Ukrainian kamikaze drone strikes 'struck Putin's Satan-2 nuclear missiles' - prompting huge explosion

Daily Mail UK ^ | September 21, 2024 | Freya Barnes

[Monterrosa-24]

You don’t understand the arrogance on Russian social media concerning their ability to “win” a nuclear war with America. They need reminding that Russians would also suffer immensely. Despite all of the Russian setbacks in Ukraine they are renewing threats against Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania claiming an interest in preserving the integrity of Kaliningrad. They have even ramped up talk of “reversing the illegal transfer of Alaska.” So yes, Russians need to realize that their quarter-century dictatorship is leading them down a path of absolute insanity and extremely dangerous policies. What has Russia gained from throwing away hundreds of thousands of troops in Ukraine?

[NonValueAdded]

I guess you never read the book or saw the movie.

[null and void]

Au contraire!. The "Morse" code was a bottle tangled in the chord of blinds hitting the transmitter key.

[alexander_busek]

And you gleefully cheer at the thought of radioactive material falling back onto Russia, so how’s that any different?

There you go again, twisting my words (which you do not quote - understandably, since that would knock the legs right out from under your shameless accusations).

My post #17:

The vast majority of the radionuclides will precipitate as fall-out in Russia, itself. Belarus would likely also get a significant portion. (Which would be poetic justice.)

Calling it "poetic justice" cannot by any stretch of the imagination be characterized as "gleefully cheering."

You have completely discredited yourself, Prince of Space, and are a disgrace to Free Republic.

Regards,

[null and void]

Candidly, if the choice was the current ruling Regimes of the West forever, or rule by Putin forever, I would choose Putin x1000!

I wouldn't choose either.

"None of the above" is an option on the ballot in Nevada...

[alexander_busek]

I think we started it when we reneged on our agreement not to put weapons on Russia’s western border. It’s okay for us to break that multilateral agreement with Russia but our agreement with NATO is supposed to be sacrosanct & unassailable?

There were, admittedly, various verbal assurances and discussions about limiting NATO's eastward expansion towards the U.S.S.R., but there was never any binding legal basis for that scurrilous claim. U.S. Sec'y of State James Baker, for instance, made a verbal statement to the effect that NATO would not expand "one inch eastward." But that casual utterance was never formalized in any treaty or written agreement.

And Russia has never received even so much as a half-sentence or parenthetical remark to that effect.

In contrast, the Budapest Memorandum is a legal document signed by Russia, the U.S., and the United Kingdom - and Putin is clearly in total violation of it.

Your argument is thus quite specious, and - in fact - I suspect that you are not even arguing in good faith.

Regards,

[Reverend Wright]

Well that’s great, but it’s not an option for the people in the Donbass.

Yanukovych actually tried for “none of the above”.

His platform was not in NATO, but in the EU Association Agreement and in the Eurasian Economic Union.

At the last minute after years of negotiations the EU said: EU only, out of EEU, either us or them.

So Yanu chose the EEU and got a Color Revolution.

[Prince of Space]

As if I GAF what a putz living in Germany thinks about me.

[alexander_busek]

As if I GAF what a putz living in Germany thinks about me.

"Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong."

- Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Regards,