Trump ultimatum: Open Hormuz in 48-hours or your powerplants will be destroyed. (Poll)

[Roudy]

Our illiterate Clown Poster Mouldy thinks that the loss of a double hand full of Freedom Fighters has crippled a nation of 90 million .

Oh ye of little Perception and Comprehension .
Iran has prepared for this very scenario for years -- two decades actually .
Rightly or wrongly they glory in martyrdom and have several individuals on Stand By for every key position .
Unlike the US Zionists or the insane Israeli cabinet .

“Double hand full” ha ha ha! What a delusional dipshit, try groups of Islamic terrorist subhuman leaders. What a phucking freak…calls IslamoNazi terrorist animals “freedom fighters”. That’s the problem with the Biden / Democrat open borders policy, you allow vermin like Luiza in.

 

[Roudy]

My detailed intel does not run to a list of targets but even a half wit should have known exactly the full effects of total war and the closing of Hormuz .

Which is why I think there might be a second Deep State narrative which intends world economic failure , huge disruption and loss of life .

Only Time will show how accurate that might be .
Or not .

Your detailed intel comes from Uranus.

 

[Roudy]

You have completely lost me but the only way to discuss a Cartoon character like Motor Mouth is with a degree of humour mixed with ridicule .
Same as with one testicle Uncle Adolf and his love of German Shepherds and kiddywinks .
Or, Macron the Beastie Boy with his love of his Dad who masquerades as his wife . etc etc

I tried Google Translate and it didn’t recognize your gibberish as a human language. You seem very fluent in Islamic donkey.

 

[Zavulon]

We don't escalate, Putin escalates. Invading a neighboring country gets punished.

Of course, in the terms of the ladder of escalation you do escalate. And, bombing and invading non-neighboring country gets punished. And, of course, collective self-defense (as it was with Republics of Novorussia) gets rewarded.

Assuming that the first strike hits all the targets they are supposed to hit, which won't happen if we shoot down most of them.

We'll see.

I would bet against that happening.

How many millions of American citizens and how many states of the USA are you ready to put on stake? If the nukes start flying you won't be able to get out of this conflict without territorial loss. Alaska, Hawaii, California... And this is if don't retaliate.

Russian propaganda. There is no "conventional genocide" of Russians.

There is genocide. Actually, genocide of Russians is officially declared goal of the EU. And yes, denialism is a form of support. If you denie the fact of genocide, you are a part of the problem, not a part of its solution.

What terms am I suggesting? Only no nuclear war.

NATO overwhelm Russia as 7:1 by population and killing them all conventionally will take to much efforts. A war against NATO - is a nuclear war.

We'd choose death. We'd launch what we have. You know that. No Russian first strike would knock out our response.

It's not what your official doctrine said, but I prone to agree with you. That's why we should skip some steps on the ladder of escalation and attack US nuclear forces first. If the all out nuclear war is inevitable (as you said) the only logic choice is to decrease our losses as much as possible.

Looks like a civil war of sorts is brewing in Iran, between the crazy jihadists and the secular folk who want a peaceful democracy.

Who told you this? Secular guys are smart guys and they saw US-made "democracy" in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and the definitely don't want it. Secular folks prefer to get nukes and deter the USA by the threat of nuclear attack on US cities. Something like secular guys in North Korea did. Jihadists are mostly masochistic martyrs who believe in the unity of all Muslims and other BS. They thought that nuclear weapon is a sin.

We'll soon see won't we? Iran can't defeat the US, we export oil and gas.

Of course they can defeat the USA.

Your numbers are nonsense, but we don't want to test our theories.

If you don't want to test this theory - you better f#ck away now and leave our hemisphere. Because we do want test it.

 

[kyzr]

Of course, in the terms of the ladder of escalation you do escalate. And, bombing and invading non-neighboring country gets punished. And, of course, collective self-defense (as it was with Republics of Novorussia) gets rewarded.

