The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)

[vhcat70]

We all know that there are American soldiers in Ukraine. That is not debatable. They just are not formally part of the U.S. military. So, please …

And, the country that dealt with Chernobyl won’t use tactical nukes because it prohibits invasion? Look, I am not arguing that Putin will actually use nukes, but the reason he states is just dumb. Ukraine would effectively be disabled if Russia uses a precisely placed nuke. At that point, every front in the war becomes disabled for Ukraine. There are many reasons Russia would not use a nuke. That is not one of them.

In fact, by suggesting this is a proxy war, why would Russia need to invade after it used a nuke if its desire is to quench Westernization?

He says they're aren't US soldiers there, you do. Taking your position, since US soldiers are in Ukraine, you think there's a chance Putin would nuke them?

I read in the article that nuke(s) would make Ukraine unattractive to Russia or anyone to occupy for a good long while. No? I think nukes emit more radiation than Chernobyl did. Could be wrong.

I just think it's a bad signal to the bad actors to pull up stakes there.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

I think if you give it some thought, you can answer this question. A tactical strike would cut off the head of operations for Ukraine and would greatly change the demeanor of the populace and fighting apparatus. If you think a nuke is off the table because it would then force the Russians to push into the aftermath, we disagree. Of course, to reiterate, I am not saying that Russia would nuke Ukraine. Rather, as stated, I do not think the author’s rationale is correct. If you think his rationale is correct, we disagree.

I agree with parts and disagree with parts. However, he would obviously have more experience with the situation than we do.

Your tactical nuke wouldn't end anything. At best it would create national martyrs and at worst it would be fully ineffective and malign Russia even deeper into the international dumpster for nothing.

If you think a low yield tactical nuke with a blast zone of 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile, 2600 feet to 3900 feet, could end the war, we don't just disagree. You're simply wrong.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

He says they're aren't US soldiers there, you do. Taking your position, since US soldiers are in Ukraine, you think there's a chance Putin would nuke them?

I read in the article that nuke(s) would make Ukraine unattractive to Russia or anyone to occupy for a good long while. No? I think nukes emit more radiation than Chernobyl did. Could be wrong.

I just think it's a bad signal to the bad actors to pull up stakes there.

There are US trained American soldiers fighting for Ukraine. Fact.

I never said Putin would nuke anyone. I said his reasoning was mistaken. I still believe that.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

I agree with parts and disagree with parts. However, he would obviously have more experience with the situation than we do.

Your tactical nuke wouldn't end anything. At best it would create national martyrs and at worst it would be fully ineffective and malign Russia even deeper into the international dumpster for nothing.

If you think a low yield tactical nuke with a blast zone of 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile, 2600 feet to 3900 feet, could end the war, we don't just disagree. You're simply wrong.

Again, I was not making the argument for or against Putin having a motivation to nuke. I was simply refuting his reasoning.

 

[vhcat70]

There are US trained American soldiers fighting for Ukraine. Fact.

1) Current members of the US Armed Forces fighting or 2) Americans trained by the US military & maybe in the US military at some time in the past or 3) both? I certainly believe some US ex-military are volunteers in Ukraine.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

1) Current members of the US Armed Forces fighting or 2) Americans trained by the US military & maybe in the US military at some time in the past or 3) both? I certainly believe some US ex-military are volunteers in Ukraine.

Your belief has been personally confirmed by me and others.

 

[vhcat70]

Your belief has been personally confirmed by me and others.

OK, so there aren't current members of the US military fight in Ukraine to your knowledge. Thanks.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Again, I was not making the argument for or against Putin having a motivation to nuke. I was simply refuting his reasoning.

Huh? Weren't you just on the "well placed nuke" subject? I have trouble with my train 9f thought these days but you're confusing me.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

OK, so there aren't current members of the US military fight in Ukraine to your knowledge. Thanks.

I am sorry you misunderstood my comment. But, your guy, who you adopted as your own comment, said, “ there are no American soldiers in Ukraine.” There ARE American soldiers in Ukraine. Thanks for letting me reinforce that fact.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Huh? Weren't you just on the "well placed nuke" subject? I have trouble with my train 9f thought these days but you're confusing me.

Context matters, counselor. You should know that. Rather than getting frothy every time someone you disagree with makes a post, take a minute to understand the context. VHCat’s post said Putin won’t use a nuke because his soldiers would not be able to follow the nuke. My point was that soldiers don’t have to follow a nuke for a tactical nuke to be useful in war.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Context matters, counselor. You should know that. Rather than getting frothy every time someone you disagree with makes a post, take a minute to understand the context. VHCat’s post said Putin won’t use a nuke because his soldiers would not be able to follow the nuke. My point was that soldiers don’t have to follow a nuke for a tactical nuke to be useful in war.

Ah, and no, I didn't see that exchange. You may be right if everything happens perfectly but I still disagree with you. I think most military opinions are the same. A tactical nuke is just too small to expect it to render the enemy incapable of fighting.

It is still my opinion that regardless of who is killed with the tactical nuke, it would o ly cause the Ukrainians to dig in their heels. As I said earlier, most military opinions see little use for tactical nukes on the battlefield. We absolutely will agree to disagree on this.

Thanks for the clarification though.Eading through a bunch of data or responses is hard for me these days.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Ah, and no, I didn't see that exchange. You may be right if everything happens perfectly but I still disagree with you. I think most military opinions are the same. A tactical nuke is just too small to expect it to render the enemy incapable of fighting.

