Nuclear attack in Ukraine should spark ‘devastating’ Nato response, says Polish foreign minister

[EMNofSeattle]

Rapid escalation of WHAT?
Let’s place the blame where it belongs: on the Russian butcher.

And on the Ukrainian butchers for creating the Causus Belli

Bullies cannot be appeased.

This isn’t 2nd grade

It was a mistake for NATO to let it get this far.

The mistake was NATO wanting to expand anywhere near this far. Intramural conflicts amongst slavs do not contain any American interests at stake.

Now Putin will claim that an attack on Donetsk is an attack on “mother Russia “.

It really is. Since Donetsk is traditionally Russian lands and the breakup of the USSR was handled in a stupid way.

Had NATO driven him out of Ukraine at the beginning such a claim would not be possible.
It’s past time to confront this asshole.

Why? Again I’m sure the poor Azov battalion and Ukro-nationalists who want to forcibly create an ethnostate out of people that don’t want it are great people, what US interest is involved? There really isn’t any other then that our elite is so committed to the lie that evil Putin was the reason behind Trump and Brexit that they want to show themselves to be strong against their boogeyman. The vast majority of Americans want nothing to do with this war, it’s only the highly “educated” high income elite who’s kids aren’t at risk who want America to be forcefully involved

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The problem with this idea is Putin was the ultimate aggressor. One can certainly argue that NATO's entertaining the idea of Ukraine as a member nation was provocative, but based on Putin's own words, it seems clear there was much more afoot with his invasion than just that. The end result now is two additional nations on Russia's border; two better armed nations by the way. From the perspective of keeping NATO nations further from its border, the invasion was a total failure.

There has been no new nations admitted to NATO since the war. In any event Finland doesn’t have any capacity for offensive actions into Russia, like Ukraine did and it is distant from Moscow.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

Why? Why should the US commit to nuclear retaliation against Russia for Ukriane’s sake? What’s in it for us?

This is hypothetical anyway since this is the Poles making noise, which is one reason why NATO expansion was a bad idea, we’re committing to the security of warmongers who want war with Russia and only talk so boldly because they wager the US is behind them.

Says the man who was happy that people got evicted during Covid so that he could buy there houses for a low price. So what you really mean is 'you' and not 'us'. And that 's what will be in it for you this time as well. Making money over the dead bodies of your fellow country men who lost their lives while fighting for your freedom.

I said it before and I will keep saying it. You are a truly bad person hiding behind the sceptor of religion as an excuse to make the bad look good.

Joey

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Says the man who was happy that people got evicted during Covid so that he could buy there houses for a low price. So what you really mean is 'you' and not 'us'. And that 's what will be in it for you this time as well. Making money over the dead bodies of your fellow country men who lost their lives while fighting for your freedom.

This is rambling nonsense not connected to the topic. Please refrain from wasting server space.

I said it before and I will keep saying it. You are a truly bad person hiding behind the sceptor of religion as an excuse to make the bad look good.

Joey

Thanks for your opinion Joey. Now you can go to the cockpit and captain Oveur can give you the model plane and ask you questions

 

[JoeyJoystick]

It has been suggested that a tactical nuclear attack at this particular moment in time may be considered an attack on NATO because of the nuclear fall-out in Europe. Poland, as a NATO member, could invoke article 5 based on teh fall-out.

A response by NATO could further escalate the situation. However, Russia knows this.

The situation is very complicated. Too many unknows.

- Normally when Putin sais something he means th eoposite. Does he this time? ANd woudl anyone want to take a chance with that?
- Equipment of the Russian army is not reliable.
- Will the military actually execute an order from Putin to use nuclear weapons?
- In the event a weapon fails and comes into the hands of the Ukrain, what will they do? And this scenario is not that far fetched considering all the captured Russian equipment that the Ukrainians use against the Russians.
- The political situation inside Russia is also very unstable at the moment. This could quickly escalate into a coup or revolution.

In addition to this, Putin sees discord in Europe. He mistakenly interprets this as a chance for him to do what he wants without retaliation. The west has a habit of not putting down a red line and sticking to it. This happened before (I am quickly remembering Japan thinking that they could negotiate with the americans before they dropped the 2nd bomb. Like wise, some GErman elements also thought they could negotiate) The west has, however, oevr and over again, shown that when shit hits the fan, they DO stand together. I just hope that Putin realizes that.

