Russian submarine with nuclear warheads headed for the US coast

That would be an almost perfect outcome in a nuclear war.

 

Fantasy is often perfect.

 

That's what my wife often tells me

 

Show me any western journalists reporting from on the ground in the Donbass or across the border in Russia. There are NONE. So what makes you think any bullshit they say on TV is the truth? How do you really know what the hell is going on if you've never been there or at least seen ANY firsthand reporting? Have you seen any western media in Crimea interviewing the locals? No no and no. The 'truth' is whatever fiction the media makes up and gullible westerners just swallow it hook, line and sinker (mainly because they are lazy and stupid).

 

Hey Rip Van Winkle, communism and the Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1990, so I don't know what in the world you're talking about. Anyway what gives you or anyone the right to impose your v business.' (Xi says the same thing - then gives Australia a 14 point list of things it
says we must change. But I digress.) So if Ukraine wants to join the EU and NATO then go ahead,
it's within its own borders.[/QUOTE]

 

Hey Rip Van Winkle, communism and the atheist Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1990, so what are you talking about? It's called the Russian Federation and consists of 85 Federal subjects, 123 different ethnicities and languages, and is predominantly Orthodox Christian with a 10% Muslim population. The US and EU are now the inheritors of the USSR. It's called the Great Reset, which is nothing but a prelude to a One World Government.

Anyway I'm in complete agreement with Vladimir Putin in the following, except maybe for the last sentence, because frankly I don't think the West in general will ever understand. They'll just keep on imposing themselves on others and continue to destroy nations one by one the way they did Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin:

"You cannot impose political standards of behavior on other countries and people while ignoring their special nature which includes the ethnic and religious structure and historical traditions.

I think that eventually they will understand this."​

You're saying then that if Russia or China want to install missiles in Cuba or Venezuela, then we have no right to stop them since it's within their borders?

Anyway, Ukraine is not a democracy it's a junta. The president was installed by the neo con Victoria Nuland and has been under American control since then. Besides, how do you know what the Ukrainian people want? All you know is what you're told in the corporate media which is one and the same as Washington. It's the same corporations that support the candidates.

Because the government in Kiev is a junta, half the people in Ukraine have no representation. This is why there was a war going on, and this is why Crimea left.

Anyway none of this matters. According to signed treaties after the Soviet Union collapsed, no nation is allowed to pose a threat to another nation - and that includes the missiles we have in Poland and Romania. If the neo cons do not allow the more responsible in our government to take charge, then a Russian ultimatum will be forthcoming.

As for the power, right now it's in the hands of the Bear, and there is nothing Nato and the US can do. Sanctions are powerless since Russia is now self sufficient, so the only thing they can do is drop Russia from SWIFT, and they prepared themselves for that years ago with their own domestic system. As for foreign exchanges, they have other methods.

 

2:45 to the end. Turn on subtitles. Putin gives a little insight to the past and the future.

 

Putin said lots of things - like co-operating with the downed airliner, promising to preserve democracy in
Russia, having no part in the death of his opponents, not creating medium range missiles, not militarizing
space etc.. (see what happened two weeks ago when debri from an attacked satellite endangered the ISS?
Why do you believe in him?

Let the Ukrainians chose their own future - they have had enough of Russia.
Next you will be defending Putin attacking Poland.

 

And there's not too many journalists in China, or North Korea, or Iran, or Venezuela.
See a pattern?
Why can't all these angry neo-Marxists go live in these squalid, opressed counties?
This way they are happy to read Chairman Xi's thoughts, accompany Kim Jong Un
as he visits the tractor factory, see Michael Moore's wonderful medical institution in
Cuba and visit Putin's palaces.
And the rest of us, who want to live in a nation of shop keepers, or admirers of
entrepreneurship, who appreciate the separation of powers and bicameral parliaments
and the rule of law --- can get on with their lives un-opposed with the endless carping
and sniping from people who are filled with self loathing and envy.

 

No it isn't. Don't forget, we'll be wiping them off the map too if they do that.

Wrong. Everything that I've said is true.

 

The only people who are trying to impose on other countries are Russia and China.

The rest of the world is merely defending themselves.

What sort of missiles?

Harmless ABM missiles like the ones in Poland and Romania?

Because they're human beings.

No human being wants Russia to invade their country and conquer them.

No, the reason why there is a war going on is because Russia keeps aggressively invading other countries.

Russia and China are the only nations who keep posing threats to other nations.

No it doesn't. The ABMs are no threat to anyone. They merely protect the EU from Iranian attack.

Who cares? Let Putin whine. It's something he's good at.

