A White House Of Lies
By: Giorgio Provinciali
Live from Ukraine ????????
Pryluky After devoting a good portion of the more than a thousand articles written from the front to debunking Russian lies, one would expect anything but the same with American ones.The lies spouted yesterday by President Donald Trump, however, are too colossal to remain silent.
Donald Trumps statements on his social network
During the White House press conference with NATO Secretary Mark Rutte, Trump denied the report from The Wall Street Journal about the United States lifting restrictions on Ukraines use of European long-range missiles to strike deep into the Russian Federation, claiming thatthe United States has nothing to do with those missiles.Regardless of whether restrictions are lifted or not, this statement is part of the same series of technical and political disinformation that has characterized the current American administration.
Trump saysI dont control their missiles.Technically, this is completely false. Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG contain critical US-sourced components, including SAASM GPS navigation chipsets (or equivalent US-supplied M-code), avionics subassemblies such as INS/IMU units, telemetry modules, some guidance ASICs, and actuators made by companies subject to ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations), as well as software including NATO-standard firmware (STANAG 3910, 4586) the export and use of which require a waiver from the US State Department.The missiles Trump callsEuropeanare not entirely so: about 15 25% of their hardware and software components are of US origin and therefore fall under ITAR regulations. For this reason,the US effectively holds a technical and legal veto over their final use. Remembering this is easy, as it was a heated debate when the previous US administration led by Joe Biden hesitated, delaying for months before granting approval for the Anglo-French supply of those vectors (which, with a nominal range of around 300 km, are notlongat all, but rather mid-range). As Alla Perdei and I have emphasized multiple times from the field in these pages, although the origin of weapons like these is European, their targeting pack (mission data cartridge) uses standardized NATO formats and depends on encryption keys provided by the US for the GPS component. Specifically, the navigation keys (P(Y)-code or M-code) are issued by the DoD. For this reason, all medium- to long-range strikes with those missiles are planned based on shared NATO/US intelligence (IMINT, SIGINT, SATINT). Also altimetric maps and digital terrain models used in mission planning are derived from databases coordinated by the US. Without access to those datasets, SCALPs and Storm Shadows would be at serious risk of colliding with the ground. Therefore,the statement I dont have control over themis technically and legally false.
This is why the export of ITAR components ergo, the delivery of those weapons required US consent in 2023.Every Western missile supplied to Ukraine with that range is tied to hardware, software, navigation, and intelligence chains that fall under NATO/US jurisdiction and supervision.One need only recall the uproar that ensued when the US suspended those services to Ukraine for approximately 48 hours (causing a fatal blackout in the midst of Operation Kursk) to understand thatall the systems, encryption keys, and firing circuit data that lead to pressing the button depend on American architectural and infrastructural control. This is why Russian authorities immediately declared that Ukraines use of those missiles was equivalent to Americas entry into the war.
Graphics source: Межа
Not content with that, the American president continued his show with another lie that any self-respecting engineer would have felt like a punch in the gut.Trump literally said that training the Ukrainian Armed Forces to use Tomahawk missiles takes a minimum of six months, often a year. This statement is patently false, given that Ukraine already uses very similar cruise missiles and produces others. To be clear: operating a cruise missile like SCALP/Storm Shadow, Tomahawk, Neptune, or Flamingo requires two separate blocks: planning (definition of route, waypoints, no-fly areas, penetration profiles, timing, etc.) and launch systems (as the American governmentpoints outon its official channels, the Tomahawk was designed for VLS/TT, but there are land-based launchers like the Typhon/MRC that can launch it from TEL platforms). Air-launching a Tomahawk would require aircraft integration, but Ukraine has already showcased its ability to use SCALP/Storm Shadow on Su-24Ms very quickly (the first deployments took place within days). After that, the launch process is mostly routine. Ukraine has been operating the SCALP-EG and Storm Shadow missiles for over two years with excellent results, such as the deep strike in the Briansk region, and is developing and employing both the Flamingo missile family and the R-360 Neptune, including the Long Neptune variant that entered service this year, along with land-attack versions.
The realistic training and qualification times for Ukrainian military personnel to operate subsonic cruise missiles with INS/GPS guidance and low-level profiles like the Tomahawk are therefore consistent with those of other accelerated programs already seen in Ukraines favor (HIMARS, ATACMS, and Patriot, for example). A few dozen days, nota minimum of six months, perhaps a year.The US government itselfclaimsthatwith Typhon/MRC-type land-based launchers, crews can be qualified in weeks, one or two months at most.The complexity of the operation therefore lies in the American political will to authorize the use of those missiles, not in learning how to push the button.
my column for the Italian newspaper La Ragione copyrighted photo
Without encrypted security keys, targeting data, cartographic consistency, updated terrain models, American intelligence and logistics (including depot-level maintenance, which often remains the responsibility of the supplier country), even with expertise and a mission-planning pipeline,Ukraine cannot fly American and European missiles without Washingtons approval.
me in a Soviet-era Ukrainian air base copyrighted photo
????YOUR SUPPORT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE????
????????請幫助我們購買反無人機РЕБ設備????????????
(https://www.paypal.com/pools/c/9jdpPchpGi)
在過去的三年裏，作為自由撰稿人，我們一直在烏克蘭戰爭的所有前線進行報道，自從大規模
謊言白宮
作者：Giorgio Provinciali
來自烏克蘭的現場報道????????
