Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Ignore I dont care. You arent that important anyway.If he goes MAD?
You don't even understand the questions posed by this discussion. Or is a military mindset blacking it out of your head. Get with the discussion or be ignored again.
You forget about Bin Laden's 9/11 attack?And?
Were we attacked in Afghanistan? The mighty Afghan army was invading the east coast?
You forget about Bin Laden's 9/11 attack?
You are the one talking nuclear weapons. I do not anticipate it, as it is not advantageous for Putin to use, tactical or otherwise. Try to calm yourself.I think you're contemplating the possibilities if Russia resorts to a tactical nuclear weapon. But you're still avoiding the question of Russia using a nuclear weapon on the Ukraine, which would be the most likely of possibilities.
As to Russia using a nuke on Poland or one of the surrounding Nato countries, your military mindset has to be suggesting that MAD is not inevitable.
My opinion remains, that the use of a tactical nuclear weapon that doesn't violate the mutually agreed upon rules of the war, would not trigger a full scale nuclear war.
Does America have an option for the use of a tactical nuclear weapon?
Does Russia have an option for the use of a tactical nuclear weapon?
These are questions in a discussion that propagandists would rather not be asked.
Are you of the opinion that MAD isn't inevitable? Your anger seems to be taking this conversation between us to a new level. That's telling.
You did not read the article or just rejected it?Are you drunk?
Again, you claimed, falsely, that NATO stepped up to protect us. NATO did nothing of the kind. A coalition of nation, many of them outside of NATO, joined in the attack on Afghanistan, which posed no threat to America.
Seriously, you are so full of shit.
You did not read the article or just rejected it?
Yes.You are the one talking nuclear weapons.
The military mindset can't be cracked. That makes it impossible for you to explore any possibilities.I do not anticipate it, as it is not advantageous for Putin to use, tactical or otherwise. Try to calm yourself.
Dude, the article does not support your claim.
No one questioned that there was an international coalition invading Afghanistan. I pointed out that NATO has never protected AMERICA.
You offered a straw man fallacy in hopes of distracting from the issue and the facts.
www.businessinsider.com
www.theatlantic.com
So, you are postulating, Putin is just mad dog crazy and would use them, even if not to tactical advantage or strategic advantage?Yes.
The military mindset can't be cracked. That makes it impossible for you to explore any possibilities.
So I'll just state my perception of what is possible and becoming quite probable.
Russia will use a tactical nuclear weapon on the Ukraine. The US won't respond with a nuclear weapon on Russia.
And slightly less probable, the same if Russia uses a nuclear weapon on Poland or a Nato country.
I've made myself clear for you. No response from you is required.
Nato has always been a tool for US aggression. The current conflict is proving that out more clearly now than ever before.
NATO is still living with the consequences of a historic decision it made hours after 9/11
After 20 years of fighting in Afghanistan, NATO members face hard questions about their commitment to the alliance.
The only time in history that Article 5 has been invoked was after the September 11 attacks, a fact that Trump mentioned. The memorial Trump was dedicating is a piece of steel from the North Tower that fell during the attacks.
“We remember and mourn those nearly 3,000 people who were brutally murdered by terrorists on September 11, 2001,” Trump said. “Our NATO allies responded swiftly and decisively, invoking for the first time in its history the Article 5 collective-defense commitment.”
Trump Declines to Affirm NATO's Article 5
Speaking in front of the leaders of its member-nations, the president fails to make clear the United States still has the alliance’s back.
Your anti-American opinion noted. You are on ignore, so you can make your case to somebody else.Nato has always been a tool for US aggression. The current conflict is proving that out more clearly now than ever before.
Even MSNBC has starting to pick up on that truth yesterday afternoon. The question being considered is whether America is going too far from the stated reason of helping the Ukraine.
This is undoubtedly being inspired by suspicions of nuclear war could result from US actions against Russia.
Perhaps some others witnessed the exchange between Mohedin and ..............??
This by the media outlet most sympathetic of Biden's war to save the Ukraine!
We'll have to wait to see if they're punished for airing their opinions?
Thanks for coming back to the discussion. I suspected you would need to.So, you are postulating, Putin is just mad dog crazy and would use them, even if not to tactical advantage or strategic advantage?
