• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Horror of Nuclear War is Imminent. Think, People, Think!

DarkWizard12 said:
maybe it is, maybe it isn't. What is 100% true is that Zelensky has already lost.
Click to expand...
Zelensky may have lost a few battles. But Putin loses this war and his dictatorship along with the Russian economy. How can Zelensky lose a war he did not start? He is one of, if not the strongest war time leaders we've seen in a long time.
 
Ontologuy said:
War with Russia will be instantly nuclear, with very few surviving, if any.

Zelenskyy must surrender, immediately, as he is not only in the ethical wrong for threatening to place NATO nuclear missiles within 400 miles of Moscow, thereby causing this war, he is also morally wrong for calling for the U.S. to create a no-fly zone, as we all know that would receive an immediate nuclear response from Putin, as he has promised.

We must remember, that we ought not participate in a battle between countries requiring us to pick the side on which we wish to be vaporized.

The only fight here is between nuclear missiles and humanity. Anyone who thinks otherwise is on the side of the missiles.
Click to expand...
No, Russia needs to immediately leave the sovereign nation they had no right to invade.
 
Ontologuy said:
War with Russia will be instantly nuclear, with very few surviving, if any.

Zelenskyy must surrender, immediately, as he is not only in the ethical wrong for threatening to place NATO nuclear missiles within 400 miles of Moscow, thereby causing this war, he is also morally wrong for calling for the U.S. to create a no-fly zone, as we all know that would receive an immediate nuclear response from Putin, as he has promised.

We must remember, that we ought not participate in a battle between countries requiring us to pick the side on which we wish to be vaporized.

The only fight here is between nuclear missiles and humanity. Anyone who thinks otherwise is on the side of the missiles.
Click to expand...
Good thing you’re not in charge. 👍
 
mrjurrs said:
No, Russia needs to immediately leave the sovereign nation they had no right to invade.
Click to expand...
Before you know it, Russia is going to have to sell their nuclear arsenal just to pay down their debt. That's all they will have left.
 
Questerr said:
It’s 100% accurate. Three NATO member nations possess nuclear weapons, but the organization itself doesn’t have any.
Click to expand...

You should contact NATO and tell them to correct their website.

"Nuclear weapons are a core component of NATO’s overall capabilities for deterrence and defence ..."

"Nuclear deterrence has been at the core of NATO’s mutual security guarantee and collective defence since its inception in 1949. The very first NATO Strategic Concept (1949) referenced the requirement to “ensure the ability to carry out strategic bombing promptly by all means possible with all types of weapons without exception.” The United States subsequently committed nuclear weapons to NATO in July 1953, with the first American theatre nuclear weapons arriving in Europe in September 1954."


www.nato.int

NATO’s nuclear deterrence policy and forces

Nuclear weapons are a core component of NATO’s overall capabilities for deterrence and defence, alongside conventional and missile defence forces. NATO is committed to arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation, but as long as nuclear weapons exist, it will remain a nuclear alliance.
www.nato.int www.nato.int
 
Now there are three….
 
Ontologuy said:
Though I welcome intelligent discussion, I don't expect it here anymore except from a very few who have not yet been completely brainwashed.

Still, one of my goals is to get my threads picked up by the spiders so that the OP will come up in a Google search, and thereby I get my message out to the rest of the world.

Those who respond to the OP with typical polemic "Russian troll", "Russia bad, Ukraine good", and other low-IQ dualism rhetoric will only support my case to the world that there are a lot of people being duped into supporting the horror of a nuclear war with Russia.
Click to expand...
"Though I welcome intelligent discussion, I don't expect it here anymore except from a very few who have not yet been completely brainwashed."

Don't know as brainwashed as much as abandoning other forums and comment sections they have ruined. So many other posting sites have been overrun with the Anti-Everything crowd that there is no banter or discussion any more; just a competition who can ride the 'other' party and affiliated POTUS furthest into the ground with tediously repetitive talking (propaganda) points. After having reasonable and constructive input, the intelligent and logical are summarily dispatched with a wall of blatant rejection, and offensive comments.

When the the comment start with "Bidumb, Frump, righties, lefties, greenies, alphabet people, etc," I stop reading - I seldom get past the first post on many sites, and have noticed that recently that is happening here. Lots more "Suspended" and "Banned" users here recently compared to a few years ago. Many of the informative and interesting posters have just gone away.
 
Antiwar said:
You should contact NATO and tell them to correct their website.

"Nuclear weapons are a core component of NATO’s overall capabilities for deterrence and defence ..."

