In space no one can hear you......
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be facked though. The US and UK have nuclear submarines hidden under the arctic ice just ready to launch hundreds of nukes at Russia and they would be impossible to stop. So unless Russia have a death wish they’d not launch any of their own and it would be a case of NATO demanding Russia leave Ukraine and no war would need to happen.
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 18 seconds ago
Shugs exactly! Hypersonic weapons and people want to risk nations being flattened and pretty much causing near extinction. No matter how abhorrent Russia are, this is not an acceptable course of action as people and humanity should be allowed to continue. Putin will be dead and things will change, risking complete elimination is not ever going to be justified
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robbs right about the best hope being an internal threat removing Putin tbh
Hitler hand picked his people too but they still tried to kill him.
At the end of the day most people prefer not to die
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 1 second ago
Diafol - they are yes men and wouldn’t dare question authority. They will follow to the death.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know this for sure?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody knows anything for sure but nothing has happened so far to suggest otherwise.
Re the nuke thing…it’s a difficult one really. If he nukes Ukraine with no repercussions (beyond financial sanctions) then what’s to stop him doing it again. On the flip side, if NATO were to get involved, what’s to stop him doing it again? Either way we are snookered and he knows it.
There is the 3rd option if just nuking Moscow on the sly and killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of innocent civilians as collateral damage and forcing Russia into submission, which obviously sounds completely inhumane, but in theory could also save millions more lives worldwide.
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be facked though. The US and UK have nuclear submarines hidden under the arctic ice just ready to launch hundreds of nukes at Russia and they would be impossible to stop. So unless Russia have a death wish they’d not launch any of their own and it would be a case of NATO demanding Russia leave Ukraine and no war would need to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I agree... Russia would be smashed as well
If it ever gets to the stage of firing a nuke at the west then it's over for everyone
You're talking him needing to be even more of a mad man than we already think he is though
If he's going full "James bond bad guy" though... He'll know what's coming so he'll empty his arsenal.
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be facked though. The US and UK have nuclear submarines hidden under the arctic ice just ready to launch hundreds of nukes at Russia and they would be impossible to stop. So unless Russia have a death wish they’d not launch any of their own and it would be a case of NATO demanding Russia leave Ukraine and no war would need to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I agree... Russia would be smashed as well
If it ever gets to the stage of firing a nuke at the west then it's over for everyone
You're talking him needing to be even more of a mad man than we already think he is though
If he's going full "James bond bad guy" though... He'll know what's coming so he'll empty his arsenal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps but I think the threat of oblivion will be enough to either scare him or his people around him as I’m sure they want to live above ground for the rest of their lives
Even if only russia set off all their nukes and received no retaliation, they've still literally facked themselves.
There would appear to be a number of caveats with this threat.
(A) It is not likely that any use of a nuclear weapon will not be the full works but a more localised tactical weapon. However, that is likely to trigger a more positive response from NATO.
(B) You would hope that the generals would be more inclined to put a stop to Putin if he tries to go that far.
(C) China will have something to say. They, too, will be at risk if full nuclear weapons are deployed, just from the fall out dependent on the prevailing winds.
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Little fact checking would be good here. The Tsar Bomb was detonated in 1961 and there is not other Tsar Bomb.
Was the biggest bomb ever detonated, but no longer exists.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tsar-Bomba
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 39 seconds ago
What are the options:
1) The west instantly nukes Moscow in the hope that it puts an instant end to this.
2) The west instantly nukes Moscow and nuclear Armageddon begins.
3) We get involved in a land war with a nation that has just used a nuke as an offensive weapon. WW3 is triggered
4) We send in the SAS/Navy seals types to try and kill Putin. IF it goes wrong, WW3 is triggered.
5) We try to deescalate the situation in political ways, letting Putin know he can do what he wants.