There is no "Novorussiya" only Ukraine. How many Russian soldiers need to die before realizing that?

How many millions of American citizens and how many states of the USA are you ready to put on stake? If the nukes start flying you won't be able to get out of this conflict without territorial loss. Alaska, Hawaii, California... And this is if don't retaliate.

Millions of Americans and millions of Russians are at stake if nukes start flying.
Russia's military isn't very capable, so stop trying to bluff the US.

There is genocide. Actually, genocide of Russians is officially declared goal of the EU. And yes, denialism is a form of support. If you deny the fact of genocide, you are a part of the problem, not a part of its solution.

"Genocide" means a lot of Russians dying. I don't see Russians dying unless they are invading Ukraine.
The EU doesn't have a goal of killing Russians that I heard about either. Yes I deny the genocide of Russians as a pretext for war.

NATO overwhelm Russia as 7:1 by population and killing them all conventionally will take to much efforts. A war against NATO - is a nuclear war.

Ok. Good luck with that.

It's not what your official doctrine said, but I prone to agree with you. That's why we should skip some steps on the ladder of escalation and attack US nuclear forces first. If the all out nuclear war is inevitable (as you said) the only logic choice is to decrease our losses as much as possible.

You keep saying that. Sound like desperation to me.

Who told you this? Secular guys are smart guys and they saw US-made "democracy" in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and the definitely don't want it. Secular folks prefer to get nukes and deter the USA by the threat of nuclear attack on US cities. Something like secular guys in North Korea did. Jihadists are mostly masochistic martyrs who believe in the unity of all Muslims and other BS. They thought that nuclear weapon is a sin.

If the choice is Iran giving up their nukes or sit in the dark and die for thirst, I think the secular guys would give up their nukes.

Of course they can defeat the USA.

How could Iran defeat the US? I don't see them as a threat unless they get nukes and ICBMs.

If you don't want to test this theory - you better f#ck away now and leave our hemisphere. Because we do want test it.

Here is a Princeton simulation of an all-out nuclear war between Russia and NATO. 91.5m dead immediately plus many more dying from the effects on the climate and radiation. A lose-lose outcome.

PLAN A | Princeton Science & Global Security

SGS developed a new simulation for a plausible escalating war between the United States and Russia using realistic nuclear force postures, targets and fatality estimates. It is estimated that there would be more than 90 million people dead and injured within the first few hours of the conflict.

sgs.princeton.edu

 

[Zavulon]

There is no "Novorussiya" only Ukraine. How many Russian soldiers need to die before realizing that?

There is Novorussia and it was there long before invention of "independent Ukraine". Previous time, more than 10 mln of Europeans were eliminated for their attempt to take rightfully our lands. This time, we can kill, one billion of NATO+ countries population to ensafe our land and our people.

Millions of Americans and millions of Russians are at stake if nukes start flying.
Russia's military isn't very capable, so stop trying to bluff the US.

It is important to be numerical. I mean Russia wants to return Alaska, but hardly ready to pay more than 1 mln of Russians for this goal. And as you keep ability to kill more than one million of Russians even in the worst for you scenario of Russian counter-force attack (and Russians do know it) Alaska is perfectly safe (if don't do other stupid things). Russia wants to liberate Ukraine (and remove American strategic forces from Eastern Europe) and ready to pay at least 50 mln killed for it. And in all realistic scenarios you can't kill that many Russians by your strategic forces after Russian attack.

Given, that you don't send Infantry in Ukraine, you are not ready to lose even one million Americans for it. And it means that you should alleviate now, to minimise your losses.

"Genocide" means a lot of Russians dying.

No. There are two parts in the definition.

----------
Definition
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Elements of the crime
The Genocide Convention establishes in Article I that the crime of genocide may take place in the context of an armed conflict, international or non-international, but also in the context of a peaceful situation. The latter is less common but still possible. The same article establishes the obligation of the contracting parties to prevent and to punish the crime of genocide.

