Posted on 02/02/2023 6:17:30 PM PST by TonyinLA
Yeah this seems reasonable
Must be a lot of foreigners on this forum
YES!!!
Wow. I was in Detroit as a child and knew nothing about that.
Yes, except Reagan was joking and this turd is serious.
Ze first called for it in January last year in Munich and threatened to nuke up.
That was probably behind Putin’s decision to finally invade.
My guess is that Putin is going to make clear that any attack by Ukraine is considered an attack by the US and UK.
Speak softly and carry a big stick is a better strategy than straight-facedly calling for others to launch a first-strike nuclear attack, just to teach Putin a lesson.
gaslight
I’m observing the reactions to threats against mother Russia.
And Reagan had a serious point.
By the way. Who is Zelesky?
Jack Posobiec is on the right side, but I sometimes question his Tweets. On the other hand, Zelensky is not calling the shots, and neither is Biden. Hopefully there are more sensible men running things behind the scenes. It makes no sense for either side to wish for nuclear war. That is not to say that we can’t stumble into it.
“Worse from the standpoint of today’s Republican war lobby was Reagan’s response to the Polish crisis. Lech Walesa and the Solidarity movement were a global inspiration but the Polish military, fearing Soviet intervention, imposed martial law in 1981. Again, Reagan’s response was, well, appeasement. No bombers flew, no invasion threatened, no soldiers marched. He continued to contain Moscow and challenge its moral foundation. But like Dwight Eisenhower in 1953 and 1956 and Lyndon Johnson in 1968, Reagan did not risk a general war to help liberate Eastern Europeans when they opposed Soviet troops. Indeed, from Reagan came no military moves, no aggressive threats, no economic sanctions. Reagan did little other than wait for the Evil Empire to further deteriorate from within.
Little other than talk, that is. Reagan wanted to negotiate from a position of strength, but he wanted to negotiate. And despite his image as a crazed cowboy and mad Cold Warrior, he negotiated over arms reduction with … the Soviet Union. For example, he used the deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles to win the withdrawal of both nations’ weapons.
from 1983 onward, Reagan devoted more of his foreign policy time to arms control than to any other subject.” Reagan spoke of peace when he addressed Soviet students in Moscow in 1988. Norman Podhoretz, the neocon godfather, denounced Reagan for “appeasement by any other name.”
Reagan was willing to switch rhetoric and policy when circumstances changed, in this case, the nature of the Soviet regime. He had no illusions, unlike some observers, that enjoying jazz made former KGB chief Yuri Andropov, who replaced Brezhnev, into a closet liberal. In contrast, Reagan understood that Mikhail Gorbachev was different. A reform Communist, Gorbachev nevertheless humanized the system and kept the military in its barracks. Reagan worked with the Soviet leader, despite heartfelt criticism from his own staffers and fevered denunciations from activists—dissention that Reagan acknowledged in his diary. Gorbachev later wrote that Reagan “was looking for negotiations and cooperation.” Or, in a word, appeasement.
Reagan used the military in combat only three times, and not to impose democracy, rebuild failed states or overthrow dictators.”
All this happened with a background of a large Reagan led military buildup.
That military strength is what helped push the Soviets over the edge.
They knew Reagan meant business
Speak softly and carry a big stick is a better strategy than straight-facedly calling for others to launch a first-strike nuclear attack, just to teach Putin a lesson.
*******
I think the little *weirdo wants conventional weapons to hit Russia before anything goes nuclear.
The Ukrainian government with all the investments & payouts from the West since independence, seems to be lacking in proper military training, procurement & logistics.
* I was reading Free Republic on my computer, when a Freeper showed ‘piano man comedian’ dancing around in heels and weird freaky attire. My 7 year old son walked by, saw it & said: “Get that garbage off the computer screen.”
That’s right, a seven year old has more discernment than the Ukrainian George Washington.
Who is Zelesky?
You’re laughable.
Your utter propaganda doesn’t help.
It’s so transparent and laughable.
It’s communist agitprop too.
Of cocaine?
I bet they were ready for the next kid who asked that question.🥴
Chernobyl and Fukushima are the closest to worst case scenarios that we’ve had to a full blown meltdown and they sure grabbed the attention. I’ve seen several shows shot near Chernobyl and the place looks like something from a horror movie with everyone gone but the paraphernalia of everyday life still in place. Scary.
“Russia Did it”.
He called for a pre-emptive nuke strike months ago. If he thinks it’s a winning strategy...he has Russian advisors.
Let’s nuke Ukraine and bring peace to the region.
It’s time for adult supervision of course, but with Biden and Harris that option is null and void. The European “leaders” are hardly any better.
As morally odious as Putin’s conduct may seem, this conflict needs to end and it won’t end entirely on Ukraine’s terms, so instead of enabling Zelensky to hang on for months and months, we need to lean on him and say, take a deal and prepare to lose a bit of ground. It doesn’t mean forever. The situation may resolve itself in stages down the road.
At the same time I think Putin would take a reasonable deal, he won’t get everything he wants either.
Problem is, I don’t see anyone capable of taking this approach. The globalists seem to have calculated that they can destroy Putin’s regime and impose one more to their liking. This is not only crossing a line, it is very very unlikely to happen that way. It is just as possible that Putin would be replaced by somebody equally committed to the same general course of action.
I can understand why Zelensky is crying out with such crazy suggestions, he is in the middle of seeing his country being slowly destroyed. Ten million Ukrainians are now out of the country and hundreds of thousands have probably died. But we cannot allow this crazy idea of a nuclear solution to gain any traction. That just spreads the destruction to many other places on a much bigger scale and it does Ukraine no good at all, clouds of radioactivity blowing around in northeast winds at this time of year out of Russia and into Ukraine. He probably hasn’t thought that part through. Even if Ukraine were not incinerated as part of the nuclear war, it would see massive human casualties from the vast radioactive clouds coming from several different directions so any change of wind direction would not help them.
“If you far enough from the initial blast and survive the heat and radiation, the first sign will be your internet is down. Everyone’s. Then the electricity stops. Forever. You’ll have no info, no fuel can be pumped, and your food rots. Then you starve, if you survive the marauders searching for food and weapons.
So good luck with that.”
...but I watch survivalist shows - looks kind of fun to me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.