[atc23]

“. . . . . but, there isn't such a thing as a tactical small nuclear weapon. A nuclear weapon, no matter the size, is still a nuclear weapon, “

You have no idea what you’re talking about. US Navy (Surface Forces) has a ton of tactical nuclear weapons. How do I know? Because I used to load them on ships at Seal Beach Weapons Depot in Southern California.

This is what I mean when I say that there’s a ton of posters on FR nowadays (suddenly) that spout nonsense - like you.

You make statements that definitively state what Putin and what the rest of the world will do - your technical knowledge is wrong and you accuse others of “buying into the panic porn” when actually it’s you that buys into it.

[adorno]

You have no idea what you’re talking about. US Navy (Surface Forces) has a ton of tactical nuclear weapons.

You continue making the asinine mistake of distinguishing between small nuclear weapons (tactical) and larger nuclear weapons.

A low-yield or small nuclear weapon is still a nuclear weapon. The usage of it in a war, no matter how small or large the war, doesn't make any difference. Once a nuclear weapon (small or larger) is used, the conversation ends, and the whole world will know it as a nuclear weapon, and the user of that weapon can expect major responses from the world. A nuclear weapon that kills 5 people will still be designated as a nuclear weapon, same as a nuke bomb that kills 5 million.

It's about the word "NUCLEAR" and not about them being small or large or tactical or any other designation.

Get it!!!

The scale of war changes as soon as a nuke is used, and your insistence that it might be 'tactical' vs major, does not compute in the minds of people everywhere.

So, don't give me that BS about me not knowing the difference. Ain't no difference!!! Not with a nuke.