Posted on 09/06/2014 3:08:53 PM PDT by Sparklite
Would Putin commit suicide by letting his missiles fly against the United States? No. Rather, he would respond with a limited nuclear strike against a couple of European capitals -- not London or Paris, but smaller ones, presumably in Eastern European countries that have only recently joined NATO. Warsaw, against which Russia has already conducted a drill simulating a Russian nuclear attack, first comes to mind. Or, say, Vilnius, Lithuania's capital. The point is, Putin would bet on decision-makers in Washington, Berlin, London, and Paris not retaliating with nuclear weapons against Russia if it had "only" hit a city or two most Westerners have barely heard of -- and certainly do not want to die for.
The outcome of Putin's putative gambit is that NATO effectively capitulates. The alliance's credibility as guarantor of security for its member states would be utterly destroyed, as would U.S. hegemony, which largely rests on the threat of using force. Putin would then be free to do what he wanted in Ukraine and anywhere else he perceived Russia's interests to be threatened.
(Excerpt) Read more at foreignpolicy.com ...
This talk of nukes is silly. Putin could just roll in tanks and these little countries could do little. Nukes are required against strong countries not weak ones.
The Russkies are the Muslims of the Slavic world. They are too busy rehabilitating the memory of Stalin or rioting about Soviet monuments being damaged to think rationally.
Except they hate each other.
I put my wager on China nuking Japan.
And you're not the only one to suspect this:
"In 1998, I asked a former Russian intelligence official how Moscow might successfully pull off a surprise nuclear attack against the United States without suffering a devastating retaliation.
He replied without hesitation, saying: If you ever hear that Arab terrorists have attacked an American city with nuclear weapons dont believe it. The attack, he said, would be from Russia.
http://theconservativemonster.com/?tag=jr-nyquist
That's not how the United States rolls. I would fight deposing or assassinating any living president.
I have NO use for the liberal Obama, but calling for deposing a sitting president smacks of South American banana republics.
The US does business differently.
Lawful and orderly transfer of power is the American way.
/johnny
no one said anything about hurting anybody !
the USA has never been in straits like these before
We literally have run out of time .
the “lawful and orderly transfer of power” , a once dependable and noble process has now become 100% cynically perverted and corrupted ; by the Partys themselves , the lawyers that advise them on how to subvert the Constitution and by the mass mainstream media that supports , aides and abets the subversion .
The people of the United States and those that voluntarily serve in our Armed Forces are gravely at risk due to this massive subversion .
Do you really think that another stroll thru the corrupted and 100% gamed electoral process , and waiting for the outcome of this charade in late 2016 is the way to go ?
Question : will Putin wait? how about ISIS ? how about China ?
The world has become an intensely dangerous place , on a global scale , worse than ever before . The sharks are attracted to the blood of perceived American weakness and lack of will .
Can we wait ? I wish I could say we could ....
My great hope is that a fully Republican controlled Congress may FINALLY hold the evil players accountable and firings and impeachments will follow . If that does not happen , our goose is cooked .
--the Russians have (fortunately) always had leadership sufficiently rational to avoid a nuclear war--
People get defenestrated (look it up) during deposing leaders.
I do not ever accept overthrow of the government of the United States by the use of force.
I have no problem with nations like Texas breaking away and demanding independence, that is recognized under international law...
But the United States wouldn't ever be the United States again with a forceful overthrow of a legally elected government. Regardless of how corrupt those laws are. That must be changed to keep the United States that you miss.
Deposing leaders is very turd world. And violent.
/johnny
“What the local weather conditions are at the base they launch ICBMs from probably doesnt matter much....at all. lol”
That might be. I’m certainly no expert on the subject. But what if they amassed a fleet of long range bombers, fighters, refuelers, and paratrooper transports. Then it would. Let’s hear from the freepers with knowledge on this. If our satellites couldn’t see it because of the fog cover??
There's a long wait where a train don't come.
I know a lot of people here are in denial about how liberal the Republican party has become, but they ARE liberal, and support the liberal agenda.
The liberal republican party leaders in the legislature have proven that, over and over.
Get rid of the liberals out of at least one party (Hint: You can't get rid of liberals from the Dem party).
/johnny
/johnny
Defenestrating the leader doesn’t change the large mass of Americans who thought he was the cat’s meow and would elect him for a third term if they could. Our problem isn’t Obama, its a corrupted populace. I don’t know what you do about that.
Corrupted parties rise up from a corrupted public. Thats why banana republics keep overthrowing el comandante year after year and always wind up right where they started. Chavez wasn’t an anomaly, he was just what the Venezuelan doctor ordered. And Obama, sad to say, isn’t an anomaly either. Talk to the average kid coming out of college who doesn’t know what WWII was about or who won.
~It is more likely that Putin, would OK the uses of tactical nuke against a Ukrainian troop concentration.~
I think your tin foil hat is too tight. It way affect a blood circulation is your head one day.
Russia doesn’t have the capability to invade America, the Russian military is not what it was when it was the Soviet Union, all of their Warsaw Pact countries are in NATO now.
The old Soviet Union’s military was massive, 6 or 7 Airborne divisions, a huge number of Air Assault battalions and bridge building units and such, not today.
Today the Russian military is down from 6.3 million, to a total of 766,000 in all branches, and they lack the ability to launch great attack forces globally.
Train up the children in the way they should go, and they won't depart from it.
I'm giving up a great big chunk of my life to be part of a multi-generational effort to help my son-in-law and daughter raise children that know crap from shinola.
Evil prevails when good men watch TV on the weekends instead of spending time with their families.
/johnny
Well said.
ah yes , Jezebel ....
Thanks for the new word !
question : does the government have rights over the people it governs ? And if not , and that trust is broken ( in 100’s of ways) what recourse is left to the people ?
We’ve been there before : Revolution
It would be a new nation.
It also isn't just about deposing a leader.
I maintain my position. I will fight any attempt to depose a sitting leader of the nation to install another.
It's not how the United States works.
/johnny
If Russians keep dying as this story suggests then maybe they will fade away. But I doubt it.
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/sep/02/dying-russians/
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.