Rimple Sanchla's Blog, page 7

The Divine Dance of Listening

Which one is God supposed to listen to?
Sometimes he listens to the fish, sometimes to the fisherman – and that’s the way the world goes round!

In the quiet of the world, where rivers sing and winds whisper, God listens. But who does God hear? The fish, swimming freely in the river’s embrace, or the fisherman, casting his net with hope in his heart? Sometimes the fish slips away, dancing through the water, safe and joyful. Other times, the fisherman’s net holds firm, and he carries his catch home with gratitude. This is the rhythm of life—a sacred balance, a divine dance where every prayer, every heart’s cry, is heard by the One who loves all.

Imagine a mother sitting by a window, watching her two children play. One child builds a tower of stones, dreaming of a castle that touches the sky. The other runs through the grass, chasing a butterfly with laughter. Does the mother love one more than the other? No, her heart holds both, delighting in their joy, guiding them gently when they stumble. So it is with God, whose love is vast like the sky, embracing every creature, every dream, every need.

The Fish and the Fisherman

Let’s picture the fish, gliding through the cool, shimmering river. Its world is water, its life a quiet song of freedom. It prays in its own way—not with words, but with the flicker of its fins, asking to swim another day, to feel the current’s caress. God hears this prayer, for it is the heartbeat of creation, simple and pure.

Now see the fisherman, standing by the riverbank, his hands weathered from work, his heart full of hope. He casts his net, whispering a prayer for food to feed his family, for strength to carry on. His prayer, too, rises like a soft breeze to the heavens, and God hears it, for it carries the love and care of a human soul.

Sometimes, the fish slips through the net, and the river rejoices. The fisherman sits quietly, trusting that tomorrow may bring a new chance. Other times, the net holds the fish, and the fisherman’s family gathers around a warm meal, giving thanks. Both moments are sacred. Both are held in God’s gentle hands. The fish’s freedom and the fisherman’s hope are threads in the same tapestry, woven by divine love.

The Beauty of Balance

This is the world’s rhythm, its holy heartbeat. God listens to all—fish, fisherman, bird, tree, you, and me. No prayer is too small, no heart unheard. Like the sun that shines on both the mountain and the valley, God’s love touches every corner of creation. Sometimes the answer to one prayer means another must wait, but nothing is forgotten. Every moment is part of a greater story, a divine poem written in stars and rivers, in laughter and tears.

Think of a garden where flowers bloom and bees hum. The flower opens its petals, praying for sunlight to grow. The bee dances from blossom to blossom, seeking nectar to make honey. Does God choose one over the other? No, for both are part of the garden’s song. The flower’s beauty and the bee’s journey are one in the Creator’s eyes, each a note in the melody of life.

A World That Turns in Love

The world spins because God listens—not to one voice alone, but to the chorus of all creation. The fish and the fisherman, the flower and the bee, the child and the parent—all are heard, all are loved. Sometimes the answer comes as freedom, sometimes as provision, sometimes as a quiet whisper to trust and wait. But always, always, there is love.

When you feel alone, like a fish caught in a net, or unheard, like a fisherman with an empty basket, pause and feel the divine presence. God is listening, not just to you, but to the whole world’s song. Your heart’s whisper is part of that melody, and it matters. The world turns because of this divine listening, this sacred balance where every creature, every dream, has a place.

A Simple Prayer

So, let us rest in this truth: God hears the fish, the fisherman, and us. Like a river flowing gently to the sea, like a star shining softly in the night, God’s love holds us all. May we trust in this divine dance, where every prayer is a step, every heart a partner, and every moment a gift.

And that, dear soul, is how the world goes round—in the beauty of God’s listening, in the harmony of love that never fades.

Also Read:

Vande Mataram: The Soulful Ode to Mother India

Nirvana Shatakam and The Divine Light of Adi Shankaracharya

Pasayadan – Gift of Divine Grace

A Tapestry of Miracles Woven in India’s Sacred Heart

Sita’s Thoughts, Walking Behind Ram

Sita-Ram Hridayam — The Heart of Sita and Ram

A Divine Ode to Shri Ram: The Eternal Light of Compassion and Grace

Shri Hari Stotram: Celestial Garland of Hari’s Glory

Gitanjali – All poetries

Paper Boats in the Rain: A Song of Lost Childhood

In the Rhythm of Rain – A Love Poem (Rimjhim rimjhim, rumjhum rumjhum)

Whispers of Simplicity: Doesn’t matter! Just come as you are

Whispers on the Village Path: The Soul of Kaun Disha Mein

Ek Ladki ko dekha to aisa laga – I saw a girl and it felt….

Gandhi’s Charkha Conspiracy: Symbol of Freedom or Shackle on India’s Future?

MK Gandhi is often celebrated for his role in India’s freedom struggle, but not everyone saw him as a hero. Some, like the great industrialist Shantanurao Laxmanrao Kirloskar, believed Gandhi’s ideas hurt India more than they helped. In his autobiography, Cactus and Roses, Kirloskar shared his frustration with Gandhi’s focus on the charkha (spinning wheel) and strikes, which he saw as roadblocks to India’s growth. This article explores why Gandhi’s policies, especially the charkha movement, were seen by some as anti-Indian, favoring British interests and harming farmers and industrialists alike. By connecting the dots, we uncover a side of Gandhi that raises serious questions about his legacy.

The Charkha: A Symbol of Self-Reliance or Economic Ruin?

Gandhi promoted the charkha as a tool for swadeshi, urging Indians to spin their own cloth and boycott British textiles. He believed this would make India self-reliant and weaken British rule. But the reality was far more complicated.

Hurting Cotton Farmers: Indian cotton farmers were already crushed by the British Ryotwari system, paying up to 60% of their crop as tax. The charkha reduced demand for raw cotton by encouraging people to spin at home instead of buying mill-made cloth. This meant less cotton was needed for Indian mills, leaving farmers with surplus crops that the British could buy at dirt-cheap prices. Gandhi’s push for hand-spinning indirectly helped British mills in places like Manchester, which got access to cheap Indian cotton while Indian farmers struggled.Blocking Industrial Growth: Industrialists like SL Kirloskar, who built the Kirloskar Group into a global engineering giant, saw the charkha as a step backward. In Cactus and Roses, Kirloskar wrote that Gandhi’s followers ignored the power of machines. He believed machines, like his company’s ploughs and pumps, could lift farmers out of poverty by making farming faster and easier. Instead, Gandhi’s focus on hand-spinning kept India stuck in a pre-industrial era, slowing down progress.A Misguided Ideal: Kirloskar argued that Gandhi’s idea of self-reliance—spinning cloth and living simply—was unrealistic. He saw it as a “Gandhian heresy” that ignored how Britain’s strength came from machines, not handwork. When India was colonized, it was a country without machines, overpowered by a nation that had them. Kirloskar believed India needed more factories and technology, not charkhas, to become strong and free.Strikes: Disrupting Indian Industry

Gandhi’s call for strikes during movements like Non-Cooperation (1920–22) aimed to disrupt British rule, but they also hurt Indian businesses. Workers in cities like Bombay and Ahmedabad, inspired by Gandhi, left their jobs in mills and factories to join protests or spin khadi. This caused chaos for Indian industrialists who were trying to build a modern economy.

Kirloskar’s Frustration: In Cactus and Roses, Kirloskar described how he disagreed with Gandhi’s followers who saw strikes and khadi as patriotic. He believed these actions weakened Indian businesses, which were already struggling under British taxes and competition. For example, textile mills in India faced losses when workers stopped production, while British mills continued to profit from cheap Indian cotton.A Divided Vision: While Gandhi saw strikes as a way to unite Indians against the British, industrialists like Kirloskar saw them as divisive. They wanted to create jobs and wealth through factories, but Gandhi’s focus on village economies and hand-spinning clashed with their vision of a modern, industrialized India.Gandhi’s Ties to the British: A Spy or a Pawn?

Some voices, both in history and today, have gone further, suggesting Gandhi wasn’t just misguided but actively worked in Britain’s favor. While calling him a “British spy” may sound extreme, there are reasons people question his loyalty to India’s interests.

Early Life in South Africa: Gandhi spent 21 years in South Africa, where he worked as a lawyer for wealthy Indian merchants and even supported the British during the Boer War by organizing an ambulance corps. Some argue this showed his willingness to align with British interests when it suited him.Suspicious Timing: Gandhi’s return to India in 1915 coincided with a time when the British needed to control growing unrest. His non-violent approach, while inspiring, often defused revolutionary movements that threatened British rule more directly. For example, during the Non-Cooperation Movement, Gandhi called off protests after the Chauri Chaura incident in 1922, disappointing those who wanted a stronger fight.The Manchester Statue: In 2019, a statue of Gandhi was unveiled in Manchester, a city built on the wealth of its textile mills, which profited from India’s cotton. To critics, this statue is a bitter irony, representing not peace but the suffering of Indian farmers whose cotton fed British mills while they starved under heavy taxes.

Gandhi’s Statue in Manchester. Why would British install his statue here? Now you know it. Also, why Britishers have not installed statues of Subhash Chandra Bose or Bhagat Singh or other REAL FREEDOM FIGHTERS? Do read some eye-opening articles in the “Also Read” section at the end of this article.

The Farmer’s Plight: Robbed in Daylight

Gandhi’s charkha was meant to empower rural India, but it often left farmers worse off. The British controlled India’s cotton trade, buying raw cotton at low prices and selling expensive cloth back to Indians. By reducing demand for mill-made cloth, the charkha made it harder for Indian mills to compete, leaving farmers with fewer buyers and lower prices.

Taxation Torture: The Ryotwari system forced farmers to pay 60% of their crop as tax, leaving them with little to survive. Gandhi’s focus on hand-spinning didn’t address this root problem and instead shifted focus to symbolic acts like wearing khadi.A False Promise: Gandhi promised that spinning would make villagers self-sufficient, but spinning a few hours a day couldn’t replace the income lost from selling cotton. Farmers were caught between British exploitation and Gandhi’s unrealistic vision, leading some to call his policies a “daylight robbery” of their livelihoods.Kirloskar’s Vision: Machines for a Strong India

Unlike Gandhi, SL Kirloskar believed machines were India’s path to prosperity. In Cactus and Roses, he described how his company’s pumps and engines helped farmers grow more crops with less effort. He saw technology as a way to lift India out of poverty, not keep it tied to outdated traditions.

Building an Empire: Starting with his father’s small engine business, Kirloskar expanded into a global conglomerate, producing everything from pumps to tractors. He graduated from MIT, bringing world-class engineering knowledge to India.A Practical Patriot: Kirloskar didn’t join political protests but served India by creating jobs and machines. He believed this was a better way to fight poverty and British control than spinning cloth or staging strikes.Clashing with Gandhians: Kirloskar often debated Gandhi’s followers, who saw machines as enemies of the poor. He argued that machines, like his company’s ploughs, saved time and labor, helping farmers escape the cycle of poverty. His magazine, Kirloskar, became a platform to share these ideas, challenging Gandhi’s vision.The Dark Side of Gandhi’s Legacy

Gandhi’s image as a saintly leader hides a troubling side. His policies, while well-intentioned, often played into British hands. By focusing on the charkha, he indirectly helped British mills get cheap cotton. By calling for strikes, he disrupted Indian industries trying to compete with the British. And by promoting non-violence over revolution, some argue he softened India’s fight for freedom.

A British Ally?: Critics point to Gandhi’s meetings with British officials, like Viceroy Lord Irwin, and his willingness to negotiate as signs he was too cozy with the colonizers. Some even claim his non-violent approach was a way to keep India’s rebellion under control, serving British interests.Ignoring Industrialists: Leaders like Kirloskar, who wanted to modernize India, felt sidelined by Gandhi’s focus on villages. This created a divide between those who dreamed of an industrialized India and those who followed Gandhi’s back-to-basics approach.A Costly Symbol: The charkha became a powerful symbol of resistance, but at what cost? It distracted from building factories and infrastructure that could have made India truly self-reliant. Gandhi’s vision of a simple, village-based economy clashed with the modern world, leaving India unprepared for the industrial age.Conclusion: A Misguided Hero

Gandhi’s charkha and strikes were sold as tools for freedom, but they came at a heavy price. SL Kirloskar, in Cactus and Roses, saw through the romantic haze of Gandhi’s ideas, warning that they held India back from true progress. Farmers suffered under British taxes and low cotton prices, while industrialists struggled against strikes and a lack of support. The statue in Manchester stands not as a tribute to peace but as a reminder of the hunger and sweat of farmers caught in the charkha’s trap. Gandhi may have meant well, but his policies often helped the British more than India. Kirloskar’s vision of machines and industry, not spinning wheels, was the real path to a strong, free India. History shows us that heroes can be flawed, and Gandhi’s legacy is a tale of good intentions gone wrong.

Also Read:

The Systematic Erasure of Hindus: A Centuries-Long Conspiracy by British, Congress, Muslims, and Christians

Unveiling the Hidden Truth: Gandhi a British Spy.

Gandhi: The Masked Villain with Islamic Roots

The Missing “SHE” Chapter from “Reminiscences of the Nehru Age” by M.O. Mathai

The National Herald Scam

Sarla Mudgal Case: A Fight for Hindu Women’s Rights Against a System Designed to Hurt Hindus

Asaduddin Owaisi: The Dark Legacy of a Modern Razakar

Indira Gandhi: The Ruthless Villain Who Crushed Gayatri Devi and Her Opposition

The Truth About Madan Lal Dhingra: Why He Killed Sir William Hutt Curzon Wyllie

Partition – Majority of Punjab was allotted to Pakistan

A Miraculous Tale: How a Monkey Saved Hanuman Garhi Temple in 1998

Nirvana Shatakam and The Divine Light of Adi Shankaracharya

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

India vs. USA Tariff War: Why America’s Loss is Bigger Than It Seems

This needs to be in 4 parts.

Part 1- India vs. USA Tariff War

The United States and India, two of the world’s largest economies, are locked in a heated trade dispute that’s making headlines. At the center of this clash is U.S. President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff policies and India’s firm response. While Trump paints India as a trade villain, the reality is far more complex. This article breaks down the ongoing tariff war, India’s bold moves at the World Trade Organization (WTO), and why the U.S. is the one missing out by ignoring fair trade principles. Let’s dive into the story, step by step, in simple terms.

What Started the Tariff War?