6) We do nothing, they take Ukraine, letting Putin know he can do what he wants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7) NATO declare war on Russia knowing that Putin knows he has zero chance of winning and the terms of ending said war depends on Russia removing every troop from every inch of Ukraine with promises to never step foot in the country again. Hopefully the threat of being wiped off the map spurs Russia into backing down without a single NATO soldier being killed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He has more nukes and faster nukes than anyone else... He's not going to be thinking he has zero chance of winning
It'll never be a boots on the ground war against Russia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
U sure about that ? America alone dearf russias annual military soending. If theyre better equipped in any departments its been a massive failure and neglect from the west.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia have more nuclear weapons than the west combined. He wil wipe the west completely out of existence. There is no point having ground troops when he has nuclear submarines patrolling from naval bases all the time. There is no winner in this. Both sides will be destroyed. The only solution is a peace treaty whereby both parties are content with.
If he deployed a nuclear weapon it would get extremely difficult for NATO. Depending on the size, I would imagine NATO members could claim fallout from the blast impacted them and was therefore an attack. Very scary territory.
For all the reasons already stated on this thread however I would hope it’s a slim risk. The next issues to navigate will be what to do if genocide is independently evidenced and verified. I think I read the UN convention requires a response in that situation - although what that response actually is I think is open.
Then there’s chemical weapons. Old grandad Biden has already made some comments on Russia’s use of chemical weapons and again I think that is a tricky issue. It’s also pretty likely as the desperation move imo.
Everyone (well, almost everyone) wants to avoid WW3 and I think even genocide and chemical will be managed politically and through sanctions. Nuclear would be extremely challenging though.
im a little concerned at the national security of all parties involved right now, as a handfull of drunk football fans on an open forum can discuss nuclear capabilities and strategies on a slow monday afternoon. These are the same people the have insider knowledge of Roman Abramoviches past dealings. I never knew Mossad were so into english football, better start supporting Hapoel Tel Aviv just in case, this is only a contingency plan should Chelsea fc go into administration before sunset as supporters of other clubs have informed us will happen.
If he deployed a nuclear weapon it would get extremely difficult for NATO. Depending on the size, I would imagine NATO members could claim fallout from the blast impacted them and was therefore an attack. Very scary territory.
…….
Weather patterns would suggest fallout would likely affect his own people rather than NATO countries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
no nukes will be dropped by anyone, stop reading social media
it's cancer for your brain
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 45 minutes ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pretty cool bible verse.
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 4 hours, 4 minutes ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Top flicπ
comment by vavarising (U21731)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
im a little concerned at the national security of all parties involved right now, as a handfull of drunk football fans on an open forum can discuss nuclear capabilities and strategies on a slow monday afternoon. These are the same people the have insider knowledge of Roman Abramoviches past dealings. I never knew Mossad were so into english football, better start supporting Hapoel Tel Aviv just in case, this is only a contingency plan should Chelsea fc go into administration before sunset as supporters of other clubs have informed us will happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeland is a good watch.π
comment by RB&W - What is it now, Ralf? (U21434)
posted 8 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - What is it now, Ralf? (U21434)
posted 1 minute ago
What exactly do you mean by 'help and step in' if Russia decides to nuke a non-NATO, european country?
Bear in mind that you say that you are not desperate for any war between Russia and NATO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not desperate for any war. But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be one if Russia go too far (if they haven’t already). You’ve made your feelings clear by saying you wouldn’t support a war even if a NATO country was attacked and fair enough, that’s your opinion. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t the right thing to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For NATO, the 'right thing to do' is to try and prevent, at all costs, a nuclear war and pending extinction of mankind and Earth just over the netrality of the non NATO, Eastern Ukraine regions bordering Russia. Even Zelensky would settle for that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems reasonable.
comment by Lurker (U21432)
posted 4 hours, 19 minutes ago
no nukes will be dropped by anyone, stop reading social media
it's cancer for your brain
----------------------------------------------------------------------
π
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 9 hours, 11 minutes ago
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 17 seconds ago
Chemical and biological are clearly not enough as they are reserving some sanctions for that escalation. But ye the nuke question is a tough one. I still get the feeling that Putin knows not to go down that slippery slope. But if he does then it is a tough one for NATO. They'd have to immediately stop all oil and gas purchases from Russia at least ( would happen if full war broke out anyway) but might get away with not intervening as what is the point of NATO if you just get involved in wars for other countries anyway?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if they made ukraine give up their own nuclear deterrent under promise theyd not be attacked or nuked by certain parties inc russia they kinda have an obligation in my eyes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Promise’
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 5 hours, 36 minutes ago
If he deployed a nuclear weapon it would get extremely difficult for NATO. Depending on the size, I would imagine NATO members could claim fallout from the blast impacted them and was therefore an attack. Very scary territory.