Joey

 

[snakestretcher]

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and stop escalating. On the NATO side, there's no need for this kind of dick-measuring. We are already winning. Just continue doing what we have been doing: Arm Ukraine with the types of weapons we have been giving them, privately warn Russia about using nukes, and mostly just ignore their nuclear threats publicly aside from pro forma denunciations.

Don't concede an inch to Putin on the subject of Ukraine, but also don't ratchet up the nuclear rhetoric. A nuclear miscalculation would be devastating for the entire world.

The problem here is that Putin will announce that the regions he has occupied fall under the auspices of the Russian Federation, and thus any 'attack' by Ukraine in defense is, de facto, an attack against Russia herself. This puts the West in a dilemma; keep resisting Russian aggression against Ukraine, or risk a nuclear response as threatened.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

It has been suggested that a tactical nuclear attack at this particular moment in time may be considered an attack on NATO because of the nuclear fall-out in Europe. Poland, as a NATO member, could invoke article 5 based on teh fall-out.

A response by NATO could further escalate the situation. However, Russia knows this.

The situation is very complicated. Too many unknows.

- Normally when Putin sais something he means th eoposite. Does he this time? ANd woudl anyone want to take a chance with that?
- Equipment of the Russian army is not reliable.
- Will the military actually execute an order from Putin to use nuclear weapons?
- In the event a weapon fails and comes into the hands of the Ukrain, what will they do? And this scenario is not that far fetched considering all the captured Russian equipment that the Ukrainians use against the Russians.
- The political situation inside Russia is also very unstable at the moment. This could quickly escalate into a coup or revolution.

In addition to this, Putin sees discord in Europe. He mistakenly interprets this as a chance for him to do what he wants without retaliation. The west has a habit of not putting down a red line and sticking to it. This happened before (I am quickly remembering Japan thinking that they could negotiate with the americans before they dropped the 2nd bomb. Like wise, some GErman elements also thought they could negotiate) The west has, however, oevr and over again, shown that when shit hits the fan, they DO stand together. I just hope that Putin realizes that.

Joey

The difference from your dumb example of Japan is that Japan didn’t have reciprocal strike capacity with nuclear weapons on the US. So we could bomb civilian population centers with nuclear weapons all we wanted. We can’t do that now because Russia can retaliate against us.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The problem here is that Putin will announce that the regions he has occupied fall under the Russian Federation, and thus any 'attack' by Ukraine in defense is, de facto, an attack against Russia herself. This puts the West in a dilemma; keep resisting Russian aggression, or risk a nuclear response.

To the extent the Donbas is occupied by Russian forces, that was a measured response to Ukranian aggression. The Ukranians are the ones who crushed a democratically elected president and sent state sponsored paramilitaries into the Donbas

 

[snakestretcher]

To the extent the Donbas is occupied by Russian forces, that was a measured response to Ukranian aggression. The Ukranians are the ones who crushed a democratically elected president and sent state sponsored paramilitaries into the Donbas

Garbage. But keep up with the pro-Russia apologetics. We understand your admiration for authoritarian tyrants well enough. The Donbas is Ukrainian territory, not Russian, and the region cannot unilaterally elect it's own president. That would be like Texas electing it's own president, answerable to nobody outside the state, and declaring itself a sovereign nation.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Garbage. But keep up with the pro-Russia apologetics. We understand your admiration for authoritarian tyrants well enough.

Are you so eager to throw away the lives of your countrymen and a pointless conflict, that you will call the objective truth garbage?

 

[snakestretcher]

Are you so eager to throw away the lives of your countrymen and a pointless conflict, that you will call the objective truth garbage?

Who are my 'countrymen'? This 'pointless conflict' is about a nation's sovereignty and independence from an aggressive invader. Was Germany's invasion of Poland and the subsequent world war also a 'pointless conflict', or would you have preferred a fascist Europe? I think I already know the answer to the last part.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Who are my 'countrymen'?

Well given you have a British flag on your profile and Britain is part of the NATO alliance you seem to want involved in the war…

Are you not able to make basic connections here?

 

[snakestretcher]

Well given you have a British flag on your profile and Britain is part of the NATO alliance you seem to want involved in the war…

Are you not able to make basic connections here?

We, Great Britain, are already involved. Quit inventing what you imagine I 'want'.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

Thanks for your opinion Joey.

It's my pleasure. I will always use every opportunity to remind you and everyone else that you are irrelevant.