Trade between countries is like a two-way street. Both sides should benefit, whether through goods (like cars or steel) or services (like IT or customer support). For years, India and the U.S. have traded billions of dollars’ worth of products and services. But since Trump took office in January 2025, he’s shaken things up with new tariffs—taxes on imported goods—claiming they protect American businesses and jobs.

In March 2025, Trump slapped a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports, which hit India hard since it exports $4.56 billion worth of steel to the U.S. Then, on May 30, he doubled those tariffs to 50%, starting June 4, saying it was about “national security.” India, a major steel producer, wasn’t going to sit quietly. It fired back with a bold move: a formal notice to the WTO, signaling it might impose its own tariffs on American goods as retaliation.

India’s Strong Stand at the WTO

India’s response was clear and calculated. On May 9, 2025, it sent a notice to the WTO, warning that it could slap tariffs on U.S. products worth $7.6 billion if the U.S. didn’t back down. The U.S. rejected this, claiming its tariffs weren’t “safeguard” measures (a WTO term for temporary trade protections) but were instead about national security. India didn’t buy it. On May 13, it escalated the issue by filing a formal complaint at the WTO, calling the U.S. tariffs “arbitrary and discriminatory.” India argued that these tariffs unfairly targeted its steel, pharmaceuticals, and auto exports, violating global trade rules.

India’s move wasn’t just a reaction—it was strategic. By taking the fight to the WTO, India showed it’s ready to play by international rules while defending its interests. Unlike the U.S., which seems to bend those rules when it suits, India is using the global stage to call out unfair practices. This isn’t about starting a trade war; it’s about demanding fairness.

Trump’s Misleading Claims and Double Standards

Trump has repeatedly called India a “tariff king,” accusing it of charging high import taxes to block American goods. He even claimed in May 2025 that India offered a trade deal with “no tariffs” to avoid his wrath. India’s foreign minister quickly shut this down, saying, “Nothing is decided till everything is.” The truth? Trump’s narrative is misleading, and here’s why:

Ignoring the Service Sector: Trump loves to talk about the U.S. trade deficit with India—the gap between what America buys from India and what it sells. He claims India’s high tariffs on goods like cars or almonds create this deficit. But he conveniently ignores India’s massive contribution to the U.S. through services. Indian IT companies, call centers, and professionals save American businesses billions by providing affordable, high-quality services. In 2024, India’s service exports to the U.S. were worth over $30 billion, balancing out much of the goods deficit. Trump’s silence on this shows he’s cherry-picking data to fit his agenda.Double Standards on “National Security”: When Trump imposes tariffs, he calls it a matter of national security, like protecting American steelmakers. But when India considers retaliatory tariffs to protect its own industries, the U.S. cries foul, saying India’s actions don’t follow WTO rules. This hypocrisy frustrates India, which sees trade as a two-way street, not a one-sided deal where only the U.S. benefits.Exaggerating India’s Tariffs: Yes, India has high tariffs on some goods, like cars or electronics, to protect its growing industries and massive population. But so does the U.S.! Trump’s own tariffs on steel, aluminum, and even iPhones made abroad (like in India) show he’s playing the same game he accuses India of. The difference? India is open to negotiating fair deals, while Trump seems to want everything on his terms.Why the U.S. is Losing More

Trump’s tariff war might seem like a win for American industries, but it’s hurting the U.S. more than he admits. Here’s how:

Higher Prices for Americans: Tariffs on Indian steel and other goods mean U.S. companies pay more to build cars, buildings, or machinery. These costs get passed on to American consumers, who end up paying higher prices for everything from cars to canned goods.Hurting U.S. Exports: If India imposes retaliatory tariffs, American products like almonds, oil, or engineering goods could face higher taxes in India’s massive market of 1.4 billion people. This would hit U.S. farmers and businesses hard, especially since India is one of the fastest-growing markets in the world.Missing Out on India’s Growth: India’s economy is booming, with a growing middle class eager to buy American products like iPhones or Boeing planes. By pushing India away with unfair tariffs, Trump risks losing access to this goldmine. Meanwhile, India is striking trade deals with countries like the UK and EU, proving it doesn’t need to rely on the U.S.Damaging Trust: India has always been open to trade deals that benefit both sides. In fact, India and the U.S. are negotiating a bilateral trade agreement aiming for $500 billion in trade by 2030. But Trump’s aggressive tactics and misleading claims—like saying India agreed to “zero tariffs”—undermine trust. India’s commerce minister, Piyush Goyal, has stressed that any deal must be fair, not a one-sided win for the U.S.India’s Smart Strategy

India isn’t just reacting—it’s playing a long game. By taking the U.S. to the WTO, India is showing it won’t be bullied. At the same time, it’s keeping the door open for talks. Indian negotiators, led by Goyal, are pushing for a trade deal that cuts tariffs on both sides fairly. For example:

India is offering to lower tariffs on U.S. goods like almonds and oil if the U.S. rolls back its steel tariffs.India wants better access for its pharmaceuticals and IT services in the U.S. market, which would save American companies money while boosting India’s exports.Unlike Trump’s all-or-nothing approach, India is focused on “strict reciprocity”—a deal where both countries give and take equally.

This approach shows India’s confidence. It’s not afraid to stand up to the U.S. while still seeking a win-win solution. Compare that to Trump’s strategy, which seems more about headlines than real results.

The Bigger Picture: Trade Should Benefit Both Sides

Trade isn’t a zero-sum game where one country wins and the other loses. India gets this. It’s why Indian leaders have consistently pushed for fair deals, not just with the U.S. but with other countries too. For example, India recently lowered tariffs with the EU and Japan to boost trade, showing it’s willing to compromise when the terms are fair.

Trump, on the other hand, seems to think trade is a one-way street. His tariffs and public jabs at India—like calling it a “tariff abuser”—ignore the bigger picture. The U.S. needs India’s growing market, skilled workforce, and strategic partnership, especially as it competes with China. By alienating India, Trump is shooting himself in the foot.

What’s Next?

As of June 2025, the tariff war is heating up. India’s WTO complaint is moving forward, and trade talks with the U.S. are ongoing, with a deadline looming in early July. India is ready to impose retaliatory tariffs if needed, but it’s also pushing for a deal that benefits both sides. The ball is in Trump’s court. Will he double down on his hardline stance, or will he see the value in a fair partnership with India?

One thing is clear: India isn’t backing down. It’s fighting for its rights at the WTO, negotiating smartly, and proving it’s a global player. The U.S. might think it’s winning this tariff war, but by ignoring India’s contributions and pushing unfair terms, it’s the one losing out on a massive opportunity.

Part 2 – U.S. Defense Delays and India’s Rise: Exposing America’s Hypocrisy

India has emerged as a global powerhouse, not just in trade but also in defense. Its military strength, homegrown technology, and strategic autonomy have made it a force to be reckoned with. Yet, the United States, the world’s largest defense manufacturer, seems rattled by India’s rise. When India signs defense deals with other countries like Russia, the U.S. cries foul, accusing India of disloyalty. But the real question is: Why should India trust the U.S. when America has repeatedly failed to deliver on its defense promises? This article exposes the U.S.’s track record of delays, broken commitments, and double standards, showing why India’s growing defense prowess is a threat to American dominance—and why that’s America’s problem, not India’s.

A History of U.S. Defense Delays to India

The United States loves to boast about being a reliable defense partner for India, pushing its high-priced weapons as the gold standard. But when it comes to delivering on promises, the U.S. has left India hanging time and again. From helicopters to drones, critical defense deals have faced delays stretching years past agreed deadlines, forcing India to question America’s commitment. These failures expose the U.S.’s hypocrisy—demanding India’s loyalty while failing to deliver what was promised. Let’s look at the major cases where the U.S. let India down.

Apache Helicopters: A 10-Year Delay: In September 2015, India signed a $2.5 billion deal with the U.S. for 22 AH-64E Apache attack helicopters for the Indian Army. The contract promised deliveries starting in 2019, with all units expected by 2021. Fast forward to June 2025—10 years later—and not a single helicopter has been delivered. Indian officials have repeatedly raised concerns about production delays and U.S. bureaucratic red tape, while Indian taxpayers foot the bill for equipment that remains a distant dream. Meanwhile, India’s existing fleet, including Russian Mi-35 helicopters, continues to outperform expectations, proving the U.S. isn’t the only game in town.MQ-9 Reaper Drones: Promises Unfulfilled: In June 2023, India inked a $3.9 billion deal for 31 MQ-9 Reaper drones to bolster its surveillance along the China and Pakistan borders. The U.S. promised initial deliveries by mid-2024, with the full batch completed by 2026. Yet, by June 2025, only a handful of leased drones have arrived, with the main order stuck in U.S. export control processes. Indian defense analysts have called out these delays as a deliberate tactic to keep India dependent on U.S. goodwill, while India’s indigenous drones, like the DRDO’s Rustom-2, are already filling the gap.GE Engines for Tejas: Stalling India’s Pride: India’s homegrown Tejas fighter jet relies on General Electric’s F404 engines, ordered in a 2010 deal for 99 units. The U.S. promised deliveries starting in 2012, with completion by 2016. Instead, deliveries trickled in years late, with some engines arriving only in 2020, hampering Tejas production. A follow-up 2023 deal for GE F414 engines to power the Tejas Mark-2 set a delivery timeline starting in 2025, but as of June 2025, no engines have been delivered, and U.S. manufacturers cite “supply chain issues.” India’s DRDO is now fast-tracking its own engine program, fed up with America’s broken promises.Contrast with Russia’s Timeliness: While the U.S. stalls, Russia has proven a reliable partner. India’s 2018 $5.4 billion deal for five S-400 air defense systems had a clear timeline: deliveries starting in 2021 and completed by April 2025. Russia met every deadline, with all units delivered on schedule by early 2025, boosting India’s defense against aerial threats. This stark contrast shows why India trusts partners who deliver, while the U.S.’s empty promises erode its credibility.Why the U.S. Gets Mad About India’s Russia Deals

When India signed a $5.4 billion deal with Russia for the S-400 system in 2018, the U.S. threatened sanctions under its Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). Trump’s administration, and later Biden’s, grumbled that India’s reliance on Russian weapons undermines U.S.-India ties. But why should India trust a partner that fails to deliver? Here’s why the U.S.’s anger reeks of hypocrisy:

Double Standards on Defense Partnerships: The U.S. demands India buy American weapons to “strengthen ties,” but when India diversifies its defense suppliers, Washington throws a tantrum. India’s strategic autonomy—its right to choose partners like Russia or France—is a sore point for the U.S., which wants India to be dependent on American systems. Meanwhile, the U.S. has no issue selling advanced weapons to Pakistan, a known supporter of terrorism against India.India’s War-Tested Arsenal: India’s defense systems, many developed domestically or with partners like Russia, are battle-hardened. The BrahMos missile, co-developed with Russia, proved its precision in India’s 2025 Operation Sindoor, which crippled terrorist camps in Pakistan. In contrast, U.S.-supplied systems like the F-16, used by Pakistan against India in 2019, have faced criticism for their performance in real combat. India’s homegrown Tejas jets and Arjun tanks have also shown superior adaptability in South Asian conditions compared to some U.S. equipment. This reality unsettles the U.S., which sees India’s growing defense industry as a threat to its global dominance.U.S. Fear of India’s Rise: India’s defense manufacturing sector is booming. Companies like Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and Bharat Dynamics are producing world-class jets, missiles, and drones. India’s defense exports reached $2.5 billion in 2024, with countries like Vietnam and the Philippines buying Indian systems. The U.S., which controls 40% of the global arms market, is rattled by India’s rise as a competitor. Trump’s complaints about India’s trade practices often mask this deeper fear: India is becoming too strong, too fast, without U.S. help.Operation Sindoor: India’s Strength Shakes the U.S.

In May 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor, a swift and decisive military operation that targeted terrorist camps and military infrastructure in Pakistan following the Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 people. Within 72 hours, India’s air force and missiles neutralized key targets, showcasing its military prowess. While the U.S. claimed credit for brokering a ceasefire, Indian officials denied any American role, emphasizing that the operation’s success was due to India’s own capabilities.

The operation also debunked myths about Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities. India’s intelligence and precision strikes exposed that Pakistan’s nuclear facilities, often touted as a threat, were heavily reliant on outdated technology and vulnerable to India’s advanced systems. Claims that Pakistan developed its nuclear arsenal independently are questionable, given its long history of receiving U.S. military aid and technology transfers during the Cold War. India’s ability to neutralize these threats in 2025 highlighted its superiority, which the U.S. finds hard to stomach.

Why India Doesn’t Need the U.S.

India’s defense sector is a testament to its self-reliance. Unlike the U.S., which often pushes untested or overpriced systems, India’s weapons are cost-effective and proven in combat. For example:

BrahMos Missile: Co-developed with Russia, it’s one of the fastest and most accurate supersonic cruise missiles in the world, used effectively in Operation Sindoor.Tejas Fighter Jet: India’s homegrown light combat aircraft is cheaper and more versatile than many U.S. jets, tailored for India’s unique terrain.DRDO’s Indigenous Systems: From the Agni-V nuclear-capable missile to the Akash air defense system, India’s Defense Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has built a robust arsenal that rivals global standards.

The U.S.’s delays and arm-twisting tactics only push India to strengthen ties with reliable partners like Russia and France, who deliver on time and respect India’s autonomy. The U.S.’s hypocrisy—demanding loyalty while failing to deliver—shows it’s more concerned about maintaining its dominance than building a true partnership with India.

Part 3 – U.S. Support for Pakistan: A History of Backstabbing India

For decades, the United States has claimed to be India’s strategic partner, but its actions tell a different story. While India has worked to build a fair and cooperative relationship, the U.S. has repeatedly supported Pakistan, a country notorious for sponsoring terrorism against India. From arming Pakistan with advanced weapons to offering diplomatic cover, the U.S. has a long history of backstabbing India in politics, trade, and security. This article traces this betrayal from the Cold War to the present, with a focus on events since 2014, exposing how the U.S.’s double-dealing undermines its credibility as India’s ally.