The popular understanding of what constitutes genocide tends to be broader than the content of the norm under international law. Article II of the Genocide Convention contains a narrow definition of the crime of genocide, which includes two main elements:

A mental element: the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"; Andy
A physical element, which includes the following five acts, enumerated exhaustively:
Killing members of the group
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
--------------
Two things are important - intention, and that's obviously take place, and actual murders or inflictions of human life. That's also happens.

And, to be numerical, during Kosovo conflict the Serbs killed few thousands of Albanians, most of whom were militants killed with weapons in their hands. You called it "genocide". And lifes of Russians are much more valued (at least from the Russian point of view) than lifes of Albanians.

I don't see Russians dying unless they are invading Ukraine.

Just because you don't want to see. And you don't want to see because you are a Nazi.

The EU doesn't have a goal of killing Russians that I heard about either.

They have goal "decolonisation of Russia" and it definitely means genocide of us.

Yes I deny the genocide of Russians as a pretext for war.

And, as I already said, it makes you a Nazi.

If the choice is Iran giving up their nukes or sit in the dark and die for thirst, I think the secular guys would give up their nukes.

No. We both know that Iran was attacked exactly because it didn't have nuclear program and nuclear weapons. Iran has plenty of gas and oil, and not enough weapons to deter Americans (because greedy American barbarians understand only a threat of annihilation). So, they have a choice - to get nukes, defeat Americans and live as rich and independent state, or to be killed, pillaged and raped by American soldiers who will kill them and take their land and their resources.

How could Iran defeat the US?

Two basic possibilities - more or less conventional war-rebellion on Middle East (including territories of US allies), or nuclear attack on US military bases as the first step (with the threat of a nuclear attack on US cities).

I don't see them as a threat unless they get nukes and ICBMs.

They will get nukes as soon as they wish and they don't need ICBMs. Medium Range Sea Launch Ballistic Missiles on civilian ships can be good enough to create a reasonable threat to destroy US infrastructure sites.

Here is a Princeton simulation of an all-out nuclear war between Russia and NATO. 91.5m dead immediately plus many more dying from the effects on the climate and radiation. A lose-lose outcome.

PLAN A | Princeton Science & Global Security

SGS developed a new simulation for a plausible escalating war between the United States and Russia using realistic nuclear force postures, targets and fatality estimates. It is estimated that there would be more than 90 million people dead and injured within the first few hours of the conflict.

sgs.princeton.edu

Those 90 mln are total amount. But if there is only one million of killed in Russia and 90 mln killed in the USA and EU, and we have post-war peace on Russia-acceptable terms, I'd rather call it "Victory". May be even win-win outcome, if America got a better government and political system, for the acceptable price of, say, 10 million killed.

 

[Ringo]

 

[kyzr]

There is Novorussia and it was there long before invention of "independent Ukraine". Previous time, more than 10 mln of Europeans were eliminated for their attempt to take rightfully our lands. This time, we can kill, one billion of NATO+ countries population to protect our land and our people.

No matter how many times you say it, Ukraine is NOT RUSSIA.
Ukraine is an independent country.

It is important to be numerical. I mean Russia wants to return Alaska, but hardly ready to pay more than 1 mln of Russians for this goal. And as you keep ability to kill more than one million of Russians even in the worst for you scenario of Russian counter-force attack (and Russians do know it) Alaska is perfectly safe (if don't do other stupid things). Russia wants to liberate Ukraine (and remove American strategic forces from Eastern Europe) and ready to pay at least 50 mln killed for it. And in all realistic scenarios you can't kill that many Russians by your strategic forces after Russian attack.
Given, that you don't send Infantry in Ukraine, you are not ready to lose even one million Americans for it. And it means that you should alleviate now, to minimise your losses.

If you watched the Princeton video at the last point of discussion you saw their projection of about 91.5m people killed during a nuclear war. About half would be Russian.

