Russia’s new missile and our military industrial-complex

Some things are as bleak as the media wants you to think and some things are much worse…

Like how we’re being scared by the media with Putin’s new nuclear warhead delivery missile.

But shouldn’t we be more afraid that Hillary Clinton helped Russia gain access to US/Canadian uranium in the first place?

That’s why everything covered by the media recently seems ridiculous to me. I have a background in Communication and Advertising. I also have a Masters in Psychology applied to National Security. Most of my teachers have been in the military, and I have also lived in the US. Though I grew up in former Soviet Satellite State, where media deception was the bread and butter of daily life.

This helps me see when the media lies, when they completely make things up, and when they, by mistake, tell us the truth.

Putin is doing his propaganda homework, by showing off his “new” missile. But if you only look a little deeper into it, which I encourage everyone to do about everything, listen to all—and follow none, it’s easy to access information on the subject.

Using any search engine you can find information just like I found on, which notes it looks like an Iskander missile. Furthermore it “doesn’t even look that highly modified, although it’s exhaust faring, which drops off during launch, throws off the Iskander’s signature profile a bit at first glance.”

Why didn’t our media—but a guy reading a public site on the internet, find this out?

Because the media is bought by the military-industrial complex, and they want to justify spending billions of dollars of projects of their own. Or they’re stupid… But I sincerely believe it‘s a combination of both.

How To Build a Small Bunker in Your Backyard with $400

As someone who has a MA in journalism, and is embarrassed by it, I can first-handedly say I am disgusted by most of my former colleagues, and I’m ashamed of the brainwashing I went through during university.

I can say most arts degrees are nonsense, and a giant waste of taxpayer and students’ money. What with the 1.2 Trillion dollars in student debt the US has as of now.

These so called journalists do no research. They have no professionalism in their work or finding out the truth.

The hype about this missile is mostly propaganda, in the sense that it is faster, but not by a huge margin.

But if the narrative is upheld even by the US media, what happens then?

Simple. DARPA has already announced they need more money. Even though they just got a 136% increase in funding for supersonic weapons.

This falls in line with the defense budget increase to $686.1 billion, as just one B-21 Bomber costs over 2 Billion dollars. That’s right, 2 thousand million dollars. Thousand years of median family income, to pay for a single plane.

The military-industrial complex has been working for the last hundred years, convincing us that we should fight wars. Some wars were just, some wars needed to be fought, but not all. They have been, always, making a profit on all.

The missiles that are making headlines in the mainstream media could be countered with more expensive variants of existing technology. Such an example would the Phalanx machine gun defense system which is designed to destroy cruise missiles. Probably even with modifications this would still not be effective enough against ballistic missiles, but why try?! When the margin one can add on top of a machine gun for example is infinitively smaller than that one can add over a rocket program.

Laser systems would probably be the best bet, for when one has a working system, defense becomes impenetrable by any missile, and thus only a few of these systems planted around the continent would render the fear of enemies with missiles obsolete. Taking huge profits along with it.

So, no interest in doing extensive research there…

The US also had a program for trying to intercept ballistic missiles that cost 60 Billion dollars and was shut down during the Regan era, because it was intercepting 9/10 nuclear warheads. This is not efficient enough in an era where just one warhead from a multiple warhead missile has thousands of kilo tons of power (Hiroshima had a yield of 12 kilotons).

Did they need to spend 60 Billion dollars to realize it’s inefficient? No.

But they did it, because it was a good pretext to spend money. Gladly someone had the good sense to finally pull the plug.

However, the perverse thing about a bloated state is when you spend the whole budget you can ask for more money and probably get it, by arguing that it did not work, because you did not have enough resources.

When you are efficient and spend less than allocated, you get penalized and get less money thereafter.

As the now disgraced NY Times pointed out, Hillary Clinton’s foundation received “four donations totaling $2.35 million” from Uranium One as the Russians were taking control of the company.

Follow the money. If the nuclear scare is still in effect then it gives bureaucrat  reasons to continue spending our money.

And just to illustrate just how expensive these weapons are…

Nuclear weapons must be created at astonishing costs and must be maintained by “specialists” who are sometimes paid $500/hour. All this money flows through companies that take their cut.

Thermonuclear weapons also have as one of their components Tritium. It has a half-life of 12 years so it needs to be replaced every 12 years, thus costing even more long term, into the billion of $.

This map represents the world by how much nuclear power each country has, the blue is the US and the large orange one is Russia. It shows from which countries the lion’s share of profits come from, leading to the military-industrial complex.