Joey

 

[EMNofSeattle]

We are already involved. Quit inventing what you imagine I 'want'.

You are openly declaring what you want. Stop saying things if you don’t want others to hear them.

 

[snakestretcher]

You are openly declaring what you want. Stop saying things if you don’t want others to hear them.

No, I have nowhere 'openly declared' anything of the kind. Quit lying or show me where this imagined thought process of mine is demonstrated. You can't? What a surprise!

 

[Allan]

Poland has no authority to commit NATO to a war. If Poland launches their own offensive against Russia then other countries carry no article 5 obligation.

Read the article.

 

[Allan]

Whenever Putin makes comments like, "It may come down to nuclear strikes.", he is just showing the weakness of the West. The West HAS to respond to such words, but all they can manage to do is bluster about "full NATO response, short of nuclear attack". If NATO had even a minuscule set of balls, they would make it clear that any kind of nuclear action WILL result in a devastating nuclear response.

If you are going to talk big, you have to TALK BIG...even if you have no intention of taking big action.

NATO comes across looking like *****cats.

You don't start with the biggest, baddest threat. Under your scenario NATO would look weak when they don't follow through with their threat.

A conventional NATO response is possible, a nuclear strike on Russia is not.

 

[Ethel2]

And on the Ukrainian butchers for creating the Causus Belli

This isn’t 2nd grade

The mistake was NATO wanting to expand anywhere near this far. Intramural conflicts amongst slavs do not contain any American interests at stake.

It really is. Since Donetsk is traditionally Russian lands and the breakup of the USSR was handled in a stupid way.

Why? Again I’m sure the poor Azov battalion and Ukro-nationalists who want to forcibly create an ethnostate out of people that don’t want it are great people, what US interest is involved? There really isn’t any other then that our elite is so committed to the lie that evil Putin was the reason behind Trump and Brexit that they want to show themselves to be strong against their boogeyman. The vast majority of Americans want nothing to do with this war, it’s only the highly “educated” high income elite who’s kids aren’t at risk who want America to be forcefully involved

Great
Another Putin apologist.
The blame for this war lies on one person. Period. HE is the aggressor. And as I wrote you don’t win by appeasing bullies.
Remember WW2 when Hitler was appeased? It’s no different now.

 

[Questerr]

If Russia actually does use nukes in Ukraine then we are in uncharted territory. We would have to make sure there are catastrophic consequences for Russia, without destroying the world in a full-on nuclear war. Which is not an easy needle to thread. If it came to that, I think there should be two red lines: Don't respond with nuclear weapons, and don't strike inside of Russia. But I think America would need to utterly destroy the Russian naval fleets in Sevastopol and Tartus; destroy the Russian army in Ukraine, Crimea, Transnistria, and Georgia; invade or foment a color revolution in Belarus; and push Russia back to its own borders.

Russia should lose East Prussia as well. Their colony in the middle of NATO territory would need to go.

 

[Mycroft]

Why? Why should the US commit to nuclear retaliation against Russia for Ukriane’s sake? What’s in it for us?

I don't think I mention the US.

This is hypothetical anyway since this is the Poles making noise, which is one reason why NATO expansion was a bad idea, we’re committing to the security of warmongers who want war with Russia and only talk so boldly because they wager the US is behind them.

The Biden pukes ARE behind what NATO is doing. Hell, who do you think is forking over the bulk of the money?

 

[Allan]

The US State Department is telling Americans to leave Russia immediately.

The U.S. State Department is telling U.S. citizens in Russia to leave the country "immediately."

The new travel advisory was issued Saturday over heightened security concerns in the country as Russian military forces carry out an "unprovoked and unjustified attack" in Ukraine, the State Department said.

Link

 

[slavablueberryjam]

Yes, everyone should ignore Putin for the rest of their lives.

 

[Questerr]

There has been no new nations admitted to NATO since the war. In any event Finland doesn’t have any capacity for offensive actions into Russia, like Ukraine did and it is distant from Moscow.

The Finnish border is closer to Moscow than the Ukrainian border is and for that matter, Ukraine had zero offensive capability against Russia.

Edit: correction, Ukraine’s border is closer to Moscow, but we’re still talking 200 miles compared to 450 miles, not a big difference and Finland is right on the doorstep of St Petersburg.

 

[Questerr]

Are you so eager to throw away the lives of your countrymen and a pointless conflict, that you will call the objective truth garbage?

You would have said the same thing in 1941.