No. There are two parts in the definition of "genocide"

Our definition is this, and no one has done a "widespread extermination of Russians" since WW2.
The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.

Just because you don't want to see. And you don't want to see because you are a Nazi.
They have goal "decolonisation of Russia" and it definitely means genocide of us.

You know you are wrong. There is no genocide of Russians, so you call me a Nazi.
The US doesn't mention "decolonisation" of Russia, that is an EU fantasy after Russia's economy collapses.

No. We both know that Iran was attacked exactly because it didn't have nuclear program and nuclear weapons. Iran has plenty of gas and oil, and not enough weapons to deter Americans (because greedy American barbarians understand only a threat of annihilation). So, they have a choice - to get nukes, defeat Americans and live as rich and independent state, or to be killed, pillaged and raped by American soldiers who will kill them and take their land and their resources.

Iran admitted to having 440 kg of 60% enriched uranium. No reason to have that unless you are developing nuclear weapons.

Two basic possibilities - more or less conventional war-rebellion on Middle East (including territories of US allies), or nuclear attack on US military bases as the first step (with the threat of a nuclear attack on US cities).

Iran could dream about that but could never make it happen, same as Russia.

They will get nukes as soon as they wish and they don't need ICBMs. Medium Range Sea Launch Ballistic Missiles on civilian ships can be good enough to create a reasonable threat to destroy US infrastructure sites.

Iran will never have nukes, at least until a stupid democrat like Obama or Kamala Harris becomes a president.

Those 90 mln are total amount. But if there is only one million of killed in Russia and 90 mln killed in the USA and EU, and we have post-war peace on Russia-acceptable terms, I'd rather call it "Victory". May be even win-win outcome, if America got a better government and political system, for the acceptable price of, say, 10 million killed.

If you watched the video you would see a lot of missiles flying and bombs landing.
The 91m dead would be about half Russian. As I said before, most of the US population lives outside US cities.

 

[Zavulon]

No matter how many times you say it, Ukraine is NOT RUSSIA.
Ukraine is an independent country.

It is Russian territory, temporarily occupied by the West.
And do you want to sacrifice even one million of US soldiers to prove we are wrong?

If you watched the Princeton video at the last point of discussion you saw their projection of about 91.5m people killed during a nuclear war. About half would be Russian.

It's just their wishful thinking. If Russians are ready and Americans are not, Russian losses will be at least ten times lesser than American.

Our definition is this, and no one has done a "widespread extermination of Russians" since WW2.
The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.

Yep. Exactly systematic and widespread. Even one killed Russian is too many.

You know you are wrong. There is no genocide of Russians, so you call me a Nazi.

There is genocide of Russians and you deny it because you are a Nazi and don't value Russian lifes.

The US doesn't mention "decolonisation" of Russia, that is an EU fantasy after Russia's economy collapses.

It is European official goal, and if we don't kill them, they kill us.

Iran admitted to having 440 kg of 60% enriched uranium. No reason to have that unless you are developing nuclear weapons.

Plain lie. High enriched Urainium is used, say, for small nuclear reactors. Americans use 90% enriched Uranium in submarine reactors.

Iran could dream about that but could never make it happen, same as Russia.

Of corce he can, at least, try.

Iran will never have nukes, at least until a stupid democrat like Obama or Kamala Harris becomes a president.

If they want nukes, they will get them in few weeks. And noone can prevent it.

If you watched the video you would see a lot of missiles flying and bombs landing.

But I didn't see neither smart counter-force strike, nor evacuation and shelter of population.

The 91m dead would be about half Russian. As I said before, most of the US population lives outside US cities.

As far as I know, 83% of US population lives in cities. But it doesn't matter. If you don't accept Russian peace terms after Russian counter-force strike (and will retaliate), you'll face destruction of infrastructure, and destruction of infrastructure will cause death of 90% of US population in a year. And if leftovers don't unconditionally surrender - they will be finished by poisons and unmanned vechicles.