…….
Weather patterns would suggest fallout would likely affect his own people rather than NATO countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He’ll just seed some rain clouds like they did after Chernobyl to minimise what reached Moscow
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 4 hours, 4 minutes ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Top flicπ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's a great film TBAB
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 1 hour, 41 minutes ago
comment by vavarising (U21731)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
im a little concerned at the national security of all parties involved right now, as a handfull of drunk football fans on an open forum can discuss nuclear capabilities and strategies on a slow monday afternoon. These are the same people the have insider knowledge of Roman Abramoviches past dealings. I never knew Mossad were so into english football, better start supporting Hapoel Tel Aviv just in case, this is only a contingency plan should Chelsea fc go into administration before sunset as supporters of other clubs have informed us will happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeland is a good watch.π
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Season 1 yes, season 2-7 are comedy
Sign in if you want to comment
If Russia nukes Ukraine
Page 3 of 4
posted on 18/4/22
In space no one can hear you......
posted on 18/4/22
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be facked though. The US and UK have nuclear submarines hidden under the arctic ice just ready to launch hundreds of nukes at Russia and they would be impossible to stop. So unless Russia have a death wish they’d not launch any of their own and it would be a case of NATO demanding Russia leave Ukraine and no war would need to happen.
posted on 18/4/22
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 18 seconds ago
Shugs exactly! Hypersonic weapons and people want to risk nations being flattened and pretty much causing near extinction. No matter how abhorrent Russia are, this is not an acceptable course of action as people and humanity should be allowed to continue. Putin will be dead and things will change, risking complete elimination is not ever going to be justified
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robbs right about the best hope being an internal threat removing Putin tbh
Hitler hand picked his people too but they still tried to kill him.
At the end of the day most people prefer not to die
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 1 second ago
Diafol - they are yes men and wouldn’t dare question authority. They will follow to the death.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know this for sure?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody knows anything for sure but nothing has happened so far to suggest otherwise.
Re the nuke thing…it’s a difficult one really. If he nukes Ukraine with no repercussions (beyond financial sanctions) then what’s to stop him doing it again. On the flip side, if NATO were to get involved, what’s to stop him doing it again? Either way we are snookered and he knows it.
There is the 3rd option if just nuking Moscow on the sly and killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of innocent civilians as collateral damage and forcing Russia into submission, which obviously sounds completely inhumane, but in theory could also save millions more lives worldwide.
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be facked though. The US and UK have nuclear submarines hidden under the arctic ice just ready to launch hundreds of nukes at Russia and they would be impossible to stop. So unless Russia have a death wish they’d not launch any of their own and it would be a case of NATO demanding Russia leave Ukraine and no war would need to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I agree... Russia would be smashed as well
If it ever gets to the stage of firing a nuke at the west then it's over for everyone
You're talking him needing to be even more of a mad man than we already think he is though
If he's going full "James bond bad guy" though... He'll know what's coming so he'll empty his arsenal.
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be facked though. The US and UK have nuclear submarines hidden under the arctic ice just ready to launch hundreds of nukes at Russia and they would be impossible to stop. So unless Russia have a death wish they’d not launch any of their own and it would be a case of NATO demanding Russia leave Ukraine and no war would need to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I agree... Russia would be smashed as well
If it ever gets to the stage of firing a nuke at the west then it's over for everyone
You're talking him needing to be even more of a mad man than we already think he is though
If he's going full "James bond bad guy" though... He'll know what's coming so he'll empty his arsenal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps but I think the threat of oblivion will be enough to either scare him or his people around him as I’m sure they want to live above ground for the rest of their lives
posted on 18/4/22
Even if only russia set off all their nukes and received no retaliation, they've still literally facked themselves.
posted on 18/4/22
There would appear to be a number of caveats with this threat.
