Thank you! You also can read the facts and sources on my Substack, here:

walberque.substack.com/p/fire-in-th...

Antidotes is a banger. Up there with Susan versus Youth Club.

The Marshall Suite, duh.

And the Arms Control Poseur single.

True.

You’re never alone with the Dirty Three.

I have cassettes and tons of vinyl (you can see some singles here), but my camera is by the cds, what can I say!

The Fatboy Slim remix of Wildchild’s Renegade Master is an all time banger.

Thank you!

If you’d like more on Russian non strategic nuclear weapons doctrine, I just published this report. I wish I’d seen these materials before I wrote it, certainly, but I think my conclusions are consistent with the findings by @maxseddon and @xtophercook

www.iiss.org/research-pap...

No surprises on conventional precision strike - consistent with work by Dave Johnson and others (e.g., @KofmanMichael) on SODCIT - strategic operations to destroy critical infrastructure targets. Also consistent with the idea of civilian targeting. 6/6

cgsr.llnl.gov/content/assets…

Takeaways (cont):

4) Russia's naval nuclear doctrine is consistent with its very real shortcomings and precarious position compared to the US Navy, therefore integrating nuclear planning at lower levels, giving commanders wide targeting flexibility after initial nuclear use. 5/6

Takeaways (cont):

3) Russia has done extensive work to target with nuclear and conventioanl precision strike civilian and military infrastructure in Japan, and at least some theoretical targeting against targets in South Korea, Iran, Azerbaijan, North Korea, and even China. 4/6

Takeaways (cont):

2) Russian non-strategic nuclear weapons remain a part of the surface fleet (inc. missiles, bombs, torpedoes, depth charges, all with hot-swappable conventional and nuclear warheads), despite promising to remove them in the Presidential Nuclear Initiatives. 3/6

Four key takeaways for you:

1) Russian doctrine for the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons by the Russian Navy includes a much lower threshold for nuclear use than previously thought, and far lower than the Kremlin has claimed in the years since the end of the Cold War. 2/6

Information source with a commentary by @walberque.bsky.social:

www.ft.com/content/f18e...