Putin's Nuclear War Threat

@kevcvs57 said
And you think the criticism's of his “war policies” are A) unjustified or B) distinct and unrelated to his ultra right domestic policies.
or both?
Tell us again how naive we are 🤔

@no1marauder said
The internal critics of his war policy being discussed were those in the military and intelligence community who potentially would be able to prevent Putin from using tactical nuclear weapons.

You're welcome to believe those folks are upset by the regime's "ultra right domestic policies."

@kevcvs57 said
My bad I believe it’s a mixture of those who want him to find an off ramp and those who want him to crush Ukraine by whatever means necessary, I hope the former win the argument.

@no1marauder said
At this point, no off-ramp has been offered Russia by Ukraine and/or the West that didn't amount to abject surrender.

As justified by moral grounds as that might be, do you think it will be persuasive to those in positions of power in the Russian military and intelligence community?

@kevcvs57 said
I think what people say before negotiations take place very rarely resemble the actual deal that gets struck.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable for Russia to be ceded back the Crimea given that they ceded it to Ukraine under very different geo political circumstances.
The stickier problem is the eastern fringes of Ukraine, obviously it’s a border region and there will be a ...[text shortened]... would a member state along with being fast tracked into the EU if that’s what they decide they want.

Why do people say Russia cannot use a tactical nuke on Ukraine without the wind carrying the radiation over Russia? Does the wind never blow in any other direction?

In Michigan the wind sometimes blows eastward. That never happens in Ukraine?
Perhaps Ukraine should never take territory unless the wind blows to the west. If the wind shifts direction they should be very afraid.

@jj-adams said
We have a madman in Russia that is a wildcard and a senile old fool in the White House that will do whatever he's told by his handlers.
Looks like a Seldon Crisis to me.
Edit: If you don't know what a Seldon Crisis is, I feel sorry for you.

@no1marauder said
What you just suggested is what I did months ago and you been accusing me of being a Putin puppet for doing so.

@kevcvs57 said
No you were adamant that Ukraine could not join or ally itself with nato and that nato itself should retreat to West Berlin and for the life of me I don’t remember you claiming that Russian forces in eastern Ukraine should be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force until all those Ukrainians that fled the region can return and take part in a free and fair referendum.
The only r ...[text shortened]... ould not include the Crimea is that I believe that Russia ceded it to Ukraine at a time of weakness.

@kevcvs57 said
No you were adamant that Ukraine could not join or ally itself with nato and that nato itself should retreat to West Berlin and for the life of me I don’t remember you claiming that Russian forces in eastern Ukraine should be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force until all those Ukrainians that fled the region can return and take part in a free and fair referendum.
The only r ...[text shortened]... ould not include the Crimea is that I believe that Russia ceded it to Ukraine at a time of weakness.

@metal-brain said
Russia did not threaten nuclear war.

@metal-brain said
@divegeester
Zelenskyy called for nuclear war, then he back peddled and said he was talking about sanctions. That is ridiculous since he said it was to prevent Russia from using a nuke. Sanctions obviously do not prevent that.

Zelenskyy called for WW3 and a nuclear holocaust and his madman talk didn't go over well so he lied and said sanctions would prevent Putin from ...[text shortened]... fect for a first strike advantage to take out some of the USA's nukes before they can launch. Right?

@no1marauder said
Your memory really sucks in a convenient manner. Outside of Ukraine returning to a neutral status by disclaiming any intention to join NATO, your proposal is indistinguishable from mine.

@vivify
Obama declared “all options on the table” against Iran.

President Kennedy threatened a nuclear strike at the Soviets over Berlin.
In 1946 and 1948 President Harry Truman threatened the Soviets over Iran and Berlin, respectively, and the Chinese in 1950 and 51.

President Eisenhower also threatened the Chinese over Korea in 1953, and again in 1956 over Quemoy and Matsu. He offered the French nukes to use against the Vietnamese at Dienbienphu in 1954.

Jimmy Carter issued the Carter Doctrine, reaffirmed by Ronald Reagan which committed the US to a nuclear response if its vital interests in the Middle East were ever threatened.

In a trip to Seoul, South Korea, Bill Clinton said that if North Korea gained and used a nuclear weapon “we would quickly and overwhelmingly retaliate.”

“It would mean the end of their country as they know it,” he said, according to a New York Times report at that time.

The North Korean government subsequently responded angrily and in kind to the threat from the new president.

“The United States must ponder over the fatal consequences that might arise from its rash act,” the government said in a statement. “If anyone dares to provoke us, we will immediately show him in practice what our bold decision is.”

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/07/13/world/clinton-s-warning-irks-north-korea.html

Nuclear threats are an American tradition. Why are you trying to demonize Putin for doing what almost every president of the USA has done?

@mghrn55 said
Your contribution to the debates forum has been pretty useless, in general.
"I threatened to punch a classmate in the head decades ago in high school. Therefore I must be a thug".
That kind of thinking never clarifies debates, it just muddies the waters.
Putin's argument that the US dropped 2 bombs on Japan has set a precedent is weak and he is trying to pre-justify any id ...[text shortened]... r future.

Filling this forum with rumble.com junk just fills up the database here.

Get a life.