THought for the Day: Nuclear Deterent

[Sculptor]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Or is it because Putin knows very well the west cannot use such a weapon without the end of times?
And since the west seem wholly reliant on nukes, they have no other options?

[Gary Childress]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Or is it because Putin knows very well the west cannot use such a weapon without the end of times?
And since the west seem wholly reliant on nukes, they have no other options?

I don't think there's anything any sane person can do about Russia invading Ukraine other than the economic sanctions that are being put into place.

[Gary Childress]

I mean, it's ultimately blood on Putin's hands and if there's a God, Putin will pay for it in the afterlife. If there isn't a God, then Putin just pulled off a very successful move on a chessboard completely controlled and played by the leadership class, I guess.

[Sculptor]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Or is it because Putin knows very well the west cannot use such a weapon without the end of times?
And since the west seem wholly reliant on nukes, they have no other options?

I don't think there's anything any sane person can do about Russia invading Ukraine other than the economic sanctions that are being put into place.

Yes, and the point is that nukes are useless. Having failed to deter several times in several instances.

[Sculptor]

I mean, it's ultimately blood on Putin's hands and if there's a God, Putin will pay for it in the afterlife. If there isn't a God, then Putin just pulled off a very successful move on a chessboard completely controlled and played by the leadership class, I guess.

This conflict did not start this year. You have to be aware of what the West has been doing in Ukraine to understand the situation.

Putin is possibly the smartest world leader right now.

[Gary Childress]

I mean, it's ultimately blood on Putin's hands and if there's a God, Putin will pay for it in the afterlife. If there isn't a God, then Putin just pulled off a very successful move on a chessboard completely controlled and played by the leadership class, I guess.

This conflict did not start this year. You have to be aware of what the West has been doing in Ukraine to understand the situation.

Putin is possibly the smartest world leader right now.

What has the West been doing to Ukraine?

[Sculptor]

I mean, it's ultimately blood on Putin's hands and if there's a God, Putin will pay for it in the afterlife. If there isn't a God, then Putin just pulled off a very successful move on a chessboard completely controlled and played by the leadership class, I guess.

This conflict did not start this year. You have to be aware of what the West has been doing in Ukraine to understand the situation.

Putin is possibly the smartest world leader right now.

What has the West been doing to Ukraine?

Have you not been watching the news since the beginning of the century?
EU/US hasbeen steadily pushing east without regard to Russian psychology. Part of that is helping instigate the right wing coup in 2014.

[Impenitent]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Or is it because Putin knows very well the west cannot use such a weapon without the end of times?
And since the west seem wholly reliant on nukes, they have no other options?

it was for a while...

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html

-Imp

[Walker]

This conflict did not start this year. You have to be aware of what the West has been doing in Ukraine to understand the situation.

Putin is possibly the smartest world leader right now.

What has the West been doing to Ukraine?

Have you not been watching the news since the beginning of the century?
EU/US hasbeen steadily pushing east without regard to Russian psychology. Part of that is helping instigate the right wing coup in 2014.

The premise that nukes aren't a deterrent sounds like a justification in the sense that, if nukes aren't a deterrent, then Ukraine giving up its nukes was no big deal.

After supplication with digital credits (aka money), to The Wiki, Wiki tells us:

"Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

"The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]

"The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan."


To Wiki we say ... Oh Great Wiki ... An intent of westward, Russian expansionism into eastern Europe would make these promises conscious lies.

Indeed, they may have been, which would mean ...

[Sculptor]

What has the West been doing to Ukraine?

Have you not been watching the news since the beginning of the century?
EU/US hasbeen steadily pushing east without regard to Russian psychology. Part of that is helping instigate the right wing coup in 2014.

The premise that nukes aren't a deterrent sounds like a justification in the sense that, if nukes aren't a deterrent, then Ukraine giving up its nukes was no big deal.

It's not relevant, since the nukes in the Ukraine were under the control of Russia, when Ukraine was part of the Soviet.

After supplication with digital credits (aka money), to The Wiki, Wiki tells us:

"Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

"The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]

"The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan."


To Wiki we say ... Oh Great Wiki ... An intent of westward, Russian expansionism into eastern Europe would make these promises conscious lies.

Indeed, they may have been, which would mean ...

So, the question remains. Why did nukes not deter Argentine in the Falklands war? Why did it not deter Vietnam, Laos, and Cambofia in their conflict with the USA? And why does it not deter Palestine's attacks on Isreal?
A weapon to terrible to use, is no use at all.

[Skepdick]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Or is it because Putin knows very well the west cannot use such a weapon without the end of times?
And since the west seem wholly reliant on nukes, they have no other options?