 

[PubliusMM]

Bullshit. Where is your link?

It was all over the news...Fox, and others. Sorry you missed it...

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It was all over the news...Fox, and others. Sorry you missed it...

You better check again, dumbass. There is no unilateral cease fire unless you don't know what that term means. We are just not hitting their energy infrastructure. We are continuing to hit targets all over Iran, just not powerplants, etc.

Try again.

 

[kyzr]

It is Russian territory, temporarily occupied by the West.
And do you want to sacrifice even one million of US soldiers to prove we are wrong?

I don't, but Ukrainians do.

It's just their wishful thinking. If Russians are ready and Americans are not, Russian losses will be at least ten times lesser than American.

Ok.

Yep. Exactly systematic and widespread. Even one killed Russian is too many.
There is genocide of Russians and you deny it because you are a Nazi and don't value Russian lives.

Not a real proof of genocide of Russians by anyone

It is European official goal, and if we don't kill them, they kill us.

It may be Litwin's goal, but no one else's.

Plain lie. High enriched Uranium is used, say, for small nuclear reactors. Americans use 90% enriched Uranium in submarine reactors.

The US even offered Iran free nuclear fuel if they stopped enrichment, they said no, so Iran wants a bomb.

If they want nukes, they will get them in few weeks. And no one can prevent it.

We'll see.

But I didn't see neither smart counter-force strike, nor evacuation and shelter of population.

We don't know that from the video, but it wouldn't matter, I didn't see any warheads get shot down either.

As far as I know, 83% of US population lives in cities. But it doesn't matter. If you don't accept Russian peace terms after Russian counter-force strike (and will retaliate), you'll face destruction of infrastructure, and destruction of infrastructure will cause death of 90% of US population in a year. And if leftovers don't unconditionally surrender - they will be finished by poisons and unmanned vechicles.

True, but if you only look at the 346 "cities" with over 100,000 people. that population is 35%.
(The smallest incorporated "city" in the United States is Monowi, Nebraska, which has a population of just one person.)
So I wanted to exclude very small cities in the population percentage.

 

[eagle1462010]

Of course, in the terms of the ladder of escalation you do escalate. And, bombing and invading non-neighboring country gets punished. And, of course, collective self-defense (as it was with Republics of Novorussia) gets rewarded.


We'll see.


How many millions of American citizens and how many states of the USA are you ready to put on stake? If the nukes start flying you won't be able to get out of this conflict without territorial loss. Alaska, Hawaii, California... And this is if don't retaliate.


There is genocide. Actually, genocide of Russians is officially declared goal of the EU. And yes, denialism is a form of support. If you denie the fact of genocide, you are a part of the problem, not a part of its solution.


NATO overwhelm Russia as 7:1 by population and killing them all conventionally will take to much efforts. A war against NATO - is a nuclear war.


It's not what your official doctrine said, but I prone to agree with you. That's why we should skip some steps on the ladder of escalation and attack US nuclear forces first. If the all out nuclear war is inevitable (as you said) the only logic choice is to decrease our losses as much as possible.


Who told you this? Secular guys are smart guys and they saw US-made "democracy" in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and the definitely don't want it. Secular folks prefer to get nukes and deter the USA by the threat of nuclear attack on US cities. Something like secular guys in North Korea did. Jihadists are mostly masochistic martyrs who believe in the unity of all Muslims and other BS. They thought that nuclear weapon is a sin.


Of course they can defeat the USA.


If you don't want to test this theory - you better f#ck away now and leave our hemisphere. Because we do want test it.

YAWN

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I say total war and show the world what happens when the gloves come off.

Total war... except for you, of course. You plan to sit on your fat ass and root for dead civilians and pretty explosions on yer teevee.

 

[skye]

Andrew Chang explains why for the U.S. — despite having the world's most powerful navy — getting oil tanker traffic moving through the vital shipping route again is much harder than it may seem.