It is still my opinion that regardless of who is killed with the tactical nuke, it would o ly cause the Ukrainians to dig in their heels. As I said earlier, most military opinions see little use for tactical nukes on the battlefield. We absolutely will agree to disagree on this.

Thanks for the clarification though.Eading through a bunch of data or responses is hard for me these days.

The commentator quoted said he did not think Russia would use nukes, because troops cannot follow it into battle, as if that was the only use of tactical nukes. And, yet, some in NATO this week discussed giving Ukraine nukes. Go figure. The inconsistency continues. I guess those discussing re-arming Ukraine with nukes don’t appreciate the uselessness of nukes.

 

[bcw1029]

Gazprom shares are a bargain, about a $1 a share.
You should buy in, HMT.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

The commentator quoted said he did not think Russia would use nukes, because troops cannot follow it into battle, as if that was the only use of tactical nukes. And, yet, some in NATO this week discussed giving Ukraine nukes. Go figure. The inconsistency continues. I guess those discussing re-arming Ukraine with nukes don’t appreciate the uselessness of nukes.

I hope that never happens.

 

[cat_chaser]

Serious question…..you good
BigBlueFan? Can’t tell if you are being sarcastic or not about issues you are having. If serious, hope things get better.

 

[vhcat70]

I am sorry you misunderstood my comment. But, your guy, who you adopted as your own comment, said, “ there are no American soldiers in Ukraine.” There ARE American soldiers in Ukraine. Thanks for letting me reinforce that fact.

I wrote: " I certainly believe some US ex-military are volunteers in Ukraine." That's the only thing I said I believed.

Then you wrote: "Your belief has been personally confirmed by me."

NET, I don't see where I misunderstood anything.

BUT, now that you've stated clearly what you think on US troops in Ukraine, thanks.

 

[vhcat70]

My point was that soldiers don’t have to follow a nuke for a tactical nuke to be useful in war.

If the objective is to control territory so that people you believe should be part of your country will be so & live in that territory, a tactical nuke doesn't help those people do that.

 

[vhcat70]

The commentator quoted said he did not think Russia would use nukes, because troops cannot follow it into battle, as if that was the only use of tactical nukes. And, yet, some in NATO this week discussed giving Ukraine nukes. Go figure. The inconsistency continues. I guess those discussing re-arming Ukraine with nukes don’t appreciate the uselessness of nukes.

I will figure. Why should only one side be able to threaten? Nothing inconsistent there at all. What do you think is inconsistent? Since you say nukes are useless, why would Putin do something useless?

 

[Caveman Catfan]

If the objective is to control territory so that people you believe should be part of your country will be so & live in that territory, a tactical nuke doesn't help those people do that.

IF the objective is to stop Ukraine from being a NATO partner or control the area between Russia and NATO allies or to keep the U.S. from getting some foothold on your border or to stop Nazis or …

Putin is both a madman and a rational person who concurs with our assessments.

This thread is really chaotic.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

I will figure. Why should only one side be able to threaten? Nothing inconsistent there at all. What do you think is inconsistent? Since you say nukes are useless, why would Putin do something useless?

Uh, tactical nukes are not useful and Putin won’t use nukes, but let’s give Ukraine nukes.

YOUR quote said nukes are not of value in this war. Not me. Read your own cut and pastes.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Serious question…..you good
BigBlueFan? Can’t tell if you are being sarcastic or not about issues you are having. If serious, hope things get better.

I'm dealing with a type of liver failure. I'm doing ok but it makes me very tired and quite often I have to deal with hepatic encephalopathy.....mush brain as I call it. Be very careful with fatty liver disease and medications that are hard on your liver. It's stage 4 so the only way it gets better is by transplant. I'm not sick enough for that yet.

Thanks for asking.

 

[Spica Orbit]

Risking Nuclear War › American Greatness

We are probably closer to a nuclear war than any previous point in my lifetime. As a Generation X kid who grew up during the Cold War, fear of nuclear war is still a deeply ingrained instinct.

amgreatness.com

 

[vhcat70]

I'm dealing with a type of liver failure. I'm doing ok but it makes me very tired and quite often I have to deal with hepatic encephalopathy.....mush brain as I call it. Be very careful with fatty liver disease and medications that are hard on your liver. It's stage 4 so the only way it gets better is by transplant. I'm not sick enough for that yet.

Thanks for asking.

I didn't know anything of your condition. So sorry. I hope when your eligible you get the transplant and get well. Happy Thanksgiving.

 

[vhcat70]

Risking Nuclear War › American Greatness

We are probably closer to a nuclear war than any previous point in my lifetime. As a Generation X kid who grew up during the Cold War, fear of nuclear war is still a deeply ingrained instinct.

amgreatness.com

Closer to nuclear war than anytime in his life = extremely low risk.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

I didn't know anything of your condition. So sorry. I hope when your eligible you get the transplant and get well. Happy Thanksgiving.

Thanks, Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

 

[Spica Orbit]

White House Pressing Ukraine To Draft 18-Year-Olds for War - News From Antiwar.com

The White House is pressuring Ukraine to increase the size of its military by lowering the minimum age of conscription from 25 to 18, The Associated Press reported on Wednesday. A senior Biden administration official said the outgoing administration wants Ukraine to start drafting 18-year-olds...

news.antiwar.com

 

[hmt5000]

Ah, and no, I didn't see that exchange. You may be right if everything happens perfectly but I still disagree with you. I think most military opinions are the same. A tactical nuke is just too small to expect it to render the enemy incapable of fighting.

It is still my