(A) It is not likely that any use of a nuclear weapon will not be the full works but a more localised tactical weapon. However, that is likely to trigger a more positive response from NATO.
(B) You would hope that the generals would be more inclined to put a stop to Putin if he tries to go that far.
(C) China will have something to say. They, too, will be at risk if full nuclear weapons are deployed, just from the fall out dependent on the prevailing winds.
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does Russia have more Nuclear warheads than NATO? And faster ones as we have recently learnt? Not that it has much bearing on this discussion.
What do you think.?
_______________
me? probably do have more nukes, i wouldnt expect them to be more effective though or have the better capabilities use them effectively. I expect the west to have better intel/defences, the air control and all the rest vs russia. America alone should tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia has more nukes than the USA, UK and France put together
Their Tsar Bomba missile is the fastest in the world
There is no real defence against a nuke. The US has a missile defence system that it has described as trying to stop a bullet with a bullet... And admits it has a very limited ability to destroy an incoming icb missile.
Air control means little. You wouldn't be able to hit their launch sites in time should they start readying to fire.
20 minutes would be the time from launch to London disappearing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Little fact checking would be good here. The Tsar Bomb was detonated in 1961 and there is not other Tsar Bomb.
Was the biggest bomb ever detonated, but no longer exists.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tsar-Bomba
posted on 18/4/22
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 39 seconds ago
What are the options:
1) The west instantly nukes Moscow in the hope that it puts an instant end to this.
2) The west instantly nukes Moscow and nuclear Armageddon begins.
3) We get involved in a land war with a nation that has just used a nuke as an offensive weapon. WW3 is triggered
4) We send in the SAS/Navy seals types to try and kill Putin. IF it goes wrong, WW3 is triggered.
5) We try to deescalate the situation in political ways, letting Putin know he can do what he wants.
6) We do nothing, they take Ukraine, letting Putin know he can do what he wants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7) NATO declare war on Russia knowing that Putin knows he has zero chance of winning and the terms of ending said war depends on Russia removing every troop from every inch of Ukraine with promises to never step foot in the country again. Hopefully the threat of being wiped off the map spurs Russia into backing down without a single NATO soldier being killed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He has more nukes and faster nukes than anyone else... He's not going to be thinking he has zero chance of winning
It'll never be a boots on the ground war against Russia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
U sure about that ? America alone dearf russias annual military soending. If theyre better equipped in any departments its been a massive failure and neglect from the west.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russia have more nuclear weapons than the west combined. He wil wipe the west completely out of existence. There is no point having ground troops when he has nuclear submarines patrolling from naval bases all the time. There is no winner in this. Both sides will be destroyed. The only solution is a peace treaty whereby both parties are content with.
posted on 18/4/22
If he deployed a nuclear weapon it would get extremely difficult for NATO. Depending on the size, I would imagine NATO members could claim fallout from the blast impacted them and was therefore an attack. Very scary territory.
For all the reasons already stated on this thread however I would hope it’s a slim risk. The next issues to navigate will be what to do if genocide is independently evidenced and verified. I think I read the UN convention requires a response in that situation - although what that response actually is I think is open.
Then there’s chemical weapons. Old grandad Biden has already made some comments on Russia’s use of chemical weapons and again I think that is a tricky issue. It’s also pretty likely as the desperation move imo.
Everyone (well, almost everyone) wants to avoid WW3 and I think even genocide and chemical will be managed politically and through sanctions. Nuclear would be extremely challenging though.
posted on 18/4/22
im a little concerned at the national security of all parties involved right now, as a handfull of drunk football fans on an open forum can discuss nuclear capabilities and strategies on a slow monday afternoon. These are the same people the have insider knowledge of Roman Abramoviches past dealings. I never knew Mossad were so into english football, better start supporting Hapoel Tel Aviv just in case, this is only a contingency plan should Chelsea fc go into administration before sunset as supporters of other clubs have informed us will happen.
posted on 18/4/22
If he deployed a nuclear weapon it would get extremely difficult for NATO. Depending on the size, I would imagine NATO members could claim fallout from the blast impacted them and was therefore an attack. Very scary territory.