 

[skye]

 

[schmidlap]

Now we're getting somewhere:

Iran threatens to retaliate against Gulf energy and water after Trump ultimatum

The risks of worsening regional conflict, highlighted by an Iranian threat to hit Gulf states' desalination plants, are especially acute for the desert countries whose populations and economies depend on the water facilities to survive.

www.reuters.com

Trump, Iran threaten power, energy targets as war escalates​

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/us-israel-iran-war-trump-threatens-to-obliterate-iran-power-plants-if-strait-of-hormuz-doesnt-open-in-48-hours-11249196

'Open Hormuz Or Will Destroy Power Plants': Trump Warns Iran, Tehran Responds​

Trump gives Iran 48-hour ultimatum to reopen Strait of Hormuz or face strikes on power plants

Trump warns Iran it has 48 hours to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz or the U.S. will strike and obliterate its power plants, starting with the largest.

www.foxnews.com

I fully support this ultimatum. Get that oil moving!!

The blowhard is spewing enough gas to fuel all of Christendom, but his "little excursion" is an unnecessary addition to all the issues concerning which most Americans find him sorely wanting, their disapprobation to be expressed by their ballots in November.

Americans are increasingly critical of the U.S.’s monthlong war in Iran, according to several polls released Wednesday, with prices at the pump remaining high and fears of a wider conflict growing.

Sixty-one percent of respondents in a Pew Research Center poll
said they disapprove of the president’s handling of the conflict

President Donald Trump Job Approval Ratings and Polls | RealClearPolling

Track President Trump's job approval with RealClearPolling. Gain valuable insights and stay informed on the latest ratings and political developments for a comprehensive view of the political landscape.

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Approval - Economy | RealClearPolling

President Trump Approval - Economy | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Job Approval - Foreign Policy | RealClearPolling

President Trump Job Approval - Foreign Policy | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Job Approval - Immigration | RealClearPolling

President Trump Job Approval - Immigration | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Job Approval - Inflation | RealClearPolling

President Trump Job Approval - Inflation | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

Approval of Military Action Against Iran | RealClearPolling

Approval of Military Action Against Iran | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Approval - Crime | RealClearPolling

President Trump Approval - Crime | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Approval on Handling of Russia/Ukraine | RealClearPolling

President Trump Approval on Handling of Russia/Ukraine | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

President Trump Approval on Handling of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | RealClearPolling

President Trump Approval on Handling of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

​

 

[Stann]

Now we're getting somewhere:

Iran threatens to retaliate against Gulf energy and water after Trump ultimatum

The risks of worsening regional conflict, highlighted by an Iranian threat to hit Gulf states' desalination plants, are especially acute for the desert countries whose populations and economies depend on the water facilities to survive.

www.reuters.com

Trump, Iran threaten power, energy targets as war escalates​

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/us-israel-iran-war-trump-threatens-to-obliterate-iran-power-plants-if-strait-of-hormuz-doesnt-open-in-48-hours-11249196

'Open Hormuz Or Will Destroy Power Plants': Trump Warns Iran, Tehran Responds​

Trump gives Iran 48-hour ultimatum to reopen Strait of Hormuz or face strikes on power plants

Trump warns Iran it has 48 hours to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz or the U.S. will strike and obliterate its power plants, starting with the largest.

www.foxnews.com

I fully support this ultimatum. Get that oil moving!!

trump has lied about everything from the very beginning. Nothing to believe in.

 

[Zavulon]

I don't, but Ukrainians do.

And their sponsors are ready to sacrifice them. Nothing in Ukraine is worth $300Bn. It's not about Ukraine per se, but it's about Russia. Anyway, American unreadiness to accept even 1 mln losses, makes sure, that in the case of a Limited Nuclear War in Europe, Americans rather will be neutral and betray their "allies" rather than nuke Russia.

Ok.

