- Joined
- Jun 16, 2019
- Messages
- 39,673
- Reaction score
- 38,219
- Location
- Tucson
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Ridiculous assumption. Totally ridiculous. Poland is part of Nato.
Apples and oranges.
This is not like pre ww2
You want to surrender if Russia launches a nuclear weapon(s) ?
No, this is like WWII if the Czechs chose to fight.
So what?
Our sphere of influence is where we say it is.
And I repeat, our sphere of influence is wherever we say it is.Sorry, you are wrong. I repeat, Ukraine is not part of Nato nor within our sphere of influence.
A "tactical nuclear weapon can be as small as .1 kiiltons (100 tons of TNT yield Or only one 150th the size of Hiroshima weapons.Tactical nukes seem to get a lot of attention these day and for the record Putin will use them if Ukraine does not capitulate and he can't win with conventional forces which it seems he can't.
So, just how powerful are tactical nukes? These are no mere bunker buster bombs kicked up a notch. A tactical nuke has the same strength as the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima. Enough to destroy a medium sized city.
How powerful are strategic nukes? Well, these are unimaginably strong. At 50 miles from detonation expect burns and to be ripped apart by flying glass as all windows will blow out. Inside 50 miles, the closer you get, the worse it gets. Winds will start out at 500 mph from teh blast site. (fade the further out you are of course)
Best to be at ground zero.
So what say you? Still feeling hard line toward Putin over Ukraine, a non NATO member?
Suits me. There are enough Putin fans down in the Ukraine threads already.Ok, your posts are just silly. I will not be replying any more.
A "tactical nuclear weapon can be as small as .1 kiiltons (100 tons of TNT yield Or only one 150th the size of Hiroshima weapons.
While there are strategic nuclear weapons that can do the amount of damage you describe, most are not remotely that powerful. The most common American strategic nuclear weapon is the W76 nuclear warhead with a yield of 100 kilotons or about seven times that of Little Boy (Hiroshima)..
I'm no expert but if I had to guess, to make the greatest political impact the Russians would use a Strategic nuclear warhead but targeted on a tactical level target in Ukraine in order not to cause severe damage but by the nature of the warhead send the message of "we could do a lot worse if we wanted to".Yes, small ones can fit in a backpack.
They are also as big as I describe.
Do you know which will be used where?
I'm no expert but if I had to guess, to make the greatest political impact the Russians would use a Strategic nuclear warhead but targeted on a tactical level target in Ukraine in order not to cause severe damage but by the nature of the warhead send the message of "we could do a lot worse if we wanted to".
Maybe Putin should grow a pair and tell us.Yes, small ones can fit in a backpack.
They are also as big as I describe.
Do you know which will be used where?
Not ridiculous in Putin's or the Polish people's mind. Once you give in to a dictator they take it as weakness and are emboldened. He will still have nukes and we can't risk him using them right? So NATO will also have to hold back while he takes all the countries of the former USSR again.Ridiculous assumption. Totally ridiculous. Poland is part of Nato.
Apples and oranges.
And we will destroy his black sea fleet and nuke moscow. It is not called mutual assured destruction fo nothing.I'm no expert but if I had to guess, to make the greatest political impact the Russians would use a Strategic nuclear warhead but targeted on a tactical level target in Ukraine in order not to cause severe damage but by the nature of the warhead send the message of "we could do a lot worse if we wanted to".
Don't be ridiculous. The U.S is not going to destroy a city of millions just because the Russians nuke some minor target in Ukraine.And we will destroy his black sea fleet and nuke moscow. It is not called mutual assured destruction fo nothing.
Using nukes is contagious and taking out the entire Russian Govt. is the safest thing we could do if Putin strikes first.. Russia's abm's are no match for our tech. It will be one and done. Those millions that die will save billions of lives.Don't be ridiculous. The U.S is not going to destroy a city of millions just because the Russians nuke some minor target in Ukraine.
Not to mention the obvious. Moscow is surrounded by ABMs. So unless the U.S. launched scores of warheads against Moscow the odds of destroying the city are remote.
What makes you think the entire Russian government would be in Moscow?Using nukes is contagious and taking out the entire Russian Govt. is the safest thing we could do if Putin strikes first.. Russia's abm's are no match for our tech. It will be one and done. Those millions that die will save billions of lives.
How many tactical nukes does Russia have?Judging by how the the Russin's always 'go big'. My guess is they don't even have any small tactical nukes and only have big bombs. They are centainly in no position to develop one in a reasonable time frame. To me it's all a bluff. This kind of talk might even indicate that negotiations are on going. We'll have to wait and see.
Ukraine is not a sovereign country. It has been a client state of Washington for eight years now.
You don't know what the hell you're talking about.
You comrades don't have a clue and we would all be speaking Russian now if we had you guys calling the shots during the cold war. Thankfully our military and intel services are not wimps like you and will not surrender to Russia because they are acting like assholes which is nothing new.. They have been threatening to destroy us for over 50 years and we are still here. Lets not mess things up now OK?Gone? Really? You believe this?
Guess what. There is a school of though that should he use them the best response is to unite the world against him and not strike back militarily.
If this can indeed be pulled off, it is a far better strategy than the moronic, "we'll blow Russia off the map" school yard crap.
Go ahead and cite the "Russian law" dictating when nuclear weapons can be used.You both don't have a clue and we would all be speaking Russian now if we had you guys calling the shots during the cold war. Thankfully our military and intel services are not wimps like you and will not surrender to Russia because they are acting like assholes, They have been threatening to destroy us for over 50 years.
The law was recently modified to include non-nuclear attacks targeting the nation’s critical government and military infrastructure but the nuclear part is unchanged. Not that it matters in this discussion. Nothing happening in Ukraine is threatening the existence of Russia.Go ahead and cite the "Russian law" dictating when nuclear weapons can be used.
Putin considers NATO a Nazi organization and he could well decide that it needs to be "cleansed" like Ukraine...otherwise he might be forced to use a nuke on Warsaw if we won't comply. Once you admit he has the upper hand he will use it to its fullest. Poland is VERY worried about Putin using a nuke on them.Ridiculous assumption. Totally ridiculous. Poland is part of Nato.
Apples and oranges.
No, WWII started when the Poles choose to fight. They had a defense treaty with Britain and France. My point is that appeasing Hitler by ceding Czechoslovakia did not prevent WWII. And ceding Ukraine to Putin will not stop Putin.No, this is like WWII if the Czechs chose to fight.
Cuba wasn't in the Warsaw Pact.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?