🇺🇸 Donald Trump has decided against choosing Vivek Ramaswamy as his running mate and is now considering him for a position in his Cabinet, potentially as Homeland Security secretary, Bloomberg reports.

🔗 Republicans Against Trump

🌐🤝🇺🇦 Days ago, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico announced that some EU and NATO countries were considering the possibility of sending their military to Ukraine based on bilateral agreements. These are bilateral security agreements that Ukraine has concluded with Great Britain, Germany, and France. In Kyiv, this was termed the creation of a mini-NATO against Russia.

Recently, several European leaders made similar statements about deploying NATO forces to Ukraine. Is this mere rhetoric? No, they are shifting the Overton window within a well-structured political and media plans. Over the last 2 years, tens of thousands of troops have been deployed near Ukrainian borders.

Just last week, French President Emmanuel Macron stated that the possibility of Western countries sending troops to Ukraine cannot be dismissed. Although Germany, Britain, and the United States were quick to distance themselves from this assertion, the French leader not only stood his ground but intensified his stance: "There are no red lines." If the front in Ukraine moves towards Odessa or Kyiv, Paris may deploy its troops into the country."

Some Western leaders hope that the presence of NATO military personnel in key Ukrainian cities will deter Russian military actions and prevent the occupation of critical Ukrainian cities like Odessa.

Some readers may argue that Odessa is far from Russian reach. However, the construction of fortifications around Odessa during the winter, despite the frozen soil, indicates a clear understanding of the potential threat. The AFU know exactly what they are doing.

In my opinion, Ukraine can no longer defend itself. As previously reported, the Ukrainian army has lost the initiative, leading to a strategy that slows down the inevitable Russian advances, utilizing FPV drones and incurring high infantry costs due to scarce equipment.

This is precisely why I believe the West will intervene in Ukraine, especially in Odessa. I cannot envision the West allowing Russians to occupy Odessa and turn Ukraine into a landlocked country. This could be the ignition point of a major conflict.

According to Russians, the British Secret Intelligence Service MI6 created the so-called Initiative to Guarantee the Independence of Ukraine in 2024. While the details are murky, an intervention plan seems evident.

The Russians claim this involves deploying NATO troops to Ukraine to secure the border with Belarus and near Nikolaev, to create a human barrier en route to Odessa.

In fact, the Ukrainians are building defensive lines, but the details regarding their extent and exact locations remain unclear. Some voices arguea bout 2.000km, but it's mostly to be 1/4 of that in spaced fortifications.

However, it's quite obvious that the question is no longer "if" NATO troops will be sent to Ukraine but "when." All indications point to an intervention by NATO countries when Russian troops open the northeast fronts and advance over Zaporozhye.

At a base near the Romanian village of Cincu, the construction of barracks, a hospital, and warehouses to accommodate 4,000-6,000 French soldiers and 50 Leclerc tanks is underway. This effort required preparing all the infrastructure for a large number of soldiers and heavy weaponry, with Paris providing the heavy construction equipment and Bucharest contributing builders and materials. This is known in France as the "Graduated Response Plan," active since 2022, or "Mission Aigle." 'Graduated' means France can send additional troops. Currently, about 1,500 French forces are there.

⬇️ Continued:

🔗 Patricia Marins

🇺🇸 🚀 The US government seems serious about developing a lunar economy

For the first time ever, the United States is getting serious about fostering an economy on the Moon.

NASA, of course, is in the midst of developing the Artemis program to return humans to the Moon. As part of this initiative, NASA seeks to foster a lunar economy in which the space agency is not the sole customer.

That's easier said than done. A whole host of conditions must be met for a lunar economy to thrive. There must be something there that can be sold, be it resources, a unique environment for scientific research, low-gravity manufacturing, tourism, or another source of value. Reliable transportation to the Moon must be available. And there needs to be a host of services, such as power and communications for machines and people on the lunar surface. So yeah, it's a lot.

In recent months, a US Defense organization, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, has stepped in to help. This is important because DARPA is a key supporter of emerging technologies with a track record of success. (DARPA, for example, bought the very first launch on SpaceX's Falcon 1 rocket.) Last year, the defense agency announced it was initiating a study, LunA-10, to understand how best to facilitate a thriving lunar economy by 2035.

In December, DARPA announced that it was working with 14 different companies under LunA-10, including major space players such as Northrop Grumman and SpaceX, as well as non-space firms such as Nokia. These companies are assessing how services such as power and communications could be established on the Moon, and they're due to provide a final report by June.

Things are moving faster than that, however. The DARPA program manager overseeing these activities, Major Michael "Orbit" Nayak, published a paper earlier this month based on learnings from these studies that only began a few months ago.

"Based on technical work and development conducted under the LunA-10 study, I have identified six hypotheses where, if revolutionary improvements in technology can be made, I assess that a direct acceleration to the fielding of a lunar economy is likely to occur," Nayak said in the paper.

🔗 https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/the-us-government-seems-serious-about-developing-a-lunar-economy/