How many of our MAGA members agree with Tucker Carlson? Tucker Carlson: "USA cannot win a conventional war against the Moscow empire."

Putin's economy is on the verge of collapse.

Rather than negotiating, we should bitch slap him and provide more aid to Ukraine until Putin drops to his knees and begs for mercy.
Trump cowers before Putin

He should threaten more military aid to Ukraine, more sanctions, NATO membership

Unless Putin comes to the table
 

How many of our MAGA members agree with Tucker Carlson? Tucker Carlson: "USA cannot win a conventional war against the Moscow empire."​

Srsly? The Ukraine military enjoys about a 1:3 advantage in casualties over Russian forces. For every soldier they lose, they take out about three Russians. That's not enough since the Russians have a lot more people and a leader who has no problem killing off a million or two of his own people.

But in a conventional war between the USA and Russia, the ratio would be about 1:100. We would lose dozens of men to their thousands.
 
The US can't ever beat Russia because we are totally profit motivated, and fighting Russia would bankrupt the US and end capitalism.
In fact, we are so close to bankruptcy right now, I doubt we could beat anyone.
We could not even beat the Vietnamese back in 1985, when we were much less in debt.

If there's a buck to be made, the MIC and their Congressional Flying Monkeys will make it happen
 
Wrong.
Since Putin is in the right and Kyiv is the criminal treaty violator, Russia is bound to win.
Our choice is whether or not we want to push Russia to the point they are forced to use their superior nuclear arsenal to totally destroy the US?
Hasn't that always been the deterrent? Both ways? So what's the point of this most stupid thread?
 
Hasn't that always been the deterrent? Both ways? So what's the point of this most stupid thread?
There are three basic types of deterrence:
1. Type I, or "providing stability". Basically it is like having capability to cause unacceptable damage to the enemy who tryed to attack your nuclear forces. Like saying "even if you attack our nuclear forces, survived part of them will retaliate and kill millions of your people". It is, basically, "The Credible Second Strike Capability".
2. Type II, or "providing multi-stability". Basically it is ability to use nukes (and suffer acceptable losses after enemy's retaliation) in the case of his extremely provocative behaviour, which is not, in fact, nuclear attack against your nuclear forces. Like saying: "If you do this extremely provocative thing, we'll attack your nuclear forces and suffer quite acceptable damage after your retaliation". It is "The Credible First Strike Capability". One more time - "The Credible First Strike Capability" is not about technical capability to attack first (both sides has it), it is about capability to degrade enemy's nuclear arsenal enough to suffer acceptable level of damage.
3. Type III is ability to fight and win a limited nuclear war.

What is "acceptable level of losses"? It is the level of losses you are ready to pay for achieving specific strategical or political goals. America is ready to sacrifice twenty million of Americans to not allow California join Shanghai Pact, Russia is ready to sacrifice twenty million of Russians to not allow Ukraine join NATO.
 
"USA cannot win a conventional war against the Moscow empire."
🇷🇺 Carlson is a loser which makes him think he is an expert on losers.
still, How many of our MAGA members agree with Tucker🇷🇺 Carlson?

ps can you send it to 🇷🇺him?
Moscow 🇷🇺 horde´s war record :-

1856 defeated by Britain and France

1905 defeated by Japan

1917 defeated by Germany

1920 defeated by Poland, Finland, Estonia and all Baltic states

1939 defeated by Finland

1969 defeated by China

1989 defeated by Afghanistan

1989 defeated in the Cold War.

1996 defeated by Chechnya

2022 defeated by Ukraine

2024 defeated in Syria

WW2 won USA/Britain , meanwhile Stalin's officers were shot or sent to the Gulags. Millions went to the Gulags, including Solzhenitsyn

Moscow's only victories come from invading smaller countries :-

a) Hungary 1956

b) Czechoslovakia 1968

c) Moldova 1992

d) Georgia 2008

We know that Tucker is that lily white, rich boi who has no idea what it takes to fight like a soldier; he is nothing but a mouth.
 
Putin's economy is on the verge of collapse.

Rather than negotiating, we should bitch slap him and provide more aid to Ukraine until Putin drops to his knees and begs for mercy.
The biggest hit to their economy is when the war ends.
 
Nobody can win a conventional war between the biggest nuclear powers on the globe. Too bad the war mongers don't understand that concept.
 
That's not enough since the Russians have a lot more people and a leader who has no problem killing off a million or two of his own people.
I am not sure about this part

 
Nobody can win a conventional war between the biggest nuclear powers on the globe.
Who (besides you) said that we have to fight the 🇷🇺🇸🇦horde conventionally?


 
Nobody can win a conventional war between the biggest nuclear powers on the globe. Too bad the war mongers don't understand that concept.
It would take 30 days to wipe out Putin's military, just like we wiped out the world's third largest military in Iraq in no time.
 
I am not sure about this part


Russia is in terminal decline but so is Ukraine. Russia still has more fighting age men
 
I have no idea what
🇷🇺 Putin wants Europe. He wants Alaska ("back"). But not because he's stronger — he's not. We’re 30 times stronger. He’s just betting we’ve lost our balls. That we’ll sit back, argue, hesitate. But here’s the truth: if we fight, we win. Every time. The only thing that can stop us… is us.


g5000

 
🇷🇺 Putin wants Europe. He wants Alaska ("back"). But not because he's stronger — he's not. We’re 30 times stronger. He’s just betting we’ve lost our balls. That we’ll sit back, argue, hesitate. But here’s the truth: if we fight, we win. Every time. The only thing that can stop us… is us.


g5000


Boring
 
Russia is in terminal decline but so is Ukraine. Russia still has more fighting age men
Russia does not have the financial resources to continue much longer.

And if Russia has more men, why are they calling in North Koreans and other outsiders to help?

Putin has suffered at least a million casualties. Even if he does have more men, the Russian people are reaching a breaking point in their tolerance.

All we have to do is keep supporting Ukraine and Putin will be begging for mercy.

The West collectively has far more resources than Putin.
 
Back
Top Bottom