普裏盧基（Pryluky）我從前線撰寫了一千多篇文章，在其中很大一部分用於揭穿俄羅斯的謊言之後，始料未及的是，我的文章會同樣用於揭穿美國的謊言。然而，唐納德川普總統昨天散布的謊言實在太過離譜，我不能再保持沉默。
（圖：唐納德川普發表在他的社交媒體的聲明）
在與北約秘書長馬克呂特舉行的白宮新聞發布會上，川普否認了《華爾街日報》的報道，該報道稱美國正在解除對烏克蘭使用歐洲遠程導彈襲擊俄羅斯聯邦境內目標的限製，並聲稱美國與這些導彈毫無關係。無論限製是否解除，這種說法都是美國現政府慣有的技術和政治虛假信息的一部分。
川普說我無法控製他們的導彈。從技術上講，這完全是錯誤的。風暴之影（Storm Shadow）和斯卡普-EG（SCALP-EG）導彈包含美國來源的關鍵組件，包括SAASM GPS導航芯片組（或同等的美國提供的M代碼）、航空電子子組件如INS/IMU單元、遙測模塊、一些製導ASIC和受ITAR（國際武器貿易條例）約束的公司製造的執行器，以及軟件，包括北約標準固件（STANAG 3910, 4586）這些組件的出口和使用需要獲得美國國務院的豁免。川普稱之為歐洲的導彈並完全如此：大約15-25%的硬件和軟件組件源自美國，受ITAR法規約束。因此，美國實際上對其最終用途持有技術和法律否決權。記住這一點很容易，因為當喬拜登領導的上屆美國政府猶豫不決時，這個問題曾引發了一場激烈的辯論，並拖延了幾個月才批準英法兩國供應這些導彈（這些導彈的標稱射程約為300公裏，根本不屬於遠程導彈，而是中程導彈）。正如阿拉佩爾德和我多次在本刊強調的那樣，雖然這些武器的來源是歐洲，但它們的瞄準包（任務數據盒）使用標準化的北約格式，並依賴於美國為GPS組件提供的加密密鑰。
具體來說，導航密鑰（P(Y)代碼或M代碼）由美國國防部發布。因此，所有使用這些導彈進行的中遠程打擊都基於北約/美國共享情報（IMINT、SIGINT、SATINT）進行規劃。此外，任務規劃中使用的測高地圖和數字地形模型也來源於美國協調的數據庫。如果沒有對這些數據集的訪問權限，斯卡普和風暴之影導彈將麵臨與地麵碰撞的嚴重風險。因此，我無法控製它們的說法在技術上和法律上都是錯誤的。
這就是為什麽ITAR組件的出口也就是這些武器的交付在2023年需要獲得美國的同意。提供給烏克蘭的每一枚具有該射程的西方導彈都與屬於北約/美國的管轄和監督之下的硬件、軟件、導航和情報鏈條相關聯。隻需回憶一下美國暫停向烏克蘭提供這些服務大約48小時（造成庫爾斯克行動的致命癱瘓）所引起的軒然大波，就能理解所有導致按下按鈕的係統、加密密鑰以及發射電路數據都依賴於美國的架構和基礎控製。這就是為什麽俄羅斯當局立即宣布，烏克蘭使用這些導彈相當於美國參戰。
（圖片來源：Межа）
美國總統不滿足於此，他繼續了他的表演，又編造了一個謊言，任何有自尊心的工程師都會感到如鯁在喉。川普真真切切地聲稱，訓練烏克蘭武裝部隊使用戰斧導彈至少需要六個月，通常是一年。這種說法顯然是錯誤的，因為烏克蘭已經在使用非常類似的巡航導彈，並且還在自己生產其他導彈。說白了：操作像斯卡普/風暴之影、戰斧、海王星或火烈鳥這樣的巡航導彈需要兩個獨立的模塊：規劃（定義路線、航路點、禁飛區、穿透剖麵、定時等）和發射係統（正如美國政府在其官方渠道上指出的那樣，戰斧導彈最初是為VLS/TT設計的，但也存在如Typhon/MRC等陸基發射器，可以從TEL平台發射）。
如果想從空中發射戰斧導彈，則需要進行飛機集成，但烏克蘭已經展示了其能夠非常迅速的在蘇-24M上使用斯卡普/風暴之影導彈的能力（首次部署在幾天之內完成）。此後，發射過程基本上是例行公事。烏克蘭已經使用斯卡普-EG和風暴之影導彈超過兩年，取得了優異的成績，例如對布良斯克地區的縱深打擊，並且正在開發和使用火烈鳥導彈係列和R-360海王星導彈，包括今年投入使用的遠程海王星變型，以及陸攻變型。
因此，烏克蘭軍事人員操作具有INS/GPS製導和低空飛行剖麵的亞音速巡航導彈（如戰斧）的實際培訓和資格達標時間與其他加速項目（例如HIMARS、ATACMS和愛國者）需要的時間一致，烏克蘭有能力快速完成，幾個星期，而不是至少六個月，甚至一年。美國政府本身聲稱，使用Typhon/MRC型陸基發射器，機組人員可以在幾周內，最多一到兩個月內獲得資格。因此，操作的複雜性在於美國授權使用這些導彈的政治意願，而不是學習如何按下按鈕。
（圖：我在意大利報紙La Ragione上的專欄文章版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
如果沒有加密的安全密鑰、目標數據、製圖一致性、更新的地形模型、美國的情報和後勤（包括基地級維護，這通常仍然是供應國的責任），即使擁有專業知識和任務規劃流程，未經華盛頓批準，烏克蘭也無法讓美國和歐洲的導彈起飛。
（圖：我在蘇聯時代的烏克蘭空軍基地版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
