone and Counter-Surveillance Tactics

• Electronic Warfare: Cartels have begun deploying jammers and other electronic warfare systems to disrupt the control signals of rival cartels' drones and potentially those of law enforcement.
• Decoy Drones: Smugglers use decoy drones to act as diversions, intentionally drawing Customs and Border Protection (CBP) attention to a "fake" drop site while a secondary drone safely delivers the actual narcotics elsewhere.
• Cyber Attacks and Hacking: Criminal organizations have recruited IT specialists to hack or take control of unencrypted law enforcement drones, sometimes using malware like Maldrone or specialized drones like SkyJack to hijack controls mid-flight.
• Targeting Agents Directly: There are increasing reports and internal warnings of cartels authorizing kamikaze drone attacks specifically targeting U.S. Border Patrol agents and service members with explosives. 

Technological Transfer from Ukraine

There is evidence of direct tactical learning from global conflicts. As of late 2025 and early 2026, investigations have identified cartel members being sent to 

Ukraine

 to receive training in the International Legion specifically on offensive drone operations, skills they then bring back to enhance Mexican cartel programs. 

U.S. and Mexican Responses in 2026

• $115 Million DHS Investment: In January 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a massive investment in both drone and counter-drone technologies to specifically address cartel capabilities.
• Joint Intelligence Sharing: On January 20, 2026, the U.S. and Mexico agreed to link intelligence analytics software to identify and thwart drone threats along the border.
• State-Level Authority: New laws in 2025 and early 2026, such as those in 
  Arizona
  , now legally allow local law enforcement to shoot down or electronically intercept drones suspected of criminal activity along the border.