…….
Weather patterns would suggest fallout would likely affect his own people rather than NATO countries.
posted on 18/4/22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
posted on 18/4/22
no nukes will be dropped by anyone, stop reading social media
it's cancer for your brain
posted on 18/4/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 45 minutes ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pretty cool bible verse.
posted on 18/4/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 4 hours, 4 minutes ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Top flicπ
posted on 18/4/22
comment by vavarising (U21731)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
im a little concerned at the national security of all parties involved right now, as a handfull of drunk football fans on an open forum can discuss nuclear capabilities and strategies on a slow monday afternoon. These are the same people the have insider knowledge of Roman Abramoviches past dealings. I never knew Mossad were so into english football, better start supporting Hapoel Tel Aviv just in case, this is only a contingency plan should Chelsea fc go into administration before sunset as supporters of other clubs have informed us will happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeland is a good watch.π
posted on 18/4/22
comment by RB&W - What is it now, Ralf? (U21434)
posted 8 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by Robbb Lasso πΊπ¦ π¦πΊ πͺπΈ (U22716)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - What is it now, Ralf? (U21434)
posted 1 minute ago
What exactly do you mean by 'help and step in' if Russia decides to nuke a non-NATO, european country?
Bear in mind that you say that you are not desperate for any war between Russia and NATO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not desperate for any war. But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be one if Russia go too far (if they haven’t already). You’ve made your feelings clear by saying you wouldn’t support a war even if a NATO country was attacked and fair enough, that’s your opinion. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t the right thing to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For NATO, the 'right thing to do' is to try and prevent, at all costs, a nuclear war and pending extinction of mankind and Earth just over the netrality of the non NATO, Eastern Ukraine regions bordering Russia. Even Zelensky would settle for that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems reasonable.
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Lurker (U21432)
posted 4 hours, 19 minutes ago
no nukes will be dropped by anyone, stop reading social media
it's cancer for your brain
----------------------------------------------------------------------
π
posted on 18/4/22
comment by InBefore (U20589)
posted 9 hours, 11 minutes ago
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 17 seconds ago
Chemical and biological are clearly not enough as they are reserving some sanctions for that escalation. But ye the nuke question is a tough one. I still get the feeling that Putin knows not to go down that slippery slope. But if he does then it is a tough one for NATO. They'd have to immediately stop all oil and gas purchases from Russia at least ( would happen if full war broke out anyway) but might get away with not intervening as what is the point of NATO if you just get involved in wars for other countries anyway?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if they made ukraine give up their own nuclear deterrent under promise theyd not be attacked or nuked by certain parties inc russia they kinda have an obligation in my eyes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Promise’
posted on 18/4/22
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 5 hours, 36 minutes ago
If he deployed a nuclear weapon it would get extremely difficult for NATO. Depending on the size, I would imagine NATO members could claim fallout from the blast impacted them and was therefore an attack. Very scary territory.
…….
Weather patterns would suggest fallout would likely affect his own people rather than NATO countries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He’ll just seed some rain clouds like they did after Chernobyl to minimise what reached Moscow
posted on 18/4/22
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 4 hours, 4 minutes ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItjLzPFZYEk
Chill out honey bunny π°
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Top flicπ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's a great film TBAB
posted on 18/4/22
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 1 hour, 41 minutes ago
comment by vavarising (U21731)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
im a little concerned at the national security of all parties involved right now, as a handfull of drunk football fans on an open forum can discuss nuclear capabilities and strategies on a slow monday afternoon. These are the same people the have insider knowledge of Roman Abramoviches past dealings. I never knew Mossad were so into english football, better start supporting Hapoel Tel Aviv just in case, this is only a contingency plan should Chelsea fc go into administration before sunset as supporters of other clubs have informed us will happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeland is a good watch.π
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Season 1 yes, season 2-7 are comedy
Page 3 of 4