U.S. Navy Destroyer Armed With Tomahawks Arrives Off Syrian Coast, "Harassed" By Russian Warplanes

No, you are wrong. NATO says if one member is attacked.

The russians are in Syria on invitation of the syrian regime. If this US ships fires first shots and russia sinks it, then we are not bound to act in any way.

We wont join any war against Russia. Its that easy.

Merkel also made clear we wont join if North Korea attacks US areas, because this would be not under the NATO treaty.

I assure you not a single EU nation would join this madness.

Also you should read article 5 of the NATo treaty

It commits each member state to consider an armed attack against one member state, in Europe or North America, to be an armed attack against them all.

https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm

If Russia sinks a ship at Syrian coast this is not Europe or North America.

So have fun at your party. We are out.

 

I always knew that trucker was a crypto Marxist Democrat

 

Oh ... Okay ... so we are going just start lobbing nukes around willy nilly.

We should not even be in Syria. Our presence there is a violation of international law and our involvement in Syria has not only been a crime against humanity, it was a crime against our own law.

 

How many 20 megaton warheads does it have? Is it currently in service? Everything that I read on the subject indicates that all large warheads over 2 megaton were retired on both sides. Typical warhead size these days is 550-750 kt.

 

And if what they do have is as well maintained as their naval forces, it would be lucky to reach us anyway.

 

US sending tamahawks to Syria is not an act of war against Russia. Russia sinking US warship is an act of war against a NATO member.
Spin it any way you like, it won’t change a thing.

 

Why do you talk so much bullshit and dont even read the facts?
You claimed Germany is bound by NATO to step in if Russia sinks an americn ship infront Syria.

I posted article 5 and proved thats not the case.

Since Germany is largest EU nation i assure you, all european countries will follow our example.

How mad must you be to believe Germany would enter a nuclear war? Over some bullshit like this?

 

Yep. And new scary Sarmat ICBMs take a long time to fuel.

 

NATO Article 5 states an attack must happen on European or North American soil.

Evrything else is irrelevant. You can do what you want, Germany will not join.

 

.

 

Are you the head of German government?

 

Nope, Merkel is. And she already made a statement to be not walking into an american adventure.

She also made clear that Germany will not side with USA if North Korea attacks USA. Same counts for a war against Russia.

But hey you will get our symbollic support. We might send one or two russian diplomats home. But dont expect more.

 

Germany has a lot of NATO military bases on its soil and it will be attacked by Russians in event of conflict for that very reason.

 

By the way, where is the statement, so that we can all see the full context? And what if putler wants east Germany back, along with USSR? If Germany refuses to join it might find itself losing support if it actually needs it.

 

Putin is a friend of Germany.

If conflict escalates we would lock down those bases. What do you want from us`? That we let our country erase by nuclear bombs?

And here is the statement:

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/la...upport-us-war-north-korea-angela-merkel-trump

If we dont side with USA against NK you can be sure we wont side against Russia.

So explain me what do you actually expect from us? That we let our country be nuked because some syrians sniffed some chlorine gas?

 

Do you think the Russians might get upset enough to launch a few nukes toward the USA?

 

Context of the statement - if the US attacks NK then Germany wouldn’t join. She did float a possibility of join under “some circumstances”.
US stricking NK wouldnt be grounds for invoking NATO article 5.
I really doubt anyone expected Germany to join in that hypothetical situation.
Where did Merkel say that Germany would refuse to join if a NATO member is attacked?
You were wrong.

 

I am not the one who made the silly claim

That you "don't believe" it is possible for the Russians to mount a 20 MT warhead on a missile is based on what ?

Regardless, none of your traverse down this silly rabbit hole changes the fact that Russia can destroy the US in the blink of an eye.

 

It can’t. Count the amount of active/ready warheads, think of potential targets and you’ll see - Russia doesn’t have the means to destroy the US. The US doesn’t have the means to literally destroy Russia as well. MAAD was possible when each side had over 30000 warheads - at that time it was possible.

 

The US will not aim at Russian installations. They will be aiming strictly at Syrian military installations.

 

Well, in terms of maintenance, looks like you're right.

However, I was talking in terms in influence - influence from the MIC that passed such lemons as the F-35 or the Zumwalt, and that is pushing for war in any case, no matter who's President.

 

Lots of sabre rattling and big talking who has got the biggest weapon.
I predict that nothing big will happen as usual.

 

Any action happening outside Europe and North America is also not part of Article 5. Putin personally could anal rape your first lady outside Europe and North America and we would not care.

You were wrong. You believe article 5 is universal. I posted the direct link to NATO. Only if a member state is attacked in North America or Europe.

Syria is not Europe.

We wont join.

 

According to maritime law, a flagged vessel is part of the sovereign territory of the country in which it is registered. Attack ion any vessel in high seas is considered as an attack on the country’s territory. Attacking a warship in Mediterranean is same as attacking a military base in North Carolina.

 

Since you have no idea that the amount of nuclear firepower required to destroy the US is - demonstrated by your initial comparison based on Hiroshima- your claim has no merit.

Do you have any idea what having 2000 (350-750kt) warheads dropped on the US would do ? (assuming they could not reload).

What area is covered in fallout by a 750kt blast ? ... pray tell ? Assuming only half target civilian populated areas .. and using the 100,000 figure from Hiroshima (which of course is nonsense given these are 50 times the size of Hiroshima)

How many people is that ? 1000 x 100,0000 = 100 million - just on a napkin basis. Now there are not 1000 cities in the US of population 1 million or more (that would be 1 billion) so assume the figure is less.

The initial blast is not what will kill the most people. It is the massive chaos that would ensue after the fact. There is no power, no communication, no drinkable water (or if you manage to find some it will soon run out) very little food which will soon run out.

Where are all the people ( which is everyone) running away from the blast supposed to go since pretty much everywhere is a blast zone. Assuming you could find a place to go .. how do you avoid the fallout ?

One thing you are most certainly not aware of - is the fact that a 750 kt blast will create a whole lot more than 1/10 the fallout area than from of a 7.5 megaton blast.

In any case -

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219165/