I prefer to not contemplate nuclear war and millions dead.
Act childish for somebody else's benefit. If you are tying to be a part of my conversations, show some intelligence.
Donald H does not understand boundaries. My point is clear and sharp. Tough, bub.
If so, you shouldn't attack a nuclear country (directly or indirectly).
It's simple. Step one - stop your support of neo-nazi regimes in Ukraine and Baltic States. Recognise new borders and free choice of people from other former Ukrainian regions. Step two - withdraw NATO military units from Eastern Europe (to the borders of 1997).
The problem with Litwin is not about his personal beliefs. The problem with him is that he is a copy-paster of NAFO - state-sponsored organization. Therefore, he is almost official. I do not care about a random Nazi from internet. I do care about Neo-Nazism as the governmental ideology of our neighbors.
I'm a Canadian, and yes I know that my country is involved.
See above.
You can try to change the policy of your country or you can individually make your preparations.
He hardly is "desperate". He is just payed to copy-paste. Payed by an official governmental organization. And we can't make a peace with a government who pay people for this.
It depends.
I very doubt about it. You see, there is no such term as "conventional warfare" in Russian language. The very conception of "Conventions of war" is pretty alien for the Russian military or governmental thinking. The word "war" - "voina", from the root "voi" - "howling", is about unleashing inner animal nature, something pretty contrary to the conceptions of "conventions", "laws" or "rules".
You don't want peace.
Almost all people want peace. The only question is the terms of the peace. We want peace in which we are safe and not discriminated. And we ready to fight for this peace.
And the rest of your population will starve in the dark. No power because EMP will destroy your generating capacity. Most of your food is imported because most of Russia is in a horrible climate for farming. Ukraine used to be the breadbasket of the USSR and even with its lush and productive farmland, Russia had to import grain from the USA and meat from other western countries to avoid wide-spread starvation. No one wins a nuclear war.
It's overestimation.
Actually, nowadays (with global warming and new technologies) Russia is an exporter of grain. We produce more food than we can eat. What is even more important we have 3-years food reserve in Rosreserv stores.
And yes, with active usage of nukes we can take all food from Ukraine and EU or even ask China and India for 5% of their food production.
It depends mostly on your definition of victory. If we use old-fashioned definition of victor as someone who actually writes the terms of post-war peace - of course, nuclear war (as well as any other) can be won. While, of course, the price of victory can be high.
I'd be a fool if tried actually change your mind about anything. Same way, USMB is restricted in Russia, so my very membership here is a minor crime.
Being a fool is the biggest crime of all. And you don't want access to alternative viewpoints, you want to spout propaganda. Russia has never been something other than a third world country with a second world military. Now it is a third world country with a fourth world military. Russia's only claim to power now that Ukraine has exposed the weakness of the Russian land and air forces is its nuclear arsenal, most of which won't make it out of the silo for lack of maintenance and a large portion of what actually does launch will miss the target or fail to detonate. Nuclear weapons require continual expensive maintenance by well-trained personnel. Russia lacks the personnel and the funds for proper maintenance. Russia has always lacked well trained personnel, having a military composed of poorly trained conscripts, no professional NCO corps and thus having to use commissioned officers to do the skilled grunt work that western militaries relegate to enlisted personnel and junior NCOs.
