Joe Biden’s administration has taken a significant step in escalating tensions with Russia, raising concerns over the possibility of a nuclear confrontation. The decision to provide Ukraine with long-range missiles capable of striking deep within Russian territory has sparked intense backlash, including sharp criticism from political commentator Tucker Carlson.
Carlson labeled the move as “the most evil thing I’ve ever seen in my lifetime,” highlighting the risks of igniting a global conflict during Biden’s remaining weeks in office.
The Biden administration recently authorized Ukraine to use the U.S.-supplied Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) for strikes inside Russia, a development reported by The Washington Post. The ATACMS is a supersonic-guided missile system with a range of approximately 190 miles, capable of delivering either cluster munitions or conventional warheads.
Ukraine has already deployed these missiles, reportedly targeting the Kursk and Bryansk regions in Russia. On Tuesday, six missiles were launched, with five intercepted by Russian air defense systems, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. The sixth missile caused a fire in a military facility’s technical zone after its fragments landed there.
This escalation coincides with reports of North Korea supplying thousands of troops to assist Russia. In response to Biden’s approval of long-range missiles, Russian President Vladimir Putin updated his country’s nuclear doctrine, stating that aggression by a non-nuclear country supported by a nuclear power would be treated as a joint attack.
In a related move, Biden reversed a previous policy by approving the use of antipersonnel land mines for Ukraine. The decision has drawn widespread criticism for increasing risks to civilians while contributing to an already volatile situation.
In his latest interview with journalist Glenn Greenwald, Tucker Carlson condemned Biden’s actions as reckless and dangerous.
“I think we’re watching the most evil thing I’ve ever seen in my lifetime,” Carlson said, referring to Biden’s approval of Ukraine’s use of U.S. missiles to strike inside Russia. “It’s the lame-duck administration leaving the next administration with a nuclear conflict, by allowing Ukraine, a proxy state of the United States, to strike within Russia.”
Carlson argued that Washington underestimates the political dynamics in Russia. “Putin is not a monarch with absolute power. Russian politics is complex, and he’s very concerned with his approval rating. He cannot appear weak. If attacks on Russia escalate and result in significant civilian casualties, Putin might feel compelled to launch a serious response, either against Ukraine, NATO, or even the U.S.”
He concluded that the decision to arm Ukraine with long-range weapons represents “the most evil thing” he has witnessed in his lifetime.
Glenn Greenwald echoed Carlson’s concerns, pointing to the timing of Biden’s decision. “For Joe Biden or whoever’s acting in his name to do this just two weeks after the country resoundingly rejected governance by the Democratic Party is astounding,” Greenwald said.
He accused Biden of taking these risks despite knowing he will leave office in a matter of weeks. “To make it so much more difficult for the incoming administration to fulfill its promise of resolving this war is irresponsible,” Greenwald stated. “Instead, Biden’s actions risk escalation with the world’s largest nuclear power—over what?”
“One of the most evil things I have ever seen in my lifetime. The lame duck administration (Biden) leaving the next administration with a world war, a nuclear conflict”
— Tucker pic.twitter.com/KZjqdA2zxJ
— Wall Street Mav (@WallStreetMav) November 20, 2024
Critics of Biden’s approach argue that these moves are not only dangerous but also politically motivated. Carlson and Greenwald suggest that the administration’s escalation could tie the hands of the next administration, preventing any effort to broker peace in the region.
Furthermore, the decision to approve land mines and long-range missile strikes raises ethical and humanitarian questions. The use of such weapons is widely condemned for their indiscriminate nature and long-term consequences on civilian populations.
As tensions rise, the risks of a larger conflict become more apparent. Putin’s updated nuclear doctrine serves as a stark reminder of the stakes involved. Any perception of weakness or loss of control could push Russia to retaliate, potentially drawing NATO or the United States into direct conflict.
Carlson warned that the situation could spiral out of control quickly. “If Putin feels cornered, he may have no choice but to escalate in ways we cannot predict,” he said. “This is the most dangerous game anyone has ever played.”
As the Biden administration doubles down on its support for Ukraine, critics like Carlson and Greenwald are calling for a reevaluation of U.S. policy in the region. With the transition of power looming, the actions taken in these final weeks could have long-lasting consequences for global security.
While the administration frames its decisions as a necessary response to Russian aggression, detractors argue that the risks far outweigh any potential benefits. Whether the incoming administration can de-escalate tensions remains to be seen, but for now, the specter of World War III looms larger than ever.