Because Ukraine has no nukes. They gave them up in 1994.

So now every nuclear power has been given a choice. Go to war with Russia, or let Ukraine get fucked.

If anything, what Russia is literally making the argument "There's no such thing as sovreignity without nukes."

So, the question remains. Why did nukes not deter Argentine in the Falklands war? Why did it not deter Vietnam, Laos, and Cambofia in their conflict with the USA? And why does it not deter Palestine's attacks on Isreal?
A weapon to terrible to use, is no use at all.

No. Because part of the deterrence is the bluff. And the other part is actually having the balls to use it when other nations fuck with your sovreign land.

[Sculptor]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Or is it because Putin knows very well the west cannot use such a weapon without the end of times?
And since the west seem wholly reliant on nukes, they have no other options?

Because Ukraine has no nukes. They gave them up in 1994.

Thsose were Russian nukes. They never had full control of them.

So now every nuclear power has been given a choice. Go to war with Russia, or let Ukraine get fucked.

And because the nuke deterrent has failed to work, the USA, Uk and Eu just has to STFU and accept what Putin wants. Because they have no conventiaonal weapons to match Putin and can't use nikes because they are too dangerous to use.

If anything, what Russia is literally making the argument "There's no such thing as sovreignity without nukes."

Not at all.
THey are saying that Biden and the EU can blow it up their arse, because they are too scared to use the only weapons they have that could stop Putin.

[Skepdick]

Thsose were Russian nukes. They never had full control of them.

Those were USSR nukes. Ukraine was the USSR. Until 1991.

They became Ukraine's nukes from 1991 until 1994.

And because the nuke deterrent has failed to work, the USA, Uk and Eu just has to STFU and accept what Putin wants. Because they have no conventiaonal weapons to match Putin and can't use nikes because they are too dangerous to use.

Have you ever carried a weapon for self-defence? It's terrible and messy and dangerous and all that. I'll gladly use it to protect me and mine. But every fight I avoid is a fight I have won.

I am not risking my ass for you - I'll gladly be a good witness to the prossecution at the murder trial of your assailants. Get your own gun.

Not at all.
THey are saying that Biden and the EU can blow it up their arse, because they are too scared to use the only weapons they have that could stop Putin.

See above. Biden and the EU aren't risking their own ass for Ukraine. They'll gladly testify at Putin's war crime tribunal.

You want to defend yourself? Get your own firepower!

Putin gave them an out. Fuck your friends over OR nuclear war. Seems an easy choice for cowards.

[Sculptor]

Thsose were Russian nukes. They never had full control of them.

Those were USSR nukes. Ukraine was the USSR. Until 1991.

They became Ukraine's nukes from 1991 until 1994.

No. Not really. And not relevant. The soviet military establishment had the laucnch codes and the guidance systems, until they were de-comissioned.

And because the nuke deterrent has failed to work, the USA, Uk and Eu just has to STFU and accept what Putin wants. Because they have no conventiaonal weapons to match Putin and can't use nikes because they are too dangerous to use.

Have you ever carried a weapon for self-defence? It's terrible and messy and dangerous and all that. I'll gladly use it to protect me and mine. But every fight I avoid is a fight I have won.

I am not risking my ass for you - I'll gladly be a good witness to the prossecution at the murder trial of your assailants. Get your own gun.

Not at all.
THey are saying that Biden and the EU can blow it up their arse, because they are too scared to use the only weapons they have that could stop Putin.

See above. Biden and the EU aren't risking their own ass for Ukraine. They'll gladly testify at Putin's war crime tribunal.

There is no war crime. If you think this is going to happen, then what about Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Salvador.... Should I go on??
And what about our "allies", such as Saudi Arabis bombing the fuck out of Yemen?
Keep drinking the FOx News lies, it suits you.

You want to defend yourself? Get your own firepower!

Putin gave them an out. Fuck your friends over OR nuclear war. Seems an easy choice for cowards.

[Gary Childress]

There is no war crime. If you think this is going to happen, then what about Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Salvador.... Should I go on??
And what about our "allies", such as Saudi Arabis bombing the fuck out of Yemen?
Keep drinking the FOx News lies, it suits you.

It's basically the same thing that's been done to many Third world countries, now being done to an Eastastern European country. We can thank many idiot US Presidents and their advisors for giving away the moral high ground. Had baby Bush and Dickhead Cheney not fucked up so bad we'd be able to martial more moral support from the world. Instead the American electorate (probably many of the same ones who voted for Trump) didn't want Gore so they apparently got what they wished for, the potential undoing of the Western global economy.