Not necessarily due to low radiation yield being available in tactical weapons. But also in secondary importance to Russia accepting defeat.No. You cannot crack my military mindset to sell me that crock of crap. Prevailing wind would give Russia and Russsian held territory (already stolen from Ukraine) the lions share of fallout.
Kiev or outskirts would be my vision on what is probable. I think you're having to downplay the possibilities on account of you never being able to accept that this is a war between America and Russia. We don't need to debate that any further. I won't now that I've made myself clear on my perceptions.There is no mass assembly area, suitable for targeting inside Ukraine.
Yes, it could but it would also be a situation in which the rules of this war are thrown outIt would further galvanize international condemnation of Russia as a pariah state and could trigger involvement beyond Ukraine borders.
I find it inevitable that dumb moves will be made by one side or the other. But not fatal moves that result in allout nuclear war. That's my ace in the hole so to speak.Really really dumb move. He is not going to do it.
You've already tried that kind of spam with me and it failed. You had to come back to address the questions first.Try to get some sleep if you can and talk to somebody professional of your anxiety attacks.
NATO is still living with the consequences of a historic decision it made hours after 9/11
After 20 years of fighting in Afghanistan, NATO members face hard questions about their commitment to the alliance.
The only time in history that Article 5 has been invoked was after the September 11 attacks, a fact that Trump mentioned. The memorial Trump was dedicating is a piece of steel from the North Tower that fell during the attacks.
“We remember and mourn those nearly 3,000 people who were brutally murdered by terrorists on September 11, 2001,” Trump said. “Our NATO allies responded swiftly and decisively, invoking for the first time in its history the Article 5 collective-defense commitment.”
Trump Declines to Affirm NATO's Article 5
Speaking in front of the leaders of its member-nations, the president fails to make clear the United States still has the alliance’s back.
Weak response on your part.Still doesn't support your claim. NATO joined a coalition that included a dozen non-NATO countries in invading Afghanistan.
{This was a watershed moment for the alliance. Failure to invoke Article 5 would have rendered NATO obsolete. Instead, the alliance, which had struggled to find its raison d'être following the collapse of the Soviet Union, was propelled into Afghanistan and the fight against terrorism.}
Sounds self-serving.
Weak response on your part.
NATO was formed to counter the USSR. The USSR were assholes and why everyone of the countries left their sorry asses.Nato has always been a tool for US aggression. The current conflict is proving that out more clearly now than ever before.
Even MSNBC has starting to pick up on that truth yesterday afternoon. The question being considered is whether America is going too far from the stated reason of helping the Ukraine.
This is undoubtedly being inspired by suspicions of nuclear war could result from US actions against Russia.
Perhaps some others witnessed the exchange between Mohedin and ..............??
This by the media outlet most sympathetic of Biden's war to save the Ukraine!
We'll have to wait to see if they're punished for airing their opinions?
Not outdated, in my opinion. NATO supports freedom and autonomy from oppressive regimes and ideologies, bad for Europe and us here in the US. The world and indeed this includes the European nations, can be a fragile place. We can, do, and have a history of leadership. It has evolved this way, because of the history of times, we did not step up soon enough to lead to head things off, and it became brutal for all involved, including us. It is no time to turn our backs and let whatever happens, happen until we are forced to take a stand, at a much higher cost in young men, and material. We are there, with NATO, so we don't ever have to fight our way back onto that continent to help put down the attack of a ruthless nation gone rogue, again. It is still a vital mission and I support it.NATO has never defended America because there has never been a need for such defense. America is NATO. The treaty is to force us to protect them. It is also outdated.
Let's go Brandon!!!
Not outdated, in my opinion. NATO supports freedom and autonomy from oppressive regimes and ideologies, bad for Europe and us here in the US. The world and indeed this includes the European nations, can be a fragile place. We can, do, and have a history of leadership. It has evolved this way, because of the history of times, we did not step up soon enough to lead to head things off, and it became brutal for all involved, including us. It is no time to turn our backs and let whatever happens, happen until we are forced to take a stand, at a much higher cost in young men, and material. We are there, with NATO, so we don't ever have to fight our way back onto that continent to help put down the attack of a ruthless nation gone rogue, again. It is still a vital mission and I support it.