You will not hear about any of this from paid-for media. Because people like Oliver North, who was convicted in the Iran-Contra affair is partially responsible for selling weapons to Iran, works for the media. Iran is now one of our biggest enemies, and used that money to fund the revolutionary Contras in Nicaragua to overthrow the regime the US administration did not like.

This retired and disgraced Oliver North, had a show on MSNBC called “Equal Times”. MSNBC standing for Microsoft NBS, which means it is Bill Gates’s and of course the television reflected his agenda.

The main stream media is own by corporate interest and their political allies from the military industrial complex.

The irony if this situation is that they are trying to maintain a delicate balance.

On one hand they want the public to be scared enough to rationalize the thousands of billions of dollars spend on military programs, but not so scared that all they want to do is check out of society when they realize the danger and go somewhere safe(r).

On such example is “Duck and Cover”, for those who are too young to know, when you hide under a desk, you can increase your chances of surviving a nuclear blast.

Not when weapons like that can create huge craters.

There is also good news in all of this.

Firstly the human instinct to survive will forever push us away from nuclear annihilation, that is not to say it’s impossible, but the likelihood it will probably low.

Secondly if it does happen, there are some factors that further increase your chases of surviving.

If you do not live in a major city, your chances of being hit by a nuclear weapon are very low.

There are other things to be concerned about, we will discuss a little later…

And even if you do live in a big city, then you still have a good chance if you are not dead center of the explosion.  Plus, contrary to popular belief, weapons 10 times stronger than the Hiroshima bomb (Little Boy) are not 10 times more destructive, they are only 30% more so.


And as long as you are in a reinforced-concrete US mainland building, that’s not under the cloud, the explosion itself will not kill you. But you will clearly be hurt. From burns, that can kill but are manageable with the right skills to hearing lose.

The real danger is from the high levels of radiation that is impregnated into everything for the next 48 hours. Sadly, we are talking about thousands of years of radiation, but the quick acting, cannot be mitigated one is present for two days.

In this scenario, city dwellers as our friends from the suburbs and off the grid,

have to avoid contaminated food, water and air. And the simplest and best thing to do, is stay indoors for the first two days.

Also, most big yield weapons have little radioactive fallout, because they have little fissile material (Uranium and Plutonium) and rely mostly on Hydrogen to liberate energy. Thus, if thermonuclear weapons are used, and they probably will be if big cities are attacked, they will be relatively clean.

After these 2 days are over for the next couple of months, radiation is still big an issue, and the location should be left as soon as possible.

The next challenge will be that civilization has fallen and one must then take care of himself and his family. Be prepared for everything to be as it was in the 13th century, after nuclear weapons destroy infrastructure, communications and more.

If nuclear weapons are detonated in the stratosphere, they will burn out all electrical devices for hundreds of miles beneath.

But as I said, this is unlikely to happen as long as the other person is sane and values his life. But just in case he/they are not, it is good to be prepared.



Written by

Paul is a former Advertising man with Masters Degrees in Journalism and Military Psychology. He realized the many dangers that await our society and is working on going off the grid. His pen name is out of respect for Revere—of “The British are coming!” fame—who also valued silver as he does. He believes that the most probable end of society will be financial but is also preparing for the worst and hopes to bring valuable information to others just as Revere did

Latest comments
  • Hello, “Paul”. A Very thorough and well “thought-out” Article. Thank You. For you, and for the few other journalists like you – Thank You ! True American citizens with an addiction for the Whole Truth – like me – I salute you. Please – keep doing what you do. Bill

  • Very interesting and enlightening. Imagine what problems could be solved if we spent more money…. JUDICIOUSLY and not frivolously on better police training, integrating retired and discharged military veterans back into society and the work force, increased security in schools, airports and other places both public and private, and reducing negative impacts on the environment and improved management of the environment and wildlife.

    Instead, greedy people over estimate costs or they are allocated funds as favor for political support. And then you see people create more change and provide more assistance with no experience and money they gather from a web page explaining their cause. Sad how the professionals with all the education, finances and resources need millions just so they can throw half away and spend the rest on nonsense, parties, fancy offices, hush money, payoffs and never produce any measurable results. Seems like the honest people fall under more scrutiny and there are immediate repercussions if they cheat, steal, embezzle, divert funds or pull any kind of crap. Mean while the politicians and the wealthy experience mild embarrassment and often buy or negotiate their way out punishment.