Putin issues a nuclear warning to the West over Ukraine
Putin issues a nuclear warning to the West over Ukraine
www.nbcnews.com
Putin issues a nuclear warning to the West over Ukraine
58 comments
-
-
Thirty years of shrugging off promises, agreements, and red lines is how we got to 90 seconds to midnight.
-
Is this a yearly average? I don’t think we’re closer to nuclear war than we were during the Cuban missile crisis.
I mean if the Russian leadership wants to die over a piece of land (because they don’t already have enough?), then sure by all means.
-
That is a natural reaction of person that tracks only western MSM and doesn’t pay attention to gradual rise in western politician attitudes.
Russian nuclear doctrine change reflects changed attitude in western propaganda.
You must not be aware of the following developments. Poland is already primed to fight. Baltic states openly talk about preemptive strike on Russia. Western long range weapons are pretty much cleared to strike “old” Russian territory. Country on southern side of Russia is set to become 2nd Ukraine. NATO general claims that Russia will not use nukes under any circumstances and thus justifies any level of involvement.
In this environment expansion of nuclear deterrence is pretty much the only option from Russian point of view.
Please note that inside Russia there are calls to strike from Kiev to London due to crossing of previously announced red lines. Someone was right here. Putin is moderate if not outright inactive.
The above creates potentially unstable environment inside Russia and may give Russian government additional motivation to use nukes at location of regional importance.
There are some reasons for western side to provoke Russia, which nobody here wants to discuss or acknowledge.
It shall come as no surprise that NATO has larger military than Russia. Russia never made it a secret that the only way to balance out conventional strength difference is with nukes.
The calculation on Russian side is that they will destroy large amount of opposing side military and equipment. It should be enough to stop any meaningful ground action.
So, reality is very close to getting out of control.
All it takes is a small provocation on the border side that looks like invasion even if it is just a large scale disruption in communication on the border line and incursion of some military equipment.
The later happened already on Belorussian border in last 12 months. So the scenario was tested in part by Poland.
-
more than a piece of land - its about securing their borders. NATO is danged-near surrounding them.
-
-
-
Russia tries to keep Poland, Baltic states and other unfriendly bordering nations from getting involved in any military action against Russia by making it clear that response will be nuclear.
The desire to involve other nations against Russia goes up with Ukraine slowly loosing war against Russia. Tactical encirclement of 72nd Ukrainian battalion in Ugledar is the most recent example of losses on Ukrainian side.
Change to Nuclear weapons doctrine tries to stop opening of 2nd war front against Russia. The most likely location would be border between Belorussia and Poland.
-
That's my understanding as well, and hence why Putin explicitly mentioned an attack on Belarus in his statement.
-
-
It's Wednesday my comrades!
-
Right, so we all better just let the Russian regime take whatever it wants, such as Ukrainian territory, in this case. Or else they will use nuclear bombs. And it’ll be everyone else’s fault, because we didn’t want to let them take whatever they wanted.
Russia is totally the good guy here, and if we don’t let them do whatever they want, they’ll use nukes and we will deserve it.
Am I getting that right?
-
Right, so we all better just let the Russian regime take whatever it wants,
so they can keep land taken by force like diego garcia, hawaii, sioux nation territory* or countless others were taken by force once and the new "owner" kept and exploited these lands since then? yes, that would be awful.
*(thats also where that "monument" stands that stands as an example to remind the the world which nation will never ever stick to laws, not even to its very own ones, but instead humilitate other peoples religions like it i.e. also does in hawaii)
no! i think we really should make such countries give the taken-by-force land back to their rightful owners immediately plus a compensation that is worth that name plus whatever it takes to undo any destruction or change or poisoning with whatever chemicals done to the land under such evil invaders (thinking of the enewetak atoll right now 😢)
And maybe we should concentrate on the cultures that were completely(!) deported long ago first, to at least give their children back the land that was taken from their parents or grandparents or grandgrandparents a.s.o. so diego garcia seems to be the easiest one, the current invaders there don't need it for a living and don't even call it their "home", so just make them leave the captured land that is not theirs now. rescueing a whole civilisation and culture from evilish invaders was never easier! then of course those who's ancestors had been deported and enslaved, those need to be compensated for but that cannot be aligned in money especially not since that money happens to be printed by those who's ancestors did the deportation and enslavement and the money presses were at least indirectly build with slave labour, so other solutions need to be found that are not only accepted by those of the deported families who live today but really(!) compensate for centuries of abuse. also the debt of not yet abolishing slavery needs to be compensated for as it is at least a slap in their faces every day and this should be compensated like a slap in the face of an officer today, but for each single day per affected person living during that time since slavery was first introduced into those laws until it is completely abolished (this would only be the compennsation for not yet abolishing slavery). also those countries where those long ago enslaved had been deported from have to be compensated for all the losses including but not limited to all losses that resulted or may have resulted in development that did not happen due to that deporting and enslaving their families friends and firefighters ages ago. also all damages that happened after that deportation like robbing of resources underground their land that they could not defend any more due to that deporting like robbed diamonds, robbed gold and robbed oil and maybe lots of other robbed resources too. this compensatoon needs to be done throughoutly and complete, just to give the russians that example that the west actually "can" do something good and would stand to rightful living together and not only robbing the world until everything is gone like the west does now. if the west would stand to its so called values, a war against robbers would be a good one, but as it is right now, fighing another robber nation would just be a fight about who can rob more and stands last which is a bad thing or do you actually like that idea?
so on which robber nations side are you? you seemed to want to sound like being on the russian side, so tell me how many nations had been invaded and robbed and enslaved by russia in the last ... lets say 400 years ? (next step would be to compare that with western nations to be at least complete when determining which robbers side would be the more civilised one to know which side to stand to - which seemed to me to be your real question here)
Or else they will use nuclear bombs.
i guess giving back sioux nations land, hawaii and diego garcia to their rightful owners and start compensating the damages done to other nations would put real moral pressure on the russians, but until then, the only thing that happens when "the west" keeps bubbling about the values they don't even fight for within their own captive taken lands is that one evil side shouts at the other but using bombs instead of real actions of good.
have a nice day!
-
No reasonable person will ever be convinced by this unhinged wall of text that tries to equivocate between European colonialism in North America over the past 400 years, and Russian imperialism happening literally right now.
Insane whataboutism - but in any case, it doesn’t change the fact that what the Moscow regime is doing is wrong.
-
-
You're gonna feel so smug and righteous when you're dying in the nuclear holocaust.
-
If I die, he dies.
MAD spares no one.
-
Oh no, less monthly tributes to my landed lord! The bosses from my 3 part time jobs won't be able to exploit me anymore! Damn, so much to live for...
Seriously, life just ain't worth the squeeze of the shackles around my hands, feet and neck. Pull the trigger so I don't have to.
-
Caving to the Moscow regime’s nuclear threats now will only make nuclear confrontation inevitable.
-
-
-
Rattle that sabre harder.
-
I wonder which country will be next to carry out a nuclear strike, Russia or Israel.
-
Iran is my guess. Putin loves Europe - including Germany. Putin loves his people and white people. He is forced into this predicament and takes no joy in it. Russia has vast resources that others want. They also have new ports, sea routes, and highways - great new trade routes that threaten to affect western income.
-
The blood of the killed Russian soldiers is just enough for Putin to draw all his red lines.
58 comments
Again?
Yes, but this time for realsies!
Are you claiming there was already a recent change to Russia's nuclear doctrine, I'd be very interested to see a source.
Putin's final warning. It's like China's final warning but less serious.