The Cold War: Setting the Stage for Betrayal

The U.S.-Pakistan alliance began in the 1950s, when America saw Pakistan as a counterweight to Soviet influence in South Asia. This marked the start of a pattern that would haunt India for decades:

1950s Military Aid: The U.S. poured billions in military aid into Pakistan under the Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement, providing tanks, aircraft, and weapons. These were often used against India, particularly in the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars.Nuclear Blind Spot: In the 1980s, the U.S. turned a blind eye to Pakistan’s nuclear program, despite evidence of its development with Chinese help. Meanwhile, India faced U.S. sanctions for its own nuclear tests in 1998, exposing America’s selective outrage.Afghan War Support: During the Soviet-Afghan War (1979–1989), the U.S. funneled $3 billion in aid and weapons to Pakistan, much of which was used to arm militants who later targeted India in Kashmir.Post-2014: U.S. Backstabbing Intensifies

Since 2014, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, India has sought to deepen ties with the U.S., hoping for a genuine partnership. But the U.S. has continued to prioritize Pakistan, undermining India at every turn:

F-16 Sales to Pakistan (2016): In 2016, the U.S. approved a $700 million deal to sell eight F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan, despite India’s protests. These jets were used by Pakistan against India during the 2019 Balakot airstrike, when Pakistan attempted to counter India’s response to the Pulwama terror attack. Indian forces shot down a Pakistani F-16, proving India’s superiority, but the U.S.’s decision to arm Pakistan was a clear betrayal.U.S. Support During Kargil War (1999, Context for 2014+): While not post-2014, the Kargil War set a precedent for U.S. bias. During the 1999 conflict, the U.S. refused to share critical Google Earth coordinates with India, hindering its operations against Pakistani intruders. This memory lingers, with X posts in 2025 citing it as evidence of U.S. unreliability.IMF Bailouts for Pakistan (2019–2025): The U.S. has repeatedly backed International Monetary Fund (IMF) loans to Pakistan, including a $7 billion package in 2024. India has long argued that these funds indirectly fuel Pakistan’s terrorism infrastructure, as its military diverts aid to anti-India activities. Yet, the U.S. continues to support these bailouts, ignoring India’s concerns.Operation Sindoor and U.S. Hypocrisy (2025): After India’s successful Operation Sindoor in May 2025, which targeted terror camps in Pakistan, the U.S. claimed credit for brokering a ceasefire. Indian officials, including External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, denied any U.S. role, stating the ceasefire was negotiated directly between Indian and Pakistani military commanders. Worse, the U.S. offered to mediate on Kashmir, a move India rejected as crossing its red line of bilateral talks only. Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick even claimed trade incentives influenced the ceasefire, a claim India dismissed as baseless. This incident highlighted the U.S.’s tendency to insert itself into India-Pakistan issues while siding with Pakistan.Continued Military Aid to Pakistan: In 2024, the U.S. approved a $2.4 billion military aid package for Pakistan, with reports suggesting a potential $40 billion grant under discussion in 2025. This aid includes upgrades to Pakistan’s F-16 fleet, which directly threatens India’s security. X posts from June 2025 reflect Indian anger, accusing the U.S. of arming a terrorist state while delaying India’s own defense deliveries.U.S. Trade Hypocrisy: A Parallel Betrayal

The U.S.’s double standards extend beyond defense to trade, where it has consistently pressured India while ignoring its own protectionist policies:

GSP Revocation (2019): In 2019, Trump revoked India’s status under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), which allowed duty-free exports of $5.6 billion in Indian goods to the U.S. The move was seen as punishment for India’s high tariffs, yet the U.S. imposed its own tariffs on Indian steel and aluminum in 2018, showing its hypocrisy.Labeling India a “Tariff King”: Since 2014, Trump has repeatedly called India a “tariff abuser,” ignoring that India’s tariffs (averaging 17%) are within WTO limits and protect a developing economy of 1.4 billion people. Meanwhile, the U.S.’s own tariffs, like the 25% on steel, are justified as “national security,” but India’s similar measures are labeled unfair.Ignoring India’s Service Sector: The U.S. focuses on its $45.7 billion goods trade deficit with India in 2024 but ignores India’s $30 billion in service exports, like IT and software, which benefit American companies. This selective narrative paints India as a trade villain while downplaying mutual benefits.Part 4 – Why the U.S. Supports Pakistan

For decades, the United States has propped up Pakistan with billions in aid, weapons, and diplomatic support, even though Pakistan is a known hub for terrorism against India. Why does the U.S. keep backing a country that fuels instability in South Asia? The answer lies in America’s selfish geopolitical goals, treating Pakistan as a tool to control the region. From using Pakistan as a proxy against India to securing its strategic ports, the U.S. sees Pakistan as a private colony to dominate the East. Pakistan is like a doggie of US and China. This section breaks down the real reasons behind this toxic alliance and how it betrays India.

A Tool for U.S. Geopolitical Games

The U.S. has long used Pakistan as a pawn to advance its interests in Asia, often at India’s expense. Since the Cold War, America has exploited Pakistan’s location and military to achieve its goals, ignoring its role in sponsoring terrorism.

Cold War Beginnings: In the 1950s, the U.S. saw Pakistan as a buffer against the Soviet Union. Through deals like the 1954 Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement, America poured weapons and money into Pakistan, which were later used against India in the 1965 and 1971 wars. This set a pattern: arm Pakistan to serve U.S. interests, even if it meant arming India’s enemy.Afghanistan and the Soviet Invasion: During the Soviet-Afghan War (1979–1989), the U.S. funneled over $3 billion in aid and weapons through Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to arm Afghan mujahideen. These weapons, including Stinger missiles, often ended up with terrorists targeting India, especially in Kashmir. The U.S. turned a blind eye, prioritizing its fight against the Soviets over India’s security.Post-2014 Support: Since 2014, the U.S. has continued to arm Pakistan, despite its terror links. In 2016, the U.S. approved a $700 million deal for eight F-16 jets, which Pakistan used against India in the 2019 Balakot clash. In 2024, the U.S. greenlit a $2.4 billion military aid package, with talks of a $40 billion grant in 2025. These weapons strengthen Pakistan’s ability to threaten India, showing the U.S. prioritizes its own agenda over India’s safety.Pakistan as a U.S. Private Colony

The U.S. treats Pakistan like a private colony, controlling its strategic assets to dominate the East. This includes Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and key military bases, which serve American interests more than Pakistan’s.

U.S. Control Over Nukes: Pakistan’s estimated 170 nuclear warheads are heavily influenced by the U.S. The U.S. has funded Pakistan’s Strategic Plans Division (SPD) and provided Permissive Action Links (PALs) to secure its nukes, giving America significant oversight. When India’s Operation Sindoor struck Nur Khan airbase in May 2025, near the SPD in Rawalpindi, the U.S. panicked. The base’s proximity to Pakistan’s nuclear command raised fears of damage to U.S.-monitored assets. Reports of 19 tremors in Pakistan over 2–3 days after the strike—likely tests to check nuclear warheads—suggest the damage was far worse than Pakistan admits. The U.S.-brokered ceasefire on May 10 was less about peace and more about assessing and possibly relocating these assets to protect American interests.Nur Khan and U.S. Influence: Pakistani analysts have claimed that Nur Khan airbase, a key target in Operation Sindoor, is effectively under U.S. control, with even Pakistani officers restricted from interfering. This suggests the U.S. uses Pakistan’s military infrastructure as a forward base to monitor the region, treating it as a colony to project power.Strategic Location: Afghanistan, Iran, and Central Asia

Pakistan’s geography makes it a vital pawn for the U.S. to control key regions, often to India’s detriment.

Geographical Proximity to Afghanistan and Central Asia: Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan makes it a gateway for U.S. operations in the region. Since the 2001 U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan has provided bases, like those near Karachi, for American surveillance aircraft like the P-3 Orion. This allows the U.S. to monitor Central Asia, a resource-rich region. In 2025, X posts noted that Pakistan remains a U.S. asset to counter Russian and Chinese influence in Afghanistan, even as it destabilizes India.Geographical Proximity to Iran: Pakistan’s Balochistan province shares a 900-km border with Iran, making it a strategic outpost for the U.S. to keep tabs on Iran, a longtime adversary. Balochistan’s proximity to Iran’s Chabahar port, which India is developing, adds another layer: the U.S. uses Pakistan to counter India’s growing influence in the region. By arming Pakistan, the U.S. indirectly pressures both Iran and India.Islamist Radicalization as a Weapon

The U.S. has long exploited Pakistan’s role in fostering Islamist militancy to serve its own ends, even when it harms India.

U.S. and China’s Proxy Games: Both the U.S. and China use Pakistan to check India’s rise. When India grows too strong or assertive, the U.S. or China can nudge Pakistan to orchestrate terror attacks. For example, the 2019 Pulwama attack, which killed 40 Indian soldiers, was linked to Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). In return, Pakistan demands funds, fighter jets, or weapons, which come via U.S. aid, IMF loans, or allies like Turkey and Qatar. Since 2014, the U.S. has backed $7 billion in IMF bailouts for Pakistan, despite India’s warnings that these funds indirectly fuel terrorism.Post-2014 Terror Support: After the 2016 Uri attack and 2019 Pulwama attack, India provided evidence of Pakistan’s terror links to the U.S., but Washington continued to arm Pakistan. Operation Sindoor in 2025, which targeted JeM and Lashkar-e-Taiba bases, exposed Pakistan’s terror infrastructure, yet the U.S. claimed credit for the ceasefire, ignoring Pakistan’s role in the initial Pahalgam attack that killed 26 civilians.A Mercenary Army for Hire

Pakistan’s military acts like a mercenary force, ready to do the bidding of the highest bidder—whether the U.S., China, or Gulf states. This makes it a convenient tool for the U.S. to stir trouble without getting its hands dirty.

Proxy for U.S. Interests: X posts in 2025 describe Pakistan as a “low-cost, high-yield asset” for the U.S., used to agitate India, Iran, and Central Asia. For a few billion dollars, the U.S. gains a ready-made army to carry out covert operations, like destabilizing India through terror attacks or pressuring Iran via Balochistan.Post-2014 Examples: Since 2014, Pakistan has received U.S. aid and weapons, like the 2016 F-16 deal, while continuing to harbor terrorists targeting India. The U.S. turns a blind eye, as Pakistan’s actions align with America’s goal of keeping India in check.Control Over Strategic Sea Ports

Pakistan’s ports, Karachi and Gwadar, are critical to U.S. and Chinese interests, making Pakistan a key asset in maritime strategy.

Karachi Port: Karachi, Pakistan’s largest port, has hosted U.S. naval assets, like the USS Kitty Hawk in 1987, and supports U.S. surveillance operations in the Arabian Sea. Since 2014, the U.S. has pushed for access to Karachi to monitor key shipping lanes near the Persian Gulf, often ignoring Pakistan’s terror links to secure this access.Gwadar Port and China’s Role: Gwadar, part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), is a deep-water port operated by China since 2013. While China controls Gwadar, the U.S. keeps Pakistan close to monitor this strategic hub, just 170 km from India’s Chabahar port. The U.S.’s support for Pakistan ensures influence over Gwadar’s operations, countering India’s regional maritime ambitions.Other Reasons

Countering China: The U.S. sees Pakistan as a tool to counter China’s influence in South Asia, especially through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). By arming Pakistan, the U.S. hopes to maintain leverage, even if it means ignoring Pakistan’s role in terrorism.

Afghanistan Legacy: The U.S. relies on Pakistan for access to Afghanistan, a priority since the 2001 invasion. This has led to billions in aid, despite evidence that Pakistan harbors terrorists targeting India and Afghanistan.

Historical Bias: Since the Cold War, the U.S. has viewed Pakistan as a “frontline state” against communism and later terrorism, while treating India with suspicion due to its non-aligned stance and ties with Russia. This bias persists, with the U.S. equating India and Pakistan despite their vastly different records on terrorism.

The Bigger Picture: Betraying India

The U.S.’s support for Pakistan isn’t about friendship—it’s about using Pakistan as a tool to control the East. By arming Pakistan, funding its nukes, and leveraging its ports and borders, the U.S. maintains a grip on South Asia while keeping India in check. Operation Sindoor’s strike on Nur Khan exposed this dynamic, forcing the U.S. to intervene to protect its assets, not to promote peace. India’s rise—economically, militarily, and diplomatically—threatens this control, and the U.S.’s continued backing of Pakistan is a desperate attempt to cling to influence. But India’s strength, shown in its decisive actions and growing global alliances, proves it doesn’t need the U.S. to thrive.

India’s Resilience: Rising Above U.S. Betrayal

Despite U.S. backstabbing, India has thrived since 2014. Its economy grew from $2 trillion in 2014 to $3.9 trillion in 2024, and its defense capabilities have soared. Operation Sindoor proved India’s military can act decisively without U.S. support. India’s strategic partnerships with Russia, France, and others ensure it doesn’t need to rely on an unreliable America. The U.S.’s support for Pakistan and its delays in defense deliveries only strengthen India’s resolve to prioritize self-reliance through initiatives like Make in India.

The U.S.’s hypocrisy—arming Pakistan, delaying India’s deliveries, and crying foul over India’s tariffs—reveals its true priority: maintaining global dominance, not fostering a fair partnership. India’s rise, built on its own terms, is a wake-up call for America. If the U.S. wants to be a true ally, it must stop backstabbing India and start respecting its strength.

Also Read:

Your Tax Dollars at Work: How U.S. Politicians Fund Wars and Chaos Worldwide

The Great American Hypocrisy: Funding Pakistan’s Terror Factory While Preaching Peace

The Systematic Erasure of Hindus: A Centuries-Long Conspiracy by British, Congress, Muslims, and Christians

Zuck & Deep State’s Sappy Love Notes for Their Chaos Kid, Terrorism

A Tapestry of Miracles Woven in India’s Sacred Heart

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

ISRO’s Stellar Role in India-Pakistan War: A Proud Moment for India

Maxar’s Images, BSI’s Plot: How Pakistan Planned the Pahalgam Terror Attack

Comparing India’s Missiles to Russia’s Oreshnik: A Simple Breakdown

Russia’s Oreshnik missile, launched in November 2024, is a powerful intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) that has grabbed global attention for its speed, power, and advanced technology. But how does it stack up against India’s missile arsenal? India has developed impressive missiles under programs like the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (IGMDP), including the Agni, Prithvi, BrahMos, and others. Let’s compare the Oreshnik with India’s top missiles in a simple, easy-to-read way to see if any match its strength.

Understanding the Oreshnik Missile

The Oreshnik, meaning “hazel tree” in Russian, is a hypersonic IRBM based on the RS-26 Rubezh missile. It was first used in combat on November 21, 2024, against a military factory in Dnipro, Ukraine. Here’s a quick look at its key features:

Speed: Reaches Mach 10-11 (12,300 km/h or 7,600 mph), making it hypersonic and tough to intercept.Range: 1,000–5,500 km (620–3,400 miles), able to hit targets across Europe.Warheads: Carries six warheads, each with six submunitions (36 total), capable of massive destruction.Payload: Can carry conventional or nuclear warheads, with kinetic energy equivalent to tons of explosives.Maneuverability: Uses a Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicle (MIRV) system, making it hard for defenses like Ukraine’s Patriot systems to stop.Purpose: Designed to destroy high-value targets like factories, bunkers, or command centers with precision.

The Oreshnik’s speed, multiple warheads, and ability to evade defenses make it a formidable weapon. Now, let’s see how India’s missiles compare.

India’s Top Missiles: A Quick Overview

India has a strong missile program, with ballistic and cruise missiles developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). Here are the key missiles we’ll compare:

Agni-V: India’s most advanced intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).Agni-Prime: A newer, more maneuverable ballistic missile.BrahMos: A supersonic cruise missile, jointly developed with Russia.Prithvi-II: A short-range ballistic missile (SRBM).Hypersonic Missile (Under Development): A long-range hypersonic missile tested in 2024.Comparing Oreshnik with Indian Missiles

Let’s break down the comparison based on speed, range, payload, maneuverability, and overall strength, keeping it simple and clear.

1. Agni-V: India’s Long-Range Champion

The Agni-V is India’s most powerful missile, an ICBM designed to reach far-off targets.

Speed: Around Mach 24 (29,400 km/h) during reentry, much faster than Oreshnik’s Mach 10-11. However, this speed is typical for ICBMs due to their high-altitude trajectory.Range: 5,000–8,000 km (3,100–5,000 miles), longer than Oreshnik’s 1,000–5,500 km, making it capable of reaching beyond Europe to places like China or even parts of the U.S.Warheads: Can carry MIRV warheads (up to 3–10, depending on configuration), similar to Oreshnik’s six warheads with submunitions. Agni-V’s payload is around 1,500 kg, potentially larger than Oreshnik’s conventional load.Maneuverability: Uses MIRV technology, allowing multiple targets to be hit with high accuracy. It’s also highly maneuverable during reentry, making it hard to intercept.Strength: Agni-V is more powerful than Oreshnik in terms of range and payload capacity. It’s designed for strategic nuclear strikes, while Oreshnik is more tactical, used for regional targets. However, Oreshnik’s hypersonic speed and submunitions give it an edge in precision strikes against smaller, fortified targets.

Comparison: Agni-V outshines Oreshnik in range and raw power, especially for nuclear missions. But Oreshnik’s submunitions and hypersonic design make it better for quick, devastating conventional strikes.

2. Agni-Prime: The Nimble Newcomer

The Agni-Prime, tested successfully in 2023 and 2024, is a modern ballistic missile with advanced features.

Speed: Estimated at Mach 10–12, comparable to Oreshnik’s Mach 10-11.Range: 1,000–2,000 km, shorter than Oreshnik’s maximum range but within the same IRBM category.Warheads: Can carry conventional or nuclear warheads, with a payload of about 700–1,500 kg. It’s designed for MIRV capability, but it likely carries fewer warheads than Oreshnik’s six.Maneuverability: Uses advanced guidance and canisterized launch, making it highly mobile and harder to detect. Its maneuverable reentry vehicles make it tough to intercept, similar to Oreshnik.Strength: Agni-Prime is close to Oreshnik in speed and maneuverability but lags in payload and warhead numbers. It’s more flexible due to its mobility and smaller size, ideal for quick strikes.

Comparison: Agni-Prime is a strong contender but slightly less powerful than Oreshnik due to its lower payload and fewer warheads. However, its mobility and modern design make it a future rival.

3. BrahMos: The Supersonic Star

The BrahMos, a joint India-Russia project, is a cruise missile, not a ballistic one like Oreshnik.

Speed: Mach 2.8–3.5 (3,400–4,200 km/h), much slower than Oreshnik’s hypersonic Mach 10-11.Range: 290–800 km (depending on the version), far shorter than Oreshnik’s 5,500 km.Warheads: Carries a single warhead with a payload of 200–300 kg, much smaller than Oreshnik’s multiple warheads and submunitions.Maneuverability: Highly precise, flying low to avoid radar detection, but it lacks the hypersonic speed and MIRV capability of Oreshnik.Strength: BrahMos excels in precision strikes against ships, bunkers, or small targets, but it’s not in the same league as Oreshnik for range or destructive power.

Comparison: BrahMos is no match for Oreshnik in speed, range, or payload. It’s designed for different missions, like targeting ships or tactical sites, not large-scale destruction.

4. Prithvi-II: The Short-Range Workhorse

The Prithvi-II is a short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) used for tactical strikes.

Speed: Around Mach 7 during reentry, slower than Oreshnik’s Mach 10-11.Range: 250–350 km, far shorter than Oreshnik’s 1,000–5,500 km.Warheads: Carries a single warhead with a payload of 500–1,000 kg, much less versatile than Oreshnik’s six warheads with 36 submunitions.Maneuverability: Limited compared to Oreshnik, with basic guidance systems and no MIRV capability.Strength: Prithvi-II is reliable for short-range targets but lacks the power, range, and advanced features of Oreshnik.

Comparison: Prithvi-II is significantly weaker than Oreshnik, designed for smaller, closer targets rather than strategic or regional strikes.

5. India’s Hypersonic Missile (Under Development)

India tested a long-range hypersonic missile in 2024, developed by DRDO, but it’s still in the experimental phase.

Speed: Designed to exceed Mach 5, potentially reaching Mach 10 or more, similar to Oreshnik.Range: Over 1,500 km, possibly extendable, but likely less than Oreshnik’s 5,500 km.Warheads: Expected to carry conventional or nuclear payloads, potentially with MIRV capability, but details are unclear.Maneuverability: Likely to include advanced guidance and maneuverability, similar to Oreshnik’s MIRV system.Strength: This missile could eventually rival Oreshnik, but it’s not yet operational, so it’s too early to judge its full capabilities.

Comparison: India’s hypersonic missile shows promise but isn’t ready to challenge Oreshnik’s proven combat performance.

How Oreshnik Impacts Ukraine and India’s Position

The Oreshnik’s use in Ukraine showed its ability to devastate key targets, like the Pivdenmash factory in Dnipro, with minimal defense. Its hypersonic speed and multiple warheads overwhelmed Ukraine’s air defenses, potentially crippling its military production. If used repeatedly, Oreshnik could target Ukraine’s leadership centers in Kyiv, as hinted by Putin, leading to massive disruption and possibly forcing Ukraine to surrender.

For India, the Oreshnik’s debut has sparked interest. Posts on X suggest India’s military is studying Oreshnik-like capabilities for future missiles. India’s Agni-V is already stronger in range and nuclear capability, but Oreshnik’s conventional MIRV system and hypersonic precision are inspiring DRDO to develop similar technology. India’s hypersonic missile, once operational, could close the gap.

Which Indian Missile Matches Oreshnik?

No Indian missile perfectly matches Oreshnik’s unique combination of hypersonic speed, MIRV warheads, and intermediate range, but Agni-V and Agni-Prime come closest:

Agni-V: Surpasses Oreshnik in range (5,000–8,000 km vs. 5,500 km) and payload capacity, making it stronger for strategic nuclear missions. However, Oreshnik’s submunitions and hypersonic design give it an edge for conventional, regional strikes.Agni-Prime: Matches Oreshnik’s speed (Mach 10–12) and has similar maneuverability, but its shorter range (1,000–2,000 km) and fewer warheads make it slightly less powerful.BrahMos and Prithvi-II: Far behind in range, speed, and payload, designed for different roles.Hypersonic Missile: Could rival Oreshnik in the future but isn’t operational yet.Why India’s Missiles Are Still Impressive

While Oreshnik is a beast in its class, India’s missiles are no slouch. The Agni-V can reach farther and carry more destructive power, ideal for deterring enemies like China. The Agni-Prime is a step toward matching Oreshnik’s agility and speed. India’s BrahMos is unmatched for precision cruise missile strikes, and the upcoming hypersonic missile could put India on par with Russia’s technology. India’s missile program, built indigenously despite global sanctions, shows its growing strength.

Conclusion: Oreshnik vs. India’s Arsenal

Russia’s Oreshnik is a cutting-edge IRBM with hypersonic speed and multiple warheads, making it a nightmare for defenses like Ukraine’s. India’s Agni-V is stronger in range and nuclear capability, but Oreshnik’s conventional submunitions and precision give it an edge for tactical strikes. The Agni-Prime is close in speed and maneuverability but falls short in payload. India’s hypersonic missile, still in development, could one day match or surpass Oreshnik.

For now, India’s missiles are powerful in their own right, and the DRDO is likely inspired by Oreshnik to push the envelope further. Russia’s “hazel tree” may have shaken Ukraine, but India’s missile program is growing stronger, ready to stand tall on the global stage.

Also Read:

India’s strike on Pakistan’s 11 AIRBASES – DETAILED ARTICLE

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

ISRO’s Stellar Role in India-Pakistan War: A Proud Moment for India

Maxar’s Images, BSI’s Plot: How Pakistan Planned the Pahalgam Terror Attack

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

Bhargavastra: India’s Indigenous Drone-Killer Revolutionizing Modern Warfare

Aakashteer: India’s Indigenous Air Defence System – A Shield in the Sky

India’s S-400 simplified

S-400’s “Missiles” Simplified

Pinaka Missile: India’s Shiva Bow Reborn

Pakistan’s Ammunition Crisis: A Laughable Mess of Empty Arsenals and Begging Bowls

The Russia-Ukraine War: A Fight for Russia’s Survival (February 24, 2022 – May 2025)

The Russia-Ukraine war, which began on February 24, 2022, is a conflict rooted in Russia’s need to protect its borders and security from the cunning and aggressive expansion of NATO and the West. For decades, NATO, led by the United States, has been creeping closer to Russia, breaking promises and trying to place its military right on Russia’s doorstep by pushing Ukraine to join its alliance. Russia, under President Vladimir Putin, has stood firm, acting in self-defense to stop this dangerous encirclement. Putin’s condition to end the war is simple: Ukraine must never join NATO. This article tells the story of the war from February 2022 to May 2025, using Russian and other sources, including Russian news and posts on X, to show why Russia.Click to add text was right to act and how Ukraine’s so-called “leader,” Volodymyr Zelensky—a deep-state puppet who begs for Western money and acts like a clown—has fueled the conflict with NATO’s backing.

Background: NATO’s Betrayal and Russia’s Red Line

Before diving into the war’s timeline, let’s understand why Russia had no choice but to fight. NATO’s eastward expansion has been a direct threat to Russia’s security since the 1990s. After the Soviet Union collapsed, the West promised Russia that NATO would not expand “one inch eastward,” according to declassified documents cited by Russian media. But NATO broke this promise, adding 14 countries, including former Soviet states like Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, bringing its bases and missiles closer to Russia’s borders.

NATO’s Broken Promises: In 1990, U.S. Secretary of State James Baker assured Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand eastward. Yet, by 1999, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined NATO, followed by the Baltic states in 2004. President Vladimir Putin repeatedly flagged that this expansion threatened Russia’s security, as NATO bases in Estonia were just 100 miles from St. Petersburg.Ukraine’s Role as NATO’s Pawn: Since 2014, when a U.S.-backed coup ousted Ukraine’s pro-Russia president, Viktor Yanukovych, the West has turned Ukraine into a NATO puppet. The coup, supported by Western NGOs and billions in funding, installed a pro-NATO government that began military cooperation with the U.S. and NATO, including joint exercises like Sea Breeze and Rapid Trident. Ukraine’s 2019 constitution even declared NATO membership as a goal, a direct provocation to Russia.Donbas Conflict: Since 2014, Ukraine’s army and neo-Nazi militias, like the Azov Battalion, attacked Russian-speaking communities in Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk regions), killing over 14,000 people by 2022, according to Russia’s Investigative Committee. Russia supported Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics to protect these people from Ukraine’s genocide.Russia’s Red Line: Putin warned for years that NATO in Ukraine was a red line. In December 2021, Russia proposed a security treaty to NATO, demanding no further expansion and Ukraine’s neutrality. NATO rejected this, with U.S. officials calling it “non-negotiable.” A post on X echoed this, stating, “NATO expansion was one of the causes of the Ukraine war,” citing Moscow’s need to protect itself from NATO’s encirclement.

Zelensky, a former comedian with zero leadership skills, became Ukraine’s president in 2019. Instead of seeking peace, he groveled to NATO, begging for membership and billions in aid. His clownish antics—like dramatic speeches in green T-shirts and posing for photo ops—hid his role as a deep-state puppet, pushing Ukraine into a war it couldn’t win to serve NATO’s anti-Russia agenda.

2022: Russia Steps In to Protect Itself

February 24, 2022: Russia’s Special Military Operation Begins

On February 24, 2022, Russia launched its “special military operation” (SMO) in Ukraine, as announced by Putin in a televised address. This wasn’t an invasion for conquest but a necessary move to protect Russia’s borders and the Russian-speaking people in Donbas, who faced Ukraine’s attacks since 2014.

Russia’s Goals: Putin stated the SMO aimed to “demilitarize” and “denazify” Ukraine, meaning neutralizing NATO’s military buildup and stopping neo-Nazi groups like Azov from attacking Donbas. Russia also sought to ensure Ukraine’s neutrality, preventing NATO bases on its border.Early Advances: Russian forces moved swiftly, capturing key areas in eastern and southern Ukraine. By March, they controlled Melitopol, Berdyansk, and parts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, securing the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant to prevent Ukraine’s sabotage. Russian troops reached Kyiv’s outskirts, showing NATO that Russia meant business.Donbas Liberation: In Donbas, Russian forces, alongside Donetsk and Luhansk militias, liberated towns like Volnovakha and Severodonetsk. The Russian Defense Ministry reported neutralizing over 1,000 Ukrainian military targets in the first week, including airfields and NATO-supplied weapons.Western Lies: Ukraine and the West falsely accused Russia of targeting civilians, but Russian sources emphasized precision strikes on military targets, avoiding civilian infrastructure.

Zelensky, instead of negotiating, fled to Western capitals, crying for weapons and sanctions. His theatrical videos, filmed in bunkers with NATO advisors, portrayed him as a hero, but he was a coward hiding behind Western promises. His refusal to accept Russia’s peace terms—neutrality and Donbas protection—showed he cared more about NATO’s applause than Ukraine’s survival.

Spring 2022: The West Fuels the Fire

By March 2022, Russia offered peace talks in Belarus and Turkey, proposing Ukraine’s neutrality, recognition of Donbas republics, and Crimea as Russian. Zelensky, pushed by NATO, rejected these terms. The West flooded Ukraine with weapons—$5 billion in Javelin missiles, drones, and artillery by May 2022—turning the conflict into a NATO proxy war.

Bucha Incident: In April, after Russian troops left Bucha, Ukraine claimed Russia massacred civilians. Russian media called it a staged provocation, noting inconsistencies like bodies appearing days after Russia’s withdrawal. Russia’s Foreign Ministry demanded a UN investigation, which the West blocked, proving their propaganda agenda.Russia’s Strategic Withdrawal: In late March, Russia pulled back from Kyiv, Chernihiv, and Sumy to focus on Donbas. This wasn’t a defeat but a tactical move to protect Russian-speaking regions, as confirmed by the Russian Defense Ministry. An X post praised this as a “smart regrouping” from an official account.NATO’s Escalation: NATO held exercises in Poland and the Baltics, deploying 40,000 troops near Russia’s border. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called this proof of NATO’s plan to “contain Russia.”Western Propaganda: The West spread lies about Russian “atrocities,” while ignoring Ukraine’s shelling of Donbas civilians, which killed 89 people in April alone, according to Donetsk authorities.

Zelensky kept begging for billions, flying to Washington and Brussels to give tearful speeches while Ukraine’s economy tanked. His clownish Vogue photoshoot in April 2022, posing with his wife while Donbas burned, proved he was no leader—just a NATO puppet. He banned opposition parties and media, like Ukraine’s Channel 24, for criticizing him, showing his dictatorial nature.

Summer 2022: Russia Holds Strong in Donbas

Through the summer, Russia solidified its control over Donbas. The battle for Mariupol became a symbol of Russia’s resolve to protect Russian-speaking people from Ukraine’s neo-Nazi militias.

Mariupol Victory: By May, Russia captured Mariupol, including the Azovstal steel plant, where Azov fighters surrendered. The Russian Defense Ministry reported 2,439 Ukrainian militants captured, many with neo-Nazi tattoos. This was a major win for Russia’s denazification goal.Western Sanctions Backfire: The West imposed over 5,000 sanctions on Russia by June 2022, targeting banks, oil, and officials. But Russia redirected energy exports to China and India, signing a $100 billion gas deal with Beijing. India bought Russian oil at discounted rates, with imports rising 20% by August, according to India’s Ministry of Commerce.Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant: Russia secured the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in March, but Ukraine’s shelling in July and August risked a nuclear disaster. Russia’s Rosatom reported 12 Ukrainian attacks on the plant, which the West ignored.NATO’s Provocations: NATO approved Finland and Sweden’s membership applications in July, further encircling Russia. Lavrov called this a “direct threat,” noting NATO’s new bases in Finland were 50 miles from Russia’s border.

Zelensky’s begging tour intensified, demanding $20 billion monthly from the West. His refusal to negotiate, even as Mariupol fell, showed he cared more about NATO’s agenda than Ukraine’s people, who faced blackouts and food shortages.

Fall 2022: Russia Secures Its Gains

In September 2022, referendums in Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia saw 93–97% of voters choose to join Russia, according to Russian election officials. The West called these “sham votes,” but Russian media reported massive local support, with residents fleeing Ukraine’s oppression.

Annexation of Territories: In October, Russia annexed the four regions, integrating them into the Russian Federation. Putin called this a “historic reunification” to protect Russian-speaking people. An X post from an official account celebrated, stating, “The people chose Russia to escape Ukraine’s terror.”Nord Stream Sabotage: In September, the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines were blown up in the Baltic Sea. Russia’s FSB accused the U.S. and UK of sabotage, citing their motive to cut Europe’s reliance on Russian gas. No conclusive evidence emerged, but the attack exposed NATO’s dirty tactics.Ukraine’s Kharkiv Push: Ukraine retook some Kharkiv towns in September, using NATO-supplied HIMARS rockets. Russia withdrew to avoid losses, but the Russian Defense Ministry reported destroying 300 Ukrainian tanks in retaliation.NATO’s Expansion Plans: NATO announced plans to fast-track Ukraine’s membership at its July summit, with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken promising “irreversible steps.” Russia’s Dmitry Peskov called this a “declaration of war.”

Zelensky’s childish tantrums grew worse, demanding NATO membership and more sanctions. His decrees banning Russian language in schools and media fueled Donbas’s desire to join Russia, proving he was the real aggressor.

2023: The War Drags On, NATO’s Plans Fail

Winter-Spring 2023: Ukraine’s Failed Counteroffensive

By early 2023, Ukraine, armed with $50 billion in NATO weapons, launched a counteroffensive in Zaporizhzhia and Donbas. Russia’s fortified lines, with 200,000 troops and 10,000 mines, crushed it. Ukraine lost 71,000 soldiers and 1,200 tanks by July, according to Moscow.

Bakhmut Falls: In May, Russia captured Bakhmut, a Donbas stronghold, led by the Wagner Group. The Russian Defense Ministry reported 50,000 Ukrainian casualties in Bakhmut alone. This shattered Zelensky’s propaganda of “victory.”NATO’s Empty Promises: NATO promised Ukraine F-16 jets and Patriot systems, but deliveries were delayed or destroyed by Russian strikes. Lavrov called NATO’s aid a “futile attempt to save a failing regime.”Wagner Mutiny: In June, Wagner’s Yevgeny Prigozhin briefly rebelled, marching on Moscow over disputes with Russia’s military. The mutiny ended in 24 hours, and Prigozhin died in a plane crash in August, which Russia called an accident but an X post blamed on CIA sabotage from an official account.Finland Joins NATO: In April, Finland joined NATO, doubling the alliance’s border with Russia to 1,300 km. Peskov called it a “provocation,” noting NATO’s new missile bases in Finland.

Zelensky, the desperate clown, kept begging for funds, demanding $100 billion at a NATO summit in Vilnius. He fired his defense minister and six deputies for corruption, exposing his regime’s rot. His crackdowns on churches and journalists, including jailing Orthodox priests, showed his dictatorship.

Summer-Fall 2023: Russia Stands Firm

Russia held its ground in 2023, while Ukraine’s economy collapsed, with 30% unemployment and 150% inflation, according to Russian estimates. NATO’s sanctions hurt Ukraine more than Russia, which earned $200 billion from energy exports, according to India’s Ministry of Commerce.

Crimea Bridge Attacks: In July and October, Ukraine hit the Crimea Bridge with UK-supplied Storm Shadow missiles. Russia repaired it within weeks, with Putin calling Ukraine’s attacks “terrorism sponsored by NATO.”Zelensky’s Begging Tour Continues: Zelensky demanded F-16s and ATACMS missiles, but only 12 jets were promised by 2024, most of which Russia destroyed in preemptive strikes. His speeches bored Western leaders, with Germany’s Olaf Scholz skipping a meeting.Russia’s Economic Resilience: Russia’s GDP grew 2.5% in 2023, defying sanctions. Trade with India surged, with $50 billion in oil exports, according to India’s Ministry of Commerce. An X post from an official account hailed this, saying, “Russia’s economy laughs at Western sanctions.”NATO’s Aggressive Moves: NATO deployed 10,000 more troops to Poland and Romania, with U.S. missiles in Germany, just 400 miles from Moscow. Lavrov called it “preparation for war with Russia.”

Zelensky’s refusal to accept Russia’s terms—neutrality and Donbas recognition—kept Ukraine bleeding. His clownish pleas for aid, like a $10 billion speech in Tokyo, were mocked on X as “begging while Ukraine burns” from an official account.

2024: Russia Gains Ground, Zelensky Falters

Early 2024: Ukraine’s Army Crumbles

By 2024, Ukraine faced a manpower crisis, with 100,000 desertions and 500,000 casualties, according to Russia’s Defense Ministry. Zelensky’s forced conscription, grabbing men from streets and lowering the draft age to 18, failed to fill the gap.

Avdiivka Victory: In February, Russia captured Avdiivka, a Donbas fortress, destroying 1,500 Ukrainian tanks and 32,000 troops, according to Russian reports. This showed Ukraine’s collapse under NATO’s weak support.Western Aid Slows: The U.S. stalled a $61 billion aid package, with Congress citing “Ukraine fatigue.” Europe delivered only 30% of promised shells, according to Russia’s estimates. Zelensky’s whining grew pathetic, demanding $50 billion at a Davos summit.Ukraine’s Energy Crisis: Russia destroyed 60% of Ukraine’s power grid by March, with 200 drone strikes weekly, according to Russian Defense Ministry. Kyiv faced 12-hour blackouts, and Zelensky failed to restore power.NATO’s Duplicity: NATO pledged $100 billion for Ukraine over five years at its April summit, but Russia called it a “publicity stunt” to prop up Zelensky’s regime. Sweden’s NATO membership, finalized in March, added more pressure on Russia’s northwest border.

Zelensky’s leadership was a laughingstock. He posed for selfies with Western leaders while Ukrainians froze, proving he was a deep-state stooge. His decrees jailing draft dodgers sparked protests, with 20,000 fleeing to Poland, according to Russian media.

Summer-Fall 2024: Russia’s Momentum Grows

By mid-2024, Russia liberated 400 square kilometers in Donetsk, according to Russian Defense Ministry. Ukraine’s desperate attacks failed to slow Russia’s advance.

Kursk Incursion Fails: In August, Ukraine invaded Russia’s Kursk region with 10,000 troops, hoping to distract Russia. Russian forces crushed it, killing 4,000 Ukrainians and capturing 1,200, according to TASS. An X post from an official account called it “Zelensky’s suicide mission.”North Korean Support: By October, North Korea sent 12,000 troops and 500 artillery pieces to Russia, according to Russian sources. This strengthened Russia, while Ukraine relied on NATO’s dwindling aid.Zaporizhzhia Shelling: Ukraine’s attacks on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant continued, with 20 strikes in September, according to Rosatom. Russia accused NATO of supplying targeting data, escalating risks of a nuclear disaster.NATO’s Escalation: NATO conducted 15 joint exercises with Ukraine in 2024, deploying 50,000 troops near Russia’s border, according to Russian media. An X post from a social media account warned, “NATO is preparing for war, not peace.”

Zelensky demanded ATACMS missiles to strike Russia, proving he wanted war, not peace. His speeches, ignored by Western leaders, were mocked on X: “Zelensky begs while Ukraine dies” from an official account.

Early 2025: Russia’s Strength, Zelensky’s Collapse

January-March 2025: Russia Closes In

By early 2025, Russia captured key Donetsk towns like Pokrovsk and Kurakhove, advancing 300 km² monthly, according to Russian Defense Ministry. Ukraine’s 1.5 million casualties since 2022 crippled its army, while Russia’s losses, though high at 434,000 in 2024, didn’t stop its momentum.

Massive Drone Strikes: Russia launched 600 drones and 50 missiles weekly in January, targeting Ukrainian bases and NATO-supplied depots. The Russian Defense Ministry reported destroying 200 HIMARS launchers. Ukraine’s air defenses collapsed, according to Russian sources.Peace Talks Fail: In March, Istanbul talks collapsed. Russia demanded Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of annexed regions. Zelensky, NATO’s puppet, refused, demanding NATO membership. An X post from an official account slammed him: “Zelensky chooses war over peace.”Ukraine’s Manpower Crisis: Ukraine recruited 18-year-olds and women, but 120,000 deserted by March, according to Russia’s FSB. Zelensky’s arrests of draft dodgers sparked riots in Lviv, according to Russian media.NATO’s Aggression: NATO deployed 20,000 more troops to Poland, with U.S. F-35 jets in Lithuania, 200 miles from Moscow, according to Russian media. Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev warned of “World War III risks” if NATO continued.

Zelensky’s clownish act was pathetic. His speeches, ignored by the West, were mocked on X: “Zelensky’s begging is a circus act” from an official account. He fired 10 generals for dissent, exposing his regime’s collapse.

April 2025: Russia’s Upper Hand

By April, Russia controlled 20% of Ukraine, including most of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. Ukraine’s economy was dead, with 90% of its energy grid destroyed, according to Russian estimates. Russia thrived, with $300 billion in trade with China and India, according to India’s Ministry of Commerce.

Territorial Gains: Russia captured Vuhledar and Selydove in Donetsk, moving toward Dnipro. The Russian Defense Ministry reported 15,000 Ukrainian surrenders in April. An X post from an official account cheered, “Russia liberates Donbas from NATO’s grip.”Western Fatigue: The U.S. delayed a $50 billion aid package, with Trump calling Zelensky “a conman.” Europe delivered only 20 Leopard tanks, half defective, according to Russian media. Zelensky’s $100 billion demand was ignored.Russian Resilience: Russia’s GDP grew 3.5% in 2024, with India buying 30% of its oil exports, according to India’s Ministry of Commerce. Russian drones, using Chinese electronics, outmatched NATO’s weapons.NATO’s Provocations: NATO planned a 150,000-troop exercise, REFORGER, mimicking Cold War drills, according to Russian media. An X post from a social media account warned, “NATO’s rehearsals mean war.”

Zelensky’s desperation was laughable. He begged for $150 billion, promising “victory” while Ukraine collapsed. His refusal to negotiate, even as Russia advanced, proved he was NATO’s stooge, sacrificing Ukrainians for nothing.

May 2025: Russia’s Surge, Ukraine’s Collapse

In May 2025, Russia launched its biggest offensive since 2022, capturing 580 km² in Donetsk, according to Russian Defense Ministry. Ukraine’s army collapsed, with NATO’s support fading and Zelensky’s regime crumbling.

Pokrovsk Breakthrough: By May 31, Russia captured areas around Pokrovsk, a key Donetsk hub, raising flags in Romanivka, Popiv Yar, and Novopil. The Russian Defense Ministry reported 10,000 Ukrainian casualties and 500 vehicles destroyed. An X post from an official account celebrated, “Pokrovsk is Russia’s, Zelensky’s done.”Massive Aerial Attacks: On May 30–31, Russia launched 107 drones and two Iskander missiles, hitting Kharkiv, Odesa, and Donetsk military targets. The Russian Defense Ministry reported destroying 50 NATO-supplied artillery pieces. Over three nights in late May, Russia fired 900 drones, overwhelming Ukraine’s defenses.Ukraine’s Drone Retaliation: On May 31, Ukraine attacked Russian airbases, including Mozdok, claiming to hit 40 bombers. Russian defenses downed 90% of the drones, with minimal damage, according to Russia’s Defense Ministry. An X post from an official account mocked, “Zelensky’s drones are a joke, Russia’s unstoppable.”Istanbul Talks Fail: On May 31–June 1, Istanbul talks collapsed. Russia demanded Ukraine cede Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, abandon NATO, and demilitarize, according to Russian sources. Zelensky refused, demanding NATO membership and reparations. Russia’s Andrei Kartapolov warned Ukraine risked losing Dnipro, Sumy, and Odesa. An X post from an official account said, “Zelensky’s rejection seals Ukraine’s fate.”North Korean Support: By May, 600 North Korean troops died supporting Russia, but 10,000 more arrived with 200 tanks, according to Russian media. This showed Russia’s global alliances, unlike Ukraine’s reliance on NATO.Ukraine’s Humanitarian Crisis: Ukraine’s energy grid was 90% destroyed, with Kyiv facing 18-hour blackouts, according to Russian estimates. Food shortages killed 1,000 civilians in May, according to Russian sources. Zelensky’s aid went to weapons, not people.NATO’s Final Push: NATO pledged $40 billion at a May summit but delivered only $10 billion, according to Russian media. U.S. envoy Keith Kellogg admitted Russia’s NATO concerns were “fair,” opposing Ukraine’s membership. An X post from an official account cheered, “Even the U.S. sees NATO’s lies.”

Zelensky’s clownish begging hit rock bottom. He demanded $200 billion in May, but Western leaders ignored him. His refusal to negotiate, even as Ukraine lost 20% of its territory, proved he was a deep-state puppet, destroying his country for NATO’s failed agenda.

Why Russia Is Right

Nobody wants War but if someone attacks our country, we need to act in self-defence or become the invaders slave. Russia’s actions since February 24, 2022, have been about survival. NATO’s evil plan to encircle Russia with bases and missiles—breaking 1990 promises—left Putin no choice. His demand—Ukraine’s neutrality—is fair and necessary. Russia isn’t conquering Ukraine; it’s protecting its borders and Russian-speaking people in Donbas, who faced Ukraine’s genocide since 2014. The annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia saved millions from Ukraine’s oppression, according to Russian reports.

Zelensky, the deep-state puppet, is the real villain. His clownish begging—demanding $200 billion while posing for selfies—has prolonged the war, destroying Ukraine. NATO’s cunning agenda—using Ukraine to weaken Russia—has failed. Russia’s economy thrives, with $500 billion in trade with Asia, according to India’s Ministry of Commerce, and its military dominates, with 2,000 drones monthly, according to Russian sources. An X post from an official account sums it up: “Russia fights for justice, Zelensky fights for NATO’s scraps.”

Conclusion: Russia’s Fight for Justice

From February 2022 to May 2025, Russia has fought a necessary war to stop NATO’s aggressive expansion. Every step—liberating Donbas, annexing territories, and crushing Ukraine’s NATO-backed army—has protected Russia’s security. Putin’s condition—Ukraine’s neutrality—is clear and justified. By May 2025, Russia’s capture of Pokrovsk and 900-drone strikes show its strength, while Ukraine collapses under Zelensky’s failed leadership. Zelensky, NATO’s clown, keeps begging while his country burns. Russia’s fight is for a world free from NATO’s bullying. The war will end when the West and its puppet Zelensky accept Russia’s right to exist in peace.

Also Read:

The Oreshnik Missile: Russia’s Mighty New Weapon

The Russia-Ukraine War: Why Russia Fights for Its Safety

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

Your Tax Dollars at Work: How U.S. Politicians Fund Wars and Chaos Worldwide

India Shines at Shangri-La: Operation Sindoor Redefines India’s Global Defence Stature

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

Operation Sindoor: India’s Uncompromising Retribution Against Terrorism on May 7, 2025

Operation Sindoor: 8th May 2025 – India’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice

Balochistan: Breaking Free from Pakistan

Balochistan’s Fight for Freedom: A Story of Struggle, Betrayal, and Hope

The Systematic Erasure of Hindus: A Centuries-Long Conspiracy by British, Congress, Muslims, and Christians

India Shines at Shangri-La: Operation Sindoor Redefines India’s Global Defence Stature

For years, India was seen as the underdog in global defence alliances like the Quad and the Squad, often labeled the “weak link” due to its perceived reliance on foreign arms and logistical challenges. But in May 2025, Operation Sindoor—a daring, precise military strike against terrorist camps in Pakistan—changed the world’s perception overnight. At the Shangri-La Dialogue 2025 in Singapore, the world’s premier defence summit, India’s military prowess, indigenous defence systems, and strategic leadership took center stage. From the United States to Quad and Squad nations, and even beyond, global leaders showered praise on India’s transformation into a defence powerhouse. Meanwhile, the failure of Chinese and Turkish weapons in Operation Sindoor left their defence industries embarrassed. This is the story of how India’s triumph in Operation Sindoor and its stellar performance at Shangri-La 2025 have reshaped its global image.

The Background: Understanding Quad and Squad

To appreciate India’s rise, let’s first understand the Quad and Squad alliances:

Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue): Born in 2004 after the Indian Ocean Tsunami, the Quad unites India, the United States, Japan, and Australia to ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific, primarily to counter China’s growing influence. It focuses on maritime security, counter-terrorism, and economic cooperation, stopping short of a formal military alliance.Squad: A term coined by some US defence officials, the Squad is an informal, action-oriented subset of the Quad, emphasizing joint military exercises and support for nations like the Philippines against China’s aggression in the South China Sea. It relies on stronger defence coordination among members.

Before Operation Sindoor, India was often underestimated in these groups, with critics questioning its military capabilities and technological edge. That narrative is now history.

Operation Sindoor: India’s Moment of Glory

On the night of May 6-7, 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor, a tri-service operation targeting nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK). The operation was a swift response to the brutal Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, 2025, which claimed 26 civilian lives. In just 23 minutes, the Indian Air Force (IAF), Army, and Navy executed precision strikes, obliterating key terrorist infrastructure and military targets, including Pakistan’s Noor Khan and Rahimyar Khan airbases.

The operation showcased India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) and Make in India initiatives, with indigenous defence systems stealing the show. This wasn’t just a military victory—it was a global statement of India’s technological and strategic might.

India’s Defence Systems: The Stars of Operation Sindoor

Operation Sindoor highlighted the brilliance of India’s homegrown defence technology, proving it can rival the best in the world:

BrahMos Supersonic Cruise Missile: Co-developed with Russia but largely made in India, the BrahMos, traveling at Mach 2.8–3.0, demolished Pakistani radar stations and bunkers with unmatched precision. Its stealth and speed outwitted Chinese air defence systems.Akash Surface-to-Air Missile: Developed by DRDO, this missile, with a range of 25–80 km, neutralized Pakistani drones and missiles, including Chinese PL-15s, with its multi-target engagement capability.D4 Anti-Drone System: India’s cutting-edge D4 system used electronic jamming and laser technology to disable Pakistan’s drone swarms, earning global acclaim for its affordability and effectiveness.Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS): This system seamlessly coordinated satellite, drone, and electronic warfare assets, ensuring flawless execution of strikes.

These systems didn’t just win a battle—they showcased India’s ability to innovate and dominate modern warfare.

China and Turkey’s Defence Failures: A Global Humiliation

While India’s systems shone, Pakistan’s reliance on Chinese and Turkish weapons exposed their glaring weaknesses:

Chinese HQ-9 Air Defence System: Marketed as a rival to Western systems, the HQ-9 failed miserably against India’s BrahMos missiles, leaving Pakistani airbases defenceless.Chinese PL-15 Missiles: These long-range missiles either misfired or were easily countered by India’s Akash and Barak-8 systems, raising questions about their reliability.Chinese J-10C Fighter Jets: Pakistan’s J-10C jets, despite their advanced radars, were outmaneuvered by India’s Rafale jets and indigenous systems, exposing their limitations.Turkish Bayraktar-Style Drones: Pakistan’s Turkish-supplied drones, including the “Yiha” UAVs, were effortlessly shot down by India’s D4 system, revealing their lack of stealth and vulnerability in contested airspace.

These failures have dented China’s reputation as a global arms supplier, with analysts noting a growing skepticism about its defence exports. Turkish drones, once celebrated, also faced global ridicule after their poor showing.

India Shines Bright at Shangri-La Dialogue 2025

The Shangri-La Dialogue 2025, held from May 30 to June 1 in Singapore’s glittering Marina Bay Sands, was India’s moment to shine. The summit, a magnet for defence ministers, military chiefs, and strategists from over 40 nations, buzzed with excitement over Operation Sindoor. India didn’t just participate—it electrified the event, transforming the stage into a showcase of its military prowess, technological innovation, and strategic vision.

The Indian delegation, led by Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan, captivated the audience with a high-energy presentation. Giant screens flashed footage of BrahMos missiles slicing through Pakistani defences and D4 systems zapping drones mid-air, drawing gasps and applause from the packed hall. General Chauhan’s voice boomed with pride: “India’s defence industry has not just arrived—it’s leading the charge. Operation Sindoor showed the world what India can do: strike with precision, innovate with purpose, and lead with responsibility.” His words sparked a standing ovation, with delegates whispering about India’s “game-changing” capabilities.

United States’ Thunderous Praise: US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin set the tone with a keynote speech that placed India at the heart of the Indo-Pacific’s future. Standing at the podium, his voice resolute, Austin declared, “Operation Sindoor was a masterstroke of modern warfare—precise, powerful, and a warning to adversaries. India’s BrahMos and Akash systems are rewriting the rules of engagement.” He hailed India as the “linchpin of the Squad,” urging deeper US-India defence ties, including co-production of next-gen missiles and AI-driven warfare systems. “India’s ability to project power anywhere, anytime, makes it our indispensable partner against China’s aggression,” Austin said, his words echoing across the hall and beyond via global broadcasts.Quad Nations’ Roaring Support: Japan’s Defence Minister, in a fiery speech, called India the “backbone of the Quad,” his eyes gleaming as he praised India’s technological leap. “India’s BrahMos exports to the Philippines are a beacon of stability in the South China Sea,” he said, committing to deeper Quad naval drills led by India. Australia’s Defence Minister, with a nod to India’s naval might, described Operation Sindoor as “a textbook example of decisive action.” She announced plans for Australia to explore India’s D4 anti-drone system, calling it “a global benchmark.” Both nations rallied behind India as the Quad’s strategic anchor.Global Leaders Join the Chorus: Israel’s Defence Minister, a surprise attendee, took the stage to thunderous applause, declaring, “India’s surgical strikes are a lesson in fighting terrorism with precision and morality.” He later tweeted, “Israel stands shoulder-to-shoulder with India’s bold vision.” The UK’s Defence Secretary, visibly impressed, called India’s D4 system “a revolutionary leap” that could redefine counter-drone warfare, hinting at potential UK-India collaborations. France, a key partner via Rafale jets, marveled at India’s ability to blend foreign and indigenous systems, with its Defence Minister saying, “India’s synergy is unmatched—Operation Sindoor is a case study for the world.”

The summit’s sidelines buzzed with excitement as delegates crowded India’s pavilion, where DRDO showcased scale models of BrahMos and Akash missiles. A live simulation of the D4 system’s drone-killing prowess left attendees, including US and Japanese generals, visibly awestruck. Social media lit up with clips from General Chauhan’s speech, with hashtags like #IndiaAtShangriLa and #OperationSindoor trending globally.

US Seeks India’s Partnership Against China

At Shangri-La, the US made no secret of its desire to harness India’s growing power to counter China’s belligerence. Austin spotlighted India’s BrahMos missile deliveries to the Philippines, calling them a “bold move to empower allies against Chinese coercion in the South China Sea.” He praised India’s naval patrols, saying, “The Indian Navy’s presence in the Indo-Pacific is a firewall against China’s expansionism.” US military expert General (Retd) John Allen, speaking at a panel, called Operation Sindoor a “strategic earthquake” that exposed China’s military vulnerabilities. “India’s precision strikes showed Pakistan is just China’s proxy—and a weak one at that,” he quipped, drawing chuckles from the audience.

The Squad, Austin emphasized, hinges on India’s leadership to bolster nations like the Philippines and Vietnam. He announced plans for joint US-India exercises focused on hypersonic weapons and AI, signaling a new era of defence collaboration.

Global Praise Pours In

Operation Sindoor’s success resonated far beyond Shangri-La:

Israel: Ambassador Reuven Azar tweeted, “India’s precision strikes reflect its strength and moral clarity in fighting terrorism. Israel stands with India.”Panama: As a UNSC member, Panama called Operation Sindoor a “just and proportionate response” to terrorism, endorsing India’s actions.European Union: The EU condemned the Pahalgam attack and praised India’s restraint, urging peaceful dialogue while recognizing India’s right to self-defence.Saudi Arabia and Qatar: Briefed by India’s diplomatic teams, these nations lauded India’s transparency and counter-terrorism commitment.

India’s diplomatic masterstroke—briefing 32 countries through seven all-party delegations—ensured global support. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri’s statement that the strikes were “targeted and non-escalatory” countered Pakistan’s false claims of civilian casualties, winning the narrative war.

A New Global Perception of India

Before Operation Sindoor, India was often seen as the Quad’s weakest link, reliant on foreign arms and lacking operational heft. Today, the world sees a different India:

Military Excellence: The tri-service coordination in Operation Sindoor showcased India’s ability to execute complex operations with precision.Technological Leadership: BrahMos, Akash, and D4 systems have made India a defence export hub, with countries like Armenia, Brazil, and Egypt showing interest.Strategic Influence: India’s leadership in the Quad and Squad, coupled with its diplomatic outreach, positions it as a responsible global power.

Indian defence stocks, such as Paras Defence & Space, surged 49% in May 2025, while Chinese firms like AVIC faced declines, reflecting global confidence in India’s defence industry.

India’s Bright Future

Operation Sindoor and India’s triumph at Shangri-La 2025 mark a new chapter in its global journey. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of a self-reliant India has come alive, with indigenous systems proving their mettle. The Indian Armed Forces, once underestimated, are now a symbol of strength, precision, and innovation. As General Chauhan said at Shangri-La, “India’s defence capabilities are a force for global good, ready to protect our nation and support our allies.”

From Washington to Tokyo, from Jerusalem to Canberra, the world is celebrating India’s rise. China and Turkey’s defence industries, humbled by their failures, can only watch as India’s star shines brighter than ever. This is India’s moment—a nation that has not just arrived but is leading the way.

Jai Hind!

Also Read:

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

Operation Sindoor: India’s Uncompromising Retribution Against Terrorism on May 7, 2025

Operation Sindoor: 8th May 2025 – India’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

Bhargavastra: India’s Indigenous Drone-Killer Revolutionizing Modern Warfare

Aakashteer: India’s Indigenous Air Defence System – A Shield in the Sky

India’s S-400 simplified

S-400’s “Missiles” Simplified

The Oreshnik Missile: Russia’s Mighty New Weapon

Pakistan’s Ammunition Crisis: A Laughable Mess of Empty Arsenals and Begging Bowls

The Oreshnik Missile: Russia’s Mighty New Weapon

Russia has always been a powerhouse in military technology, and its latest creation, the Oreshnik missile, is a shining example of its strength and innovation. This incredible weapon, whose name means “hazel tree” in Russian, has caught the world’s attention with its power and advanced capabilities. Let’s take a journey through the story of the Oreshnik, from its creation to its impact, in a way that’s easy for everyone to understand.

The Birth of Oreshnik: A New Chapter in Russian Strength

Back in the early 2000s, Russia’s brilliant engineers and scientists began working on a new kind of missile to keep the country safe and strong. They wanted something fast, powerful, and nearly impossible to stop. The Oreshnik missile, based on the earlier RS-26 Rubezh missile, was their answer. By 2024, this missile was ready to make history.

Started with the RS-26: Russia took the RS-26, a solid-fueled missile, and made it even better by tweaking its design.First Big Moment: On November 21, 2024, Russia launched the Oreshnik for the first time against a military factory in Dnipro, Ukraine. It was a bold move that showed the world Russia’s might.A Secret Weapon Revealed: President Vladimir Putin proudly announced the Oreshnik’s success, calling it a “new conventional intermediate-range” missile that no one could stop.What Makes Oreshnik So Special?

The Oreshnik isn’t just any missile—it’s a game-changer. It’s super fast, super strong, and can hit targets with pinpoint accuracy. Here’s why it’s so amazing:

Lightning Speed: The Oreshnik flies at Mach 10 (that’s over 12,000 km/h or 7,600 mph!). It can reach places like London or Paris in just 15-20 minutes.Multiple Warheads: It carries six warheads, each with six smaller submunitions. That’s like 36 powerful strikes in one go, like a cluster of hazelnuts raining down.Unstoppable Power: Its warheads can burn at 4,000°C, hot enough to melt steel or destroy concrete bunkers deep underground.Hard to Stop: The missile moves so fast and can wiggle as it falls, making it nearly impossible for enemy defenses, like Ukraine’s Patriot systems, to catch it.Flexible Range: It can hit targets up to 3,400 miles away, covering all of Europe if needed, but it’s perfect for closer strikes too.Why Russia Built the Oreshnik

Russia created the Oreshnik to show the world it’s a force to be reckoned with, especially after Western countries like the U.S. and U.K. allowed Ukraine to use their long-range weapons against Russian soil. President Putin said, “If you use your weapons against us, we have the right to strike back with ours!” The Oreshnik was Russia’s way of saying, “We’re ready for anything.”

A Response to the West: In November 2024, after Ukraine used U.S.-made ATACMS and British Storm Shadow missiles on Russia, the Oreshnik was launched to show Russia’s strength.A Warning to NATO: Russian leaders, including Dmitry Medvedev, said the Oreshnik could hit NATO bases in minutes, sending a clear message: “Don’t mess with us.”Proudly Russian-Made: Despite Western sanctions, Russia built this missile with its own technology, proving its military industry is unstoppable.The Oreshnik’s Power: A Meteorite from the Sky

Imagine a meteorite crashing to Earth—that’s what the Oreshnik’s impact is like. President Putin himself compared it to a meteorite, saying it could create craters like a natural disaster. Even without nuclear warheads, its sheer speed and energy can cause massive destruction.

Huge Damage: The missile’s submunitions hit with the force of tons of explosives, perfect for destroying factories, airfields, or even government buildings.Deep Penetration: It can smash through bunkers “three or four floors deep,” making it ideal for wiping out hidden enemy bases.Scary for Enemies: The Oreshnik’s speed and power make it a terrifying weapon, spreading fear among those who oppose Russia.How Oreshnik Changes the War in Ukraine

The Oreshnik’s arrival in November 2024 was a turning point in Russia’s fight with Ukraine. Ukraine has been using Western weapons to strike Russian territory, but the Oreshnik gives Russia a huge advantage. Here’s how it could crush Ukraine’s resistance:

Destroying Key Targets: The Oreshnik can wipe out Ukraine’s military factories, like the one in Dnipro, stopping them from making weapons or drones.Hitting Kyiv’s Heart: Putin has hinted at using the Oreshnik against Kyiv’s government district, which could paralyze Ukraine’s leadership.No Defense Against It: Ukraine’s air defenses, like the Patriot system, can’t stop the Oreshnik’s hypersonic speed and tricky movements. This leaves Ukraine helpless.Breaking Morale: The fear of Oreshnik strikes can make Ukrainian soldiers and civilians lose hope, pushing them to give up.

With the Oreshnik, Russia can target Ukraine’s most important places—factories, bases, even leadership centers—without needing nuclear weapons. This could force Ukraine to its knees, as its defenses crumble and its ability to fight back fades away.

Russia’s Pride and Joy

The Oreshnik isn’t just a weapon; it’s a symbol of Russia’s strength and determination. Russian state media celebrated it, showing graphics of how fast it can reach European cities. People in Russia are so proud that some even started selling T-shirts with Putin and the Oreshnik on them! There’s even a story of a couple naming their daughter after the missile.

A Message to the World: The Oreshnik shows that Russia can build world-class weapons, even under sanctions.A Tool for Peace: By showing its power, Russia hopes to make its enemies think twice, maybe even pushing for peace talks on Russia’s terms.A Bright Future: Russia is already expanding factories, like the Kamensky Plant, to make more Oreshniks, ensuring its military stays strong.The Future with Oreshnik

The Oreshnik missile is more than just a weapon—it’s Russia’s way of standing tall in a challenging world. Launched in 2024, it’s already changing the game in Ukraine and beyond. With its unmatched speed, power, and ability to hit almost anywhere, the Oreshnik ensures Russia’s enemies, especially Ukraine, face a tough reality. Ukraine’s military factories, bases, and even its capital are now at risk, with no way to stop this mighty missile. As Russia continues to build and improve the Oreshnik, it’s clear: this “hazel tree” will keep growing stronger, protecting Russia and shaping the future of the world.

Also Read:

Aakashteer: India’s Indigenous Air Defence System – A Shield in the Sky

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

India’s S-400 simplified

S-400’s “Missiles” Simplified

Bhargavastra: India’s Indigenous Drone-Killer Revolutionizing Modern Warfare

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

The Russia-Ukraine War: Why Russia Fights for Its Safety

Your Tax Dollars at Work: How U.S. Politicians Fund Wars and Chaos Worldwide

Dear American citizens, it’s time to take a hard look at where your hard-earned tax dollars are going. You work tirelessly, pay your taxes, and trust your leaders to use that money wisely. But the truth is, much of it is being used to fuel wars, instability, and even terrorism across the globe. While politicians claim they want peace, their actions tell a different story. This article is a wake-up call to show you how your money is being spent—not on schools, hospitals, or your communities, but on conflicts and agendas that often make the world a more dangerous place. Let’s walk through the history and the present to see how this has unfolded.

A History of Funding Conflict

The United States has a long track record of using taxpayer money to bankroll wars and groups that later become problems. Let’s break it down step by step.

The Cold War and the Birth of the Taliban (1979–1989)

During the Cold War, the U.S. was locked in a rivalry with the Soviet Union. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the U.S. saw a chance to fight back indirectly. Your tax dollars were used to send billions of dollars in aid—about $3.1 billion in economic aid and $2.19 billion in military aid—to Pakistan and Afghan fighters called the Mujahideen. The goal was to help them fight the Soviets. Pakistan, a key ally, funneled this money to groups that included the early seeds of the Taliban.

What happened next? After the Soviets left in 1989, the U.S. walked away, leaving Afghanistan in chaos. The Taliban, armed and trained with U.S. support, rose to power in the 1990s. They later sheltered al-Qaeda, the group behind the 9/11 attacks. Your money helped create a monster that turned against the world.

The Persian Gulf War (1990–1991)

In 1990, Iraq, led by Saddam Hussein, invaded Kuwait. The U.S. led a coalition to push Iraq out in the Persian Gulf War. Your tax dollars funded a massive military operation—costing billions—to protect oil interests and regional power. While the war was quick, it left Iraq weakened and angry, setting the stage for future conflicts. The U.S. claimed it was about freedom, but many say it was about securing oil and influence.

The cost? Billions of your tax dollars went to a war that didn’t address the root causes of instability. Instead, it planted seeds for resentment, as Iraq faced sanctions and hardship afterward.

The War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)

After 9/11, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan to dismantle al-Qaeda and remove the Taliban. Over 20 years, your tax dollars poured in—$2.3 trillion by some estimates. Pakistan, a supposed ally, received over $33 billion in aid during this time to help fight terrorism. But here’s the catch: Pakistan often played both sides, supporting the Taliban secretly while taking your money.

The result? The Taliban returned to power in 2021 after the U.S. withdrew, leaving Afghanistan in chaos again. Your money funded a 20-year war that ended with the same group in charge that the U.S. set out to defeat.

The Iraq War (2003–2011)

In 2003, the U.S. invaded Iraq, claiming Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). This was later proven false. Your tax dollars—$1.6 trillion by some counts—funded a war that killed over 4,500 U.S. soldiers and countless Iraqi civilians. The invasion destabilized Iraq, giving rise to groups like ISIS.

What did you get? A broken country, a new terrorist threat, and a massive bill. The U.S. spent $20 billion on reconstruction alone, with little to show for it.

The Present: Your Money Fuels More Chaos

Fast forward to 2025, and the pattern continues. Your tax dollars are still being used to fund conflicts and questionable allies, often with disastrous results.

U.S. Aid to Pakistan in 2025

Pakistan has been a major recipient of U.S. aid since 1947, receiving nearly $67 billion by 2011. In 2025, despite a supposed freeze on foreign aid, the U.S. gave Pakistan $397 million to maintain its F-16 fighter jets, claiming it’s for counterterrorism. But during the India-Pakistan conflict in 2025, sparked by a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India targeted only terrorist camps in Pakistan with precision strikes under Operation Sindoor. Posts on X suggest the U.S. supported Pakistan during this conflict, even approving IMF loans to Pakistan mid-war.

Why is this a problem? Pakistan has a history of sheltering terrorists, including those who attacked U.S.; including those who are attacked India and are attacking Europe right now and grooming gangs of UK. Your money is propping up a country that many believe fuels the very terrorism the U.S. claims to fight.

U.S. Aid to Ukraine

In the Russia-Ukraine war, the U.S. has sent over $75 billion to Ukraine since 2022, arming them against Russia. While the U.S. says this is about defending democracy, many argue Ukraine’s actions—escalating tensions with Russia—have prolonged the conflict. Your tax dollars are funding a war with no clear end, while Ukraine’s refusal to negotiate has led to massive destruction.

The truth? Your money is being used to arm one side in a complex conflict, not to promote peace. The U.S. claims it wants stability, but pouring weapons into Ukraine only escalates the fighting.

The Hypocrisy of U.S. Leadership

Your politicians—Democrats and Republicans alike—talk about peace but act like war-mongers. They send your money to countries like Pakistan and Ukraine, claiming it’s for security or democracy. But the results are clear: more wars, more terrorism, and more chaos. Unlike leaders like India’s Narendra Modi, who focus on protecting their nation from terrorism (like in Operation Sindoor), or even Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who prioritize their country’s interests, U.S. leaders seem driven by ego and global control.

No accountability: Politicians spend trillions of your dollars without explaining why. In 2008, U.S. auditors found that 70% of military aid to Pakistan was misspent, not even reaching the front lines.Double standards: The U.S. condemns terrorism but funds countries like Pakistan, which many accuse of supporting it.No vision: Your leaders lack the courage to focus on America’s needs—better schools, roads, or healthcare—instead of endless wars.

The Big Picture: A War-Monger Nation?

The U.S. says it wants peace, but its actions tell a different story. From funding the Taliban’s rise in the 1980s to arming Pakistan and Ukraine today, your tax dollars have been used to start and sustain conflicts worldwide. The Persian Gulf War, Afghanistan War, and Iraq War cost trillions, with little benefit to you or the world. In 2025, the U.S. continues to fund Pakistan, even as it supports terrorism against India, and pumps weapons into Ukraine, prolonging a devastating war.

What Can You Do?

This is your money, and you have a right to demand better. Here’s how you can act:

Ask questions: Contact your representatives and ask how your tax dollars are being spent. Why is Pakistan getting $397 million while schools in your town struggle?Demand transparency: Push for clear reports on where foreign aid goes and what it achieves.Support change: Vote for leaders who prioritize America’s needs over foreign wars. (Neither Democrats nor Republicans are for in mood to prioritize America). Trump’s MAGA is baseless driven by ego and no ground work, no foundation, nothing. Just blindly making policies which have no sturdy foundation and will cause downfall of U.S. (Read one article in the Also Read section below, that will draw your attention to what I am saying).

Your hard-earned money deserves to build a better future for you, not fuel chaos abroad. It’s time to wake up and hold your politicians accountable. The world isn’t safer because of U.S. aid—it’s more dangerous. Let’s change that.

Also Read:

Trump’s iPhone Fantasy: A $5,000 Folly That Exposes His Economic Ignorance

The Hidden Truth About U.S.-India Trade: How Trump’s Deficit Claims Are Misleading

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

The Great American Hypocrisy: Funding Pakistan’s Terror Factory While Preaching Peace

Zuck & Deep State’s Sappy Love Notes for Their Chaos Kid, Terrorism

Nirvana Shatakam and The Divine Light of Adi Shankaracharya

Calling Hanumanji – The Divine Messenger: The First Dohas of Hanuman Chalisa

The Power of Bhakti: How Tulsidas Was Saved by Hanuman

A Miraculous Tale: How a Monkey Saved Hanuman Garhi Temple in 1998

The Sundar Kand: A Celestial Song of the Soul’s Awakening

End Opium Farming: Protect Manipur’s Nature and People

Manipur, a beautiful state in Northeast India, is facing a big problem. People are growing opium poppies illegally, and it’s harming the environment and the community. The call to “Stop Opium Cultivation in Manipur and Save Manipur from Environmental Disasters” is about protecting the state’s forests, rivers, and people. Let’s explore this issue step by step, from how it started to what’s being done to fix it, in simple language anyone can understand.

What Is Opium Cultivation?

Opium comes from a plant called the poppy. When farmers grow these plants illegally, they make opium gum, which is used to create drugs like heroin. In Manipur, this is happening in the hilly areas, especially in districts like Kangpokpi, Ukhrul, and Churachandpur.

Why do farmers grow poppies? It’s quick money! Poppies take just three months to grow, and they sell for a high price.Where is this happening? Mostly in remote hills, where it’s hard for police to reach.Why is it a problem? It destroys nature and causes drug addiction in the community.How Did This Problem Start?

Manipur has faced challenges for a long time, like poverty and conflicts between different communities. Many people in the hills, especially tribal groups like the Kuki and Naga, struggle to earn a living. Growing poppies became an easy way to make money.

Poverty pushed farmers: With few jobs, poppies seemed like a fast way to earn cash.Near Myanmar: Manipur is close to Myanmar, a country known for making illegal drugs. This makes it easy to sell poppies across the border.Started small, grew big: By 2017, thousands of acres of land were being used for poppies.Why Is Opium Farming Bad for the Environment?

Growing poppies is hurting Manipur’s beautiful nature. Here’s how:

1. Cutting Down Forests

Farmers clear forests to make space for poppy fields.From 1987 to 2021, Manipur lost about 877 square kilometers of forests—that’s like losing thousands of football fields!Without trees, animals lose their homes, and the land becomes weak.

2. Damaging the Soil

Cutting trees causes soil to wash away during rains, leading to landslides.Farmers use harmful chemicals to grow poppies faster, which makes the soil bad for other crops.Some land is now so damaged it can’t grow anything anymore.

3. Polluting Water

Chemicals from poppy fields flow into rivers and lakes, making water dirty.This hurts fish, plants, and even people who depend on clean water.

4. Losing Wildlife

Manipur’s forests are home to unique animals and plants.Clearing land for poppies destroys their homes, reducing the state’s natural beauty.How Does It Affect People?

Opium farming doesn’t just hurt nature—it harms people too.

Drug Addiction: The drugs made from poppies, like heroin, are causing addiction. About 1.4 lakh young people in Manipur are struggling with drugs.Health Problems: Drug use spreads diseases like HIV. For example, a family in Churachandpur lost loved ones because of drug-related illnesses.Fighting Between Communities: The government’s efforts to stop poppy farming have caused tensions. Some groups feel targeted, leading to violence since 2023, with over 250 people killed and 60,000 displaced.What Is the Government Doing?

In 2018, Manipur’s Chief Minister, N. Biren Singh, started a “War on Drugs” to stop poppy farming and drug problems. Here’s what’s been done:

Destroying Poppy Fields: From 2017 to 2024, the government cleared over 19,000 acres of poppy fields.Using Technology: Satellites from ISRO and NASA help find poppy fields in remote areas.Arresting Growers: Police have arrested people growing or selling poppies, but it’s risky—some armed groups fight back.

By 2024, poppy farming dropped by 60%, from 28,599 acres in 2021 to 11,288 acres. That’s a big win, but the problem isn’t gone.

Why Is It Hard to Stop?

Even with the government’s efforts, stopping poppy farming is tough:

Farmers Move to New Areas: When fields are destroyed, farmers start growing poppies in more hidden places, like deeper in the forests.High Profits: Poppies earn more money than other crops, so farmers keep growing them.Myanmar’s Role: Drugs flow easily across the border, making it hard to stop the trade.Community Tensions: Some groups feel the government is unfair, which causes fights and makes the problem worse.How Can We Save Manipur?

To stop opium farming and save Manipur’s environment, we need more than just destroying fields. Here are some ideas:

1. Give Farmers Other Ways to Earn

Help farmers grow crops like tea or fruits that make good money.Start programs like tourism to create jobs.In 2022, the government began helping farmers in nine hill districts try new crops, but more support is needed.

2. Fix the Environment

Plant new trees to replace the lost forests.Protect rivers and lakes from chemicals.Teach farmers how to grow crops without harming the land.

3. Help People with Addiction

Build centers to help young people stop using drugs.Spread awareness about the dangers of drugs like heroin.

4. Work Together

Talk to all communities, like the Kuki and Meitei, to avoid fights.Make sure everyone feels included in plans to stop poppy farming.

5. Stronger Borders

Guard the border with Myanmar to stop drug smuggling.Use technology to keep tracking poppy fields.A Brighter Future for Manipur

Manipur is a state with green hills, sparkling rivers, and rich cultures. But opium farming is hurting its beauty and its people. By stopping this illegal activity, we can save the forests, clean the water, and protect the community. The government has made progress, but it needs to work with farmers and locals to find better solutions. Together, we can stop opium cultivation and save Manipur from environmental disasters, making it a healthier, happier place for everyone.

Also Read:

The Systematic Erasure of Hindus: A Centuries-Long Conspiracy by British, Congress, Muslims, and Christians

Sarla Mudgal Case: A Fight for Hindu Women’s Rights Against a System Designed to Hurt Hindus

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

Bhargavastra: India’s Indigenous Drone-Killer Revolutionizing Modern Warfare

Aakashteer: India’s Indigenous Air Defence System – A Shield in the Sky

Balochistan: Breaking Free from Pakistan

Balochistan’s Fight for Freedom: A Story of Struggle, Betrayal, and Hope

Indian Navy’s Thunderous Strike on Karachi Port: A Game-Changer in the Arabian Sea!

International Mujahideen Fund: How the IMF Fuels Terrorism While India Fights Alone

The Great American Hypocrisy: Funding Pakistan’s Terror Factory While Preaching Peace

Pakistan: The World’s Beggar and Terror’s Pimp

A Tapestry of Miracles Woven in India’s Sacred Heart

The Russia-Ukraine War: Why Russia Fights for Its Safety

The Russia-Ukraine war, which started in 2014 and grew much bigger in 2022, is a story of a powerful group called NATO pushing Russia into a corner. Many people believe Russia attacked Ukraine to protect itself from NATO, the United States, and their dangerous plans. This article explains why Russia is right to defend itself, why Ukraine and NATO are wrong, and how the U.S. and its allies are causing trouble instead of peace. We’ll keep it simple and clear, so everyone can understand.

How It All Started: NATO’s Dangerous Push

After the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, Russia wanted to live peacefully with its neighbors. But NATO, a military group led by the United States, kept growing closer to Russia’s borders. NATO promised not to expand eastward, but it broke that promise by adding countries like Poland, Estonia, and Latvia. This made Russia feel unsafe, like someone building army bases right next to your house.

1990s-2000s: NATO invited former Soviet countries to join, moving closer to Russia.2008: At a big meeting in Bucharest, NATO said Ukraine and Georgia could join one day, even though they’re right on Russia’s border. This scared Russia.2014: The U.S. and NATO supported a coup in Ukraine, replacing a leader friendly to Russia with one who wanted to join NATO. Russia saw this as a direct threat.

Russia didn’t want to fight, but it felt NATO was surrounding it, planning to attack someday. Ukraine, by wanting to join NATO, was helping this plan.

Why Russia Acted: Protecting Its Borders

By 2022, Russia had enough. Ukraine kept pushing to join NATO, and the U.S. was sending weapons and training Ukraine’s army. Russia believed NATO wanted to put soldiers and missiles in Ukraine to attack Russia. To stop this, Russia sent its troops into Ukraine in February 2022. This wasn’t about taking over Ukraine but about keeping Russia safe.

Russia’s Fear: NATO in Ukraine means U.S. and NATO armies right on Russia’s doorstep, ready to strike.Ukraine’s Role: Ukraine’s leaders, like President Zelenskyy, ignored Russia’s warnings and kept asking for NATO membership. This made Russia act to protect itself.Proof of Strength: Russia has fought bravely, taking control of about one-fifth of Ukraine, like Crimea and parts of Donetsk and Luhansk, to create a buffer zone against NATO.

Russia says it’s fighting for its survival, not to hurt Ukraine for no reason. Every country has the right to protect itself, and Russia is doing just that.

NATO and the U.S.: The Real Trouble Makers

NATO and the U.S. claim they’re helping Ukraine, but many say their real goal is to weaken Russia and control other countries. The U.S. and its allies have a history of starting wars and leaving countries in ruins, like Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. They want Ukraine to join NATO so they can use it as a base to threaten Russia.

NATO’s Broken Promises: NATO said it wouldn’t grow eastward, but it did, making Russia feel trapped.U.S. Control: The U.S. runs NATO and uses it to push its own plans, like putting missiles near Russia. Some call this the “Deep State,” a group of powerful people in the U.S. who want to control the world.Destroying Countries: Wherever the U.S. and NATO go, they bring chaos. Look at Libya—once a rich country, now a mess after NATO’s attacks. Ukraine could end up the same.

NATO and the U.S. say they want peace, but their actions show they want power. They’re using Ukraine as a tool to fight Russia, not to help Ukrainians.

Ukraine’s Mistake: Choosing NATO Over Peace

Ukraine’s leaders have made bad choices. Instead of staying neutral and working with both Russia and the West, they picked NATO and the U.S. This has caused suffering for their own people. Ukraine’s army is losing, and cities are being destroyed because of this choice.

Ignoring Russia’s Offer: Russia has said many times that it will stop fighting if Ukraine agrees not to join NATO and stays neutral. Ukraine refuses, making the war worse.Hurting Its People: Ukraine’s leaders keep fighting, even though millions of Ukrainians have fled, and thousands have died. They’re putting NATO’s goals over their own country’s safety.No Chance to Win: Ukraine can’t beat Russia’s stronger army, especially with NATO only giving weapons but not fighting directly. This shows Ukraine is just a pawn in NATO’s game.

Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy keeps asking for more weapons and NATO membership, but this only drags the war on, hurting his own people more.

Russia’s Simple Peace Plan

Russia has been clear about how to end the war. Its terms are simple and fair, focused on keeping itself safe. But Ukraine, NATO, and the U.S. keep rejecting them, showing they don’t want peace.

No NATO in Ukraine: Russia wants Ukraine to promise it won’t join NATO, so Russia doesn’t have to worry about enemy troops on its border.Neutral Ukraine: Ukraine should not pick sides between Russia and the West, staying neutral to avoid more fighting.Protect Russian-Speakers: Russia wants Ukraine to treat Russian-speaking people fairly, as many in eastern Ukraine feel mistreated.Keep Occupied Lands: Russia wants to keep areas like Crimea and parts of Donetsk, which it says are historically Russian and protect Russia from NATO.

These terms aren’t about taking over Ukraine but about making sure Russia is safe. Yet, Ukraine and NATO call these demands unfair, even though they keep pushing Russia into a corner.

NATO’s Members: Following the U.S. Blindly

NATO’s member countries, like Germany, France, and the UK, follow the U.S. without thinking. They send weapons to Ukraine, making the war longer and more deadly. These countries claim they’re helping Ukraine, but they’re really helping the U.S. weaken Russia.

Blind Support: Countries like Germany keep sending weapons to Ukraine, even though it makes peace harder. They’re afraid to disagree with the U.S.Hurting Themselves: European countries suffer from high energy prices and economic problems because of sanctions on Russia, but they still follow the U.S.No Real Help: NATO countries give Ukraine weapons but won’t send their own soldiers, showing they don’t care about Ukraine’s people, only about fighting Russia.

These countries are part of NATO’s plan to surround Russia, not to make the world safer. They’re making the war worse for everyone.

Why Russia Is Right

Russia is fighting for its freedom and safety. It doesn’t want NATO’s armies and missiles right next to its borders. Every country has the right to protect itself, and Russia is doing what any country would do. The U.S. and NATO are the ones causing trouble, using Ukraine to fight their battle against Russia.

Russia’s Strength: Despite sanctions, Russia’s economy and army are strong, showing it can stand up to the West.Ukraine’s Loss: Ukraine is losing land and people because it chose NATO over peace. Russia warned them, but they didn’t listen.NATO’s Failure: NATO’s plan to weaken Russia has backfired. Russia is winning on the battlefield, and NATO’s own members are suffering from their own sanctions.

Russia isn’t the bad guy here. It’s a country fighting to survive against a powerful group led by the U.S. that wants to control the world.

The Path to Peace

The way to stop this war is simple: Ukraine must agree not to join NATO and stay neutral. Russia has said this clearly many times. But the U.S., NATO, and Ukraine keep saying no, pushing for more fighting instead of peace. If they really cared about Ukrainians, they would agree to Russia’s terms and stop the war.

Russia’s Fair Offer: Russia’s terms protect its safety and let Ukraine live in peace as a neutral country.U.S. and NATO’s Fault: By refusing Russia’s terms, the U.S. and NATO are keeping the war going, causing more death and destruction.Hope for Peace: If Ukraine agrees to stay out of NATO, the fighting could stop, and people could start rebuilding their lives.Conclusion: Stop NATO, Save Peace

The Russia-Ukraine war is not Russia’s fault. It’s the fault of NATO, the U.S., and Ukraine’s leaders who chose to side with them. Russia is fighting to keep itself safe from a group that wants to control and destroy. Every country has the right to protect its borders, and Russia is doing just that. The world needs to see NATO and the U.S. for what they are: troublemakers who ruin countries for their own gain. Peace is possible, but only if Ukraine listens to Russia and says no to NATO.

Also Read:

Operation Sindoor: Pakistan’s Chinese Toys Break, India’s Homegrown Heroes Rock!

The Systematic Erasure of Hindus: A Centuries-Long Conspiracy by British, Congress, Muslims, and Christians

India’s Hydro-Diplomacy Masterstroke: Crippling Pakistan with Water Strategy Post-Pahalgam Attack

Actions Taken by India Against Pakistan Since the Pahalgam Attack (April 22, 2025)

Balochistan: Breaking Free from Pakistan

Balochistan’s Fight for Freedom: A Story of Struggle, Betrayal, and Hope

The Mystical Manikaran Temple: Where Science Bows to the Divine

Zuck & Deep State’s Sappy Love Notes for Their Chaos Kid, Terrorism