Fiz: If US /NATO troops are supporting the war with boots on the ground in Romania or any other border region (which seems likely if we aren't actually in Ukraine) it is just a matter of time before something reveals that. Once US direct involvement goes from speculation to fact-based, escalation will likely accelerate.
Even a 1/10th of 1% Nuclear War risk would be too high...but I'd guess the odds are at least 10-20% already, and growing by the day. The thing about statistics is that even 1/10th of 1% odds is 100% fatal, EVERY time, if you play a sufficient number of rounds.
http://dailyreckoning.com/a-bodyguard-of-lies/
Excerpt:
All experts on nuclear warfighting agree that if a nuclear war begins, it will be the result of escalation to the point that one side feels it is cornered and has no choice but to use nukes. That point is getting closer by the day.
Macgregor calls on Congress to stop the White House, but he’s not optimistic that’ll happen.
Nuclear War? It’s Not the End of the World
The possibility of nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia is a shocking development after thirty years, during which nuclear weapons and nuclear war between superpowers were almost forgotten.
What is as disconcerting is the fact that the discussion of nuclear war is casual, almost flippant, and carries none of the seriousness with which the topic was formerly addressed. It also carries no comprehension of the existential consequences and sheer horror that the use of nuclear weapons entails.
It’s almost as if the warmongers in and around the White House were playing a game of chicken without realizing the other driver had no intention of changing course.
Now the U.S. elites have started psychological operations (psyops) aimed at Putin with nuclear weapons as the bait. They claim that Putin has threatened to use tactical weapons in Ukraine and possibly other parts of Eastern and Central Europe.
That’s a lie; Putin never said that.
When asked, both Putin and Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev said that if attacked, Russia would defend itself by all means necessary, including the possible use of nuclear weapons. That’s not news. That has been Russian or Soviet policy since the early 1950s. It has also been U.S. policy since then. Neither side has ever renounced the first use of nuclear weapons.
Putin’s expected answer to a question posed has been turned into a threat he never made. This is U.S. and UK propaganda at its worst (and most dangerous). This lie about Putin’s intentions quickly morphed into another psyop about a “false flag” operation.
That’s when you stage an attack disguised to look like an attack by your enemy in order to justify your own “retaliation,” which you were planning all along. Recently, the narrative that Putin would use nukes or conduct a false flag operation morphed into a related narrative that Putin would use a “dirty bomb.”
He Said, He Said
In effect, Putin would detonate a dirty bomb and then blame the Ukrainians and Americans. A dirty bomb is not a nuclear weapon, but it does employ radioactive material wrapped around conventional explosives. When detonated, the radioactive material is dispersed and can poison or kill any people or livestock in the area.
Not to be outdone, the Russians countered by saying the U.S. or Ukraine would conduct the false flag by detonating a dirty bomb and then blaming the Russians as an excuse to escalate Western involvement in Ukraine.
At this point, we have both sides warning the other side will conduct a false flag with a dirty bomb in order to justify their own pre-planned escalation. If a dirty bomb does go off, each side will blame the other and the truth will be a casualty of war.
Meanwhile, a senior Russian foreign ministry official has warned that U.S. satellites, which have been providing critical targeting information to Ukraine’s armed forces, may be “legitimate” targets of Russian forces.
How would the U.S. respond if Russia starts taking out its satellites? We may soon find out.
Is Your Portfolio Ready for Nukes?
By the way, I’m not apologizing for Putin or defending his invasion of Ukraine. I’m just looking at the current situation and objectively analyzing where things could go next, based upon the facts.
And I’m not making a specific prediction; I’m just giving you a warning because the media doesn’t seem to want to.
It might seem like an inappropriate question given the potential for widespread death and destruction, but is your portfolio ready for nukes?
In a nuclear confrontation, stocks and bonds could become worthless as exchanges are closed around the world. At best, they will retain some value as illiquid private equity tokens.
The best assets in this catastrophic scenario are land, gold, silver, food, water, and heat for your home.
Nothing else will matter much.
| 
