Shit, Ukraine should get both nukes and NATO membership.
You're making it look like it's Ukraine's choice. They're being forced to the nuclear path by the internal enemies within NATO that are fucking everything up
Ukraine gave up those nukes in exchange for security assurances. If Russia is going to go back on its assurance, then Ukraine should be able to go back to the nukes. Fair is fair.
As a former SSR that held nuclear weapons on its territory before 1968, they even oughta be free and clear with respect to the non proliferation treaty.
I been saying this for years, and it's really nice to see someone say this too while also not getting 1000 downvotes. I shed a tear of joy for the new generation
Tankies will be in here supporting nuclear options unironically.
No they won't!
They supported nuclear options only so long as their cock-holster putin was the only one with said option.
Now it becomes 'Everyone has to forcefully disarm a rogue nuclear state for Russia!' or some other bs.
Give them time, their talking points are slow over the weekend.
They only need to get rid of one little coward hiding in his bunker - Putin. It would be a whole different story if he was on the front actually fighting because so many Russians die there.
Remember the Russian sucking dick right before getting blown up by a drone? I think about how life is cruel sometimes.
I wish, but he has lots of people to succeed him, who also piss and shit all over other people's stuff. Can you imagine a female version of Putin? There is one- Maria Belovna, IIRC her name. She is the kamehameha beyotch in charge of stealing children from Ukraine and putting them in "education" camps. Unfortunately she is in her maximum Cartman's Mom years. Not old, not young. I think she, even though a civilian, should be moved up the list for wet work, treated just like a Russian military officer and charged with war crimes in absentia. Car ignition go pop.
Sure, there may be others that are willing to set up and follow in his footsteps. But remember - the people is afraid of one specific person - Putin. People do not fully dare to go against him. Any new leader will not have the same kind of respect. So that means people may have higher chance in succeeding to stop the war.
It's a bold move but I don't see it changing the outcome of the ongoing war. If Ukraine could build long-range ballistic missiles in the near future, I think they could regain the advantage even without any nuclear warheads. Nuclear warheads would not be useful without those ballistic missiles.
Man fuck these comments, nuke Russia you pussies. I'll deliver the missiles myself if that's what you need. Strap me to the rocket and fire me at Moscow!
Name checks out?
Nuclear bombs aren't something you throw together in a afternoon. Also they primarily impact civilians. Precision is what they need. Take out critical components.
A truck can deliver a nuke. Just pack it in cat litter and drive it onto that bridge in Crimea. Should knock that stupid thing out finally.
Fuck it, give them a Davy Crocket and then you don't need no stinkin' ballistic missiles.
While I agree with your second argument that Russia would probably just call them on their bluff, I don't think they'd need long range ballistic missiles. They seem to operate on russian soil a lot, and you could put a big nuke into a larger van easily.
Just package it as a good old gravity bomb or glide bomb?
Or get creative and mount it on a swarm of large drones (with the others being decoys for SAMs). Maybe like a fleet of old prop planes flying very low.
This is very hypothetical though, no one should hope for Ukraine reaching the point of even considering an actual launch of a nuke.
Better to focus on targeted attacks. I think the Ukrainians know there country so guerrilla warfare is a better idea. Keep the Russians miserable and fearful of surprise attack. Ukraine can't beat Russia but they can break the spirit of the Russians so that they end up going home after years of embarrassment.
I think it isn't all that different then Vietnam or the US revolutionary war. Both victories were people who were protecting there homes. They used local knowledge and clever tactics. If the Ukrainians can keep the sky clear and stay hidden they are good.
Why, why Mr. Zelensky, don't you develop nuclear weapons like other nations: in silence?
No development required, I think they can open a drawer somewhere and pick one of several soviet designs. If they want a nuke, they can build one right away.
It would cost them the support of their allies, however, and they cannot afford that.
It's saber rattling.
Maybe the support is not worth losing the war. In "The King and I", the King of Siam has a verse "...If allies are weak, am I not best alone? ...If allies are strong with power to protect me, might they not protect me out of all I own?"
It can’t be saber rattling at this stage, it’s a promise.
Maybe one that cannot be kept, but I seriously doubt the allies could stop it if the fronts retract and troops from nato countries are not sent?
Looking at Israel, the “don’t ask permission, ask forgiveness” strategy really works with the US (a good example is also Kursk attack, Nord Stream 2 or Kerch bridge sabotage). They should just be doing crazy shit, forcing escalation on Russian side, and thus in response by the US/NATO. Of course this is a delicate balance, but a few nukes on paper I think would still be okay.
These could guarantee the existence of their nation in the future, and unless they use them on a Russian city, no repercussions would happen beyond verbal saber rattling just for having it. Russia would definitely shit themselves and dial back on the agression.
I'm pretty sure escalating the conflict to nuclear levels is not something they want to do. Not to mention development and manufacturing takes time and physical facilities. You can't easily make nuclear bomb grade materials and not draw attention.
nuclear is neither about having, nor using the weapons … it’s about the fear of future use of weapons
silence isn’t helpful in that endeavour
Thanks Obama
Man I thought this was a solid "thanks Obama" use given his weak defense of Crimea brought us directly to this point. Damn.
For real, it was imo the most categorically awful geopolitical play he (and Merkel, to boot) made while in office. Like, Neville Chamberlain-grade awful.
Thanks Nukebama.
Both?
Implying they would allow Ukraine to join NATO or allow Ukraine to start a nukes program, especially after kneecapping their nukes leverage in the 90s in exchange for a deal neither Russia nor the US actually fulfilled.
Rule 11: Do not spread misinformation. The goal for the alliance is for Ukraine to join NATO. That's been said many times now.
Comment was too non-credible