"Nuclear deterrence has been at the core of NATO’s mutual security guarantee and collective defence since its inception in 1949. The very first NATO Strategic Concept (1949) referenced the requirement to “ensure the ability to carry out strategic bombing promptly by all means possible with all types of weapons without exception.” The United States subsequently committed nuclear weapons to NATO in July 1953, with the first American theatre nuclear weapons arriving in Europe in September 1954."


www.nato.int

NATO’s nuclear deterrence policy and forces

Nuclear weapons are a core component of NATO’s overall capabilities for deterrence and defence, alongside conventional and missile defence forces. NATO is committed to arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation, but as long as nuclear weapons exist, it will remain a nuclear alliance.
www.nato.int www.nato.int
Click to expand...
You’re not actually ignorant enough to believe that the NATO organization has/controls any member country’s nuclear arsenals, are you?
 
Questerr said:
It’s 100% accurate. Three NATO member nations possess nuclear weapons, but the organization itself doesn’t have any.
Click to expand...

Let's look at NATO assurance that mutually assure stupidity won't happen. I feel very comforted that NATO has made a hollow claim that the use of nuclear weapons is extremely remote:

"The fundamental purpose of NATO’s nuclear forces is for deterrence. Nuclear weapons are unique and the circumstances under which NATO might have to use nuclear weapons are extremely remote. Furthermore, any employment of nuclear weapons against NATO would fundamentally alter the nature of a conflict. However, should the fundamental security of any NATO Ally be threatened, NATO has the capabilities and the resolve to impose costs on the adversary that would be unacceptable and far outweigh the benefits that any adversary could hope to achieve."
 
Ontologuy said:
War with Russia will be instantly nuclear, with very few surviving, if any.

Zelenskyy must surrender, immediately, as he is not only in the ethical wrong for threatening to place NATO nuclear missiles within 400 miles of Moscow, thereby causing this war, he is also morally wrong for calling for the U.S. to create a no-fly zone, as we all know that would receive an immediate nuclear response from Putin, as he has promised.

We must remember, that we ought not participate in a battle between countries requiring us to pick the side on which we wish to be vaporized.

The only fight here is between nuclear missiles and humanity. Anyone who thinks otherwise is on the side of the missiles.
Click to expand...
Putin must surrender, immediately.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
You’re not actually ignorant enough to believe that the NATO organization has/controls any member country’s nuclear arsenals, are you?
Click to expand...

Teamwork makes the dream nuclear nightmare work:

"The key principles of NATO’s nuclear policy are established by the Heads of State and Government of the 30 members of the Alliance. The development and implementation of NATO’s nuclear policy are the responsibility of the Nuclear Planning Group (NPG). The NPG provides the forum for consultation on all issues that relate to NATO nuclear deterrence. All Allies, with the exception of France, which has decided not to participate, are members of the NPG."
 
Antiwar said:
"The key principles of NATO’s nuclear policy are established by the Heads of State and Government of the 30 members of the Alliance. The development and implementation of NATO’s nuclear policy are the responsibility of the Nuclear Planning Group (NPG). The NPG provides the forum for consultation on all issues that relate to NATO nuclear deterrence. All Allies, with the exception of France, which has decided not to participate, are members of the NPG."
Click to expand...
Yep, you are that ignorant.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
maybe it is, maybe it isn't. What is 100% true is that Zelensky has already lost.
Click to expand...
But he's not done making Russia pay for their "victory."
 
Questerr said:
Do you have a source for Zelensky threatening to place NATO nuclear missiles in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
i'm sure i could find some sort of source, but i don't feel like looking it up, as it's not relevant to my point at all. My post literally pointed out how charges of propaganda just don't matter now.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
maybe it is, maybe it isn't. What is 100% true is that Zelensky has already lost.
Click to expand...

No, actually, it's Trump supporters in the U.S. who are rooting for him, and Ukraine, to lose.
Quite a shame.
 
lwf said:
But he's not done making Russia pay for their victory.
Click to expand...
russia isn't paying. His country is. If he wants peace(which he doesn't) he has to get serious with the peace talks. Nothing russia demanded is unreasonable, and they can be talked down on a few points.
 
Jay Falcon said:
No, actually, it's Trump supporters in the U.S. who are rooting for him, and Ukraine, to lose.
Quite a shame.
Click to expand...
LOL there's nothing to "root" for. he's lost, he just doesn't realize/refuses to see it....possibly because he enjoys the money and applause from western media.

the war is lost. IT's putin's decision if he wants to sacrifice more troops to take kyiv, but he doesn't need it. All he has to do is hold his current position.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
i'm sure i could find some sort of source, but i don't feel like looking it up, as it's not relevant to my point at all. My post literally pointed out how charges of propaganda just don't matter now.
Click to expand...
Zerohedge, Gatewaypundit, Sputnik, or Tucker Carlson?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom