Posted on 05/30/2023 3:04:51 PM PDT by Mariner
UKRAINE was warned it faced nuclear attack today after drones blitzed Moscow - sparking blasts “within earshot” of Vladimir Putin’s home.
A wave of kamikaze flying bombs targeted posh suburbs of the Russian capital where the tyrant and his cronies have luxury retreats.
The unmanned air strikes came hours after a Ukrainian commander vowed to avenge the latest of a string of Russian air raids on Kyiv.
But Ukraine denied any involvement amid fears that the attacks were another “false flag” ruse ordered by Putin himself to enable him to escalate the conflict.
The Kremlin went on to directly accuse Ukraine of targeting Russia - a claim which backs Putin’s lie that Ukraine and the West bent on destroying his motherland.
(Excerpt) Read more at the-sun.com ...
IMHO, anything less than a clear nuclear superiority is necessary to avoid being pushed and blackmailed by the communists, and they just might see an opportunity given that neither Russia or China believe a nuclear war is “not winnable”
Nukes make war un winnable, but perceptions matter, and we are looking weak and getting weaker. There is blood in the water, and it is extremely dangerous. Russia, and soon China, think they have a usable advantage.
Apathetic and dead society that is too collectively narcissistic to care. We care only about queers, blacks, netflix and sports.
Typo; Nukes make nuclear war ‘unwinnable”, but perceptions matter...
If you think the psychopath Vladimir Putin is the only adult in the room then you have a serious problem.
Just curious, you would’ve been fine with Saddam bombing Boise, ID?
> How long many years was he [Putin] supposed to put up with oppression/murder of Russians? <
That’s yet another good question. Luhansk and Donetsk are/were Ukrainian provinces. Yet there is solid evidence that ethnic Russians there were being abused.
What to do? Repatriate the ethnic Russians involved? Invade? Well, there is also solid evidence that North Korea is abusing its citizens. Should South Korea - with the help of the US - invade and put a stop to it? Would it be worth all the blood?
I suppose that some ethicist somewhere could answer both the Ukraine and the Korea questions. I’m just not sure. But there’s one thing I am sure of. Neither place is worth American blood or American money. Let the regional powers do as they will. Not our circus. Not our monkeys.
I’ll give you the last word, as I’m signing off to watch an old ‘Charlie Chan’ movie.
Regards,
LR
wut air defense doing???
“It really isn’t the easiest of calls. Putin had already seen NATO encroach into the Baltic States. That is as provocative as the old USSR putting missiles into Cuba. And we all know how JFK reacted to that.”
You guys always trot this out, and you are always wrong.
The US didn’t really have an issue with Cuba forming an alliance with the USSR; but what the US did have an issue with was the Soviet Union introducing long-range offensive nuclear missiles into Cuba, which posed a direct threat to the US specifically and much of the Western Hemisphere in general.
So, your comparison is faulty.
Now, if NATO had introduced offensive nuclear missiles into the Baltic states your comparison would have some validity. But, since no such weapons were ever introduced into the Baltic states you are out to sea with your argument.
Thanks for illumination/consideration The U.S. has caused this war
I am not so sure you are correct in your analysis.
Once tactical nuclear weapons are used, it will depend upon world opinion and what the world community does next.
There will be a lot of wringing of hands, but Ukraine will likely still feel that they are in a fight for their life.
More interesting would be what would China and the USA think about the use of tactical nuclear weapons in a fight over Taiwan. Or better yet, what India would think about fights with its neighbors Pakistan and Russia?
> Just curious, you would’ve been fine with Saddam bombing Boise, ID? <
No, I would not have been fine with it. I hate to see innocents killed, anywhere. However, such a move would only have put Saddam on the same level as Bush II - a warmonger who caused needless deaths.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not some pacifist who wanders around with flowers in his hair. Sometimes you’ve just got to grit your teeth, and pull the trigger. Pearl Harbor was such a case.
And another such instance occurred in 1936. Hitler marched into the Rhineland. France did not pull the trigger. Hitler was emboldened, and that pretty much made WW II inevitable.
So, yeah. Sometimes things are not so cut and dried.
But sometimes it is. Bush II did not have to invade Iraq. Putin did not have to invade Ukraine. War crimes, both. But your mileage may vary. I respect that.
“We should have let Ukraine keep their nukes. Thanks Bill.”
Well, they weren’t really Ukraine’s missiles. They belonged to the Soviet Union, which maintained ultimate control over them, via Moscow (i.e., Russia). And when the Soviet Union collapsed, Moscow (Russia) took back control of them. BTW: There wasn’t too much Ukraine could do with them, anyway; as Moscow alone had the launch sequences and codes.
> US did have an issue with was the Soviet Union introducing long-range offensive nuclear missiles into Cuba, which posed a direct threat to the US specifically and much of the Western Hemisphere in general. <
No argument there. But it’s worth noting that the US had previously placed long-range offensive nuclear missiles into Turkey, which of course bordered the USSR.
I’m not arguing that the US and the USSR are morally equivalent. Because they are not. Reagan was not far off the mark when he called the USSR an “evil empire”.
Instead I’m arguing that too often the US makes its moves without regard for how other nations might feel, and respond. This is no flaw specific to the United States. Every nation does it.
” Or better yet, what India would think about fights with its neighbors Pakistan and Russia?”
Do you mean China, and not Russia? Russia shares no border with India.
In 1988, Reagan was asked if he still felt the Soviet Union was the Evil Empire, and he said, “no”.
“Bush II did not have to invade Iraq.”
I agree with you.
Bush I didn’t have to go over there. Kuwait was side-drilling into Iraqi oilfields.
You’re definitely not wrong about Bush II. Total POS.
“Bush I didn’t have to go over there. Kuwait was side-drilling into Iraqi oilfields.”
So Iraq should have taken Kuwait to court instead of invading it. Or Iraq could have got international pressure to make Kuwait stop it.
There were a lot of things Iraq could have done if it felt it was so aggrieved, but invading its neighbor is on the bottom of the list.
get lost real pig
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.