Not a real proof of genocide of Russians by anyone

As I said, if you don't see genocide of Russians, it's only because you are a Nazi (in the Russian understanding of the term). Russians themselves see it. And Russians themselves are ready to sacrifice as many as necessary to achieve victory (and, therefore, peace and safety for all survivors). That's what we are. That's how we survive all those waves of European barbarians, coming on the Russian lands at least twice a century.

It may be Litwin's goal, but no one else's.

Litwin is just NAFO's "fella". And NAFO is state-sponsored organisation. Everything he post here is almost official European position.
And you understand that we just can't allow them exist.

View attachment 1235161
The US even offered Iran free nuclear fuel if they stopped enrichment, they said no, so Iran wants a bomb.

You didn't suggest them fuel they want. And anyway, they want their own civilian nuclear industry.

We'll see.

We don't know that from the video, but it wouldn't matter, I didn't see any warheads get shot down either.

Yep. So, 1-10-30 mln killed are more or less realistic numbers. Those are unacceptable losses if we are talking about say, gold mines in Central Africa, but they are pretty acceptable if we are talking about our very survival.

True, but if you only look at the 346 "cities" with over 100,000 people. that population is 35%.
(The smallest incorporated "city" in the United States is Monowi, Nebraska, which has a population of just one person.)
So I wanted to exclude very small cities in the population percentage.

Doesn't really matter. First Russian attack will be counter-force and then Russia suggest 48-hours humanitarian pause to allow you think about Russia's peace terms and evacuate people.
If you reject Russia's more than generous offer, and retaliate (counter-value attack) Russia will destroy 7 American cities for 1 Russian, and then suggest unconditional surrender.
If you refuse to surrender Russia will start unlimited bombing campaign, with nukes (including tactical), chemical and biological weapons, until governments of states or counties or towns raise white flags and surrender as independent states. And with infrastructure destroyed hardly more than 30 mln of Americans will be able to survive on the territory of the former USA.

 

[kyzr]

And their sponsors are ready to sacrifice them. Nothing in Ukraine is worth $300Bn. It's not about Ukraine per se, but it's about Russia. Anyway, American unreadiness to accept even 1 mln losses, makes sure, that in the case of a Limited Nuclear War in Europe, Americans rather will be neutral and betray their "allies" rather than nuke Russia.

I would not test that "assumption".

As I said, if you don't see genocide of Russians, it's only because you are a Nazi (in the Russian understanding of the term). Russians themselves see it. And Russians themselves are ready to sacrifice as many as necessary to achieve victory (and, therefore, peace and safety for all survivors). That's what we are. That's how we survive all those waves of European barbarians, coming on the Russian lands at least twice a century.

We can't agree on obvious facts. There is no genocide of Russians.

Litwin is just NAFO's "fella". And NAFO is state-sponsored organisation. Everything he post here is almost official European position.
And you understand that we just can't allow them exist.

We'll see.

You didn't suggest them fuel they want. And anyway, they want their own civilian nuclear industry.

They want nuclear bombs. We won't let them have them.

Yep. So, 1-10-30 mln killed are more or less realistic numbers. Those are unacceptable losses if we are talking about say, gold mines in Central Africa, but they are pretty acceptable if we are talking about our very survival.

There is no one threatening Russia's survival.

Doesn't really matter. First Russian attack will be counter-force and then Russia suggest 48-hours humanitarian pause to allow you think about Russia's peace terms and evacuate people.
If you reject Russia's more than generous offer, and retaliate (counter-value attack) Russia will destroy 7 American cities for 1 Russian, and then suggest unconditional surrender.
If you refuse to surrender Russia will start unlimited bombing campaign, with nukes (including tactical), chemical and biological weapons, until governments of states or counties or towns raise white flags and surrender as independent states. And with infrastructure destroyed hardly more than 30 mln of Americans will be able to survive on the territory of the former USA.

There won't be a Russia after a first attack.