Sure there is. For one thing, we can supplement those harmless ABM missiles in Poland and Romania with a bunch of land attack missiles that are all aimed at Russia. That'll really give Putin something to whine about.

We can also keep supplying Ukraine with guns and anti-tank missiles so they can keep resisting people who invade their country.

 

Yes .. the reason they don't use nukes against us . is exactly for that reason.. Which is why your claim that Russian nukes are not a deterrent to the US using nukes ... is completely false .. .. but thanks for contradicting yourself

In Fantasy world - where life is beautiful all the time - and self contrdiction doesn't matter - and you get to hold both positive and negative positions .. I suppose that would be correct

 

Wrong. My statement is true.

If Russia invades the EU, and we cannot dislodge that invasion conventionally, we will use tactical nukes to dislodge the invasion. We will not be deterred from doing so.

If Russia uses nuclear weapons against the EU, we will use nuclear weapons against Russia. We will not be deterred from doing so.

I did not contradict myself.

All of my statements are correct in the real world.

 

I would consider a perfect outcome to be achieving all of our war aims without any use of nuclear weapons by any party.

We hold our nuclear weapons in a state of readiness in case such a perfect outcome cannot be achieved.

The same can actually be said of conventional force as well. A truly perfect outcome would be achieving all of our aims diplomatically without any shots being fired. But we hold our conventional forces ready in case such perfection cannot be achieved.

 

In true form .. you desperately try to move the goal posts ...

1) That Russia can wipe us off the map is absolutely relevent to the nuke decision.. is the claim to which you responded

2)"No it isn't. Don't forget, we'll be wiping them off the map too if they do that".

In (2) .. you claim that US nukes are a deterrent to Russia using nukes .. but then turn around and say that Russian nukes are not a deterrent to the US using nukes.

This is preposterous nonsense ... taking both sides of an argument .. and claiming to be right .. not the first time for you .. is a regular pattern..

 

I have never done any such thing.

Wrong. I said nothing about any deterrent. I spoke only of actual use of nuclear weapons.

No turn around. But otherwise, yes. That is what I said.

I have never done any such thing.

 

1) That Russia can wipe us off the map is absolutely relevent to the nuke decision.. is the claim to which you responded

2)"No it isn't. Don't forget, we'll be wiping them off the map too if they do that".

You state that if Russia nukes us .. we would nuke them = Our nuking them .. is a deterrent to Russia nuking us .. factors into the decision to nuke.

 

Yes.

No. That is not equal to my statement. It says something completely different than what I said.

 

1) That Russia can wipe us off the map is absolutely relevent to the nuke decision.. is the claim to which you responded

2)"No it isn't. Don't forget, we'll be wiping them off the map too if they do that".

You state that if Russia nukes us .. we would nuke them = Our nuking them .. is a deterrent to Russia nuking us .. factors into the decision to nuke.

I don't believe you need things dumbed down to a kindergarten level -- which means you are pretending not to understand .. but, no worries.

In (2) you claim that the US having nukes is relevant to Russia's decision to use nukes on us . because if they nuke us .. we will nuke them.

Your claim that the reverse is not true .. is abject nonsense ..

 

No. They cannot do that. And that is NOT how deterrence works.

 

2 was not my claim - was Toggles claim .. although I concur .. and yes .. the fact that Russia can wipe USA off the map .. is definitely a deterrent to the US nuking Russia .. the premise of "MAD" which is exactly how deterrence works.

The claim that nukes do not deter other nations from attacking .. is simple nonsense.

 

I took his phrase "wipe us off the map" to just be a general term for destroying us as a functioning society.

 

Correct. I do not.

I am not failing to understand. Neither am I pretending not to understand. I understand just fine.

What I am doing is pointing out that you are wrong.

I made no such claim. I said nothing at all about Russia's decision to use nukes on us.

No it isn't.

I used the term "wipe us off the map" because you used it.

I take your phrase as just meaning an attack that will destroy us as a functioning society.

You are wrong. If Russia invades the EU and that invasion cannot be dislodged conventionally, we will not be deterred from using tactical nukes to dislodge the invasion.

If Russia uses nuclear weapons against the EU, we will not be deterred from using nuclear weapons against Russia.

 

1) That Russia can wipe us off the map is absolutely relevent to the nuke decision.. is the claim to which you responded

2)"No it isn't. Don't forget, we'll be wiping them off the map too if they do that".

2) is your response you state that if Russia nukes us .. we will nuke them.

 

Correct. Notice that I made no mention of Russian decision making and no reference to deterrence.

And here. Read this over:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_utilization_target_selection