Staff Reports
NATO’s top military brass is finally waking up to a brutal truth nobody in the mainstream cared to admit for years: sometimes, you have to strike first if you want to defend yourself. This isn’t about warmongering or reckless aggression—it’s about survival in a world where our adversaries don’t play by the rules. For decades, Western elites have clung to their sanitized rules of engagement and endless legal mumbo-jumbo, leaving the alliance hamstrung while authoritarian regimes like Russia’s exploit every opening with no regard for ethics or international law.
The latest from NATO’s military committee chair reveals a bold shift—at last. This top admiral, a seasoned warfighter, recognizes the practical need to adopt pre-emptive strikes as a legitimate form of defense. Why? Because Russia’s “dark fleet” conducting sabotage missions against European infrastructure showed just how toothless a purely reactive stance can be. NATO finally moved with its Baltic Sentry operation, and lo and behold, the attacks stopped. This proves that deterrence that relies on waiting to get hit first just doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s about time we trade in our liberal-daydream tactics for real, effective force projection.
NATO is considering ‘preemptive strikes’ on Russia, calls it ‘defensive’
Alliance officials argue that launching first could still count as self-defense, insisting the idea needs “deep analysis.”
These people should be in a mental hospital. pic.twitter.com/ukogPh3RvJ
— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) December 1, 2025
But don’t expect globalist media to celebrate this dose of common sense. They’ll frame any call for proactive defense as reckless or provocative, ignoring that the Kremlin already operates with zero moral compass. Putin’s regime launches hybrid warfare, cuts undersea cables, and moves like a dictator unbound by laws. Meanwhile, NATO—full of woke bureaucrats obsessed with “ethics” and “jurisdiction”—has tied its own hands behind its back. This double standard leaves Western nations at a disadvantage, forced to consider “legal frameworks” when their enemies simply bulldoze through them without consequences.
Even in cyber warfare, NATO is behind the curve. The admiral pointed out how the alliance remains largely reactive in cyberspace, dreaming about a more aggressive posture but chained by political correctness and restrictive laws. While Russia and China quietly sabotage and attack, NATO debates whether it “should” strike first. That hesitation spells disaster in the modern age, where speed and resolve determine dominance.
America and Europe cannot afford to remain the cautious, “ethical” players when facing enemies who view rules as obstacles to be crushed. The time is ripe for NATO to embrace a tougher, no-nonsense strategy that prioritizes decisive, pre-emptive actions to neutralize threats before they escalate. It’s a hard, cold reality—if we don’t act first, we’ll be left picking up the pieces while globalist appeasers lecture us about diplomacy. The question is simple: will NATO finally shed its old-world naivety or keep waiting for the next Berlin Wall moment in a new guise? The clock is ticking, and weakness is a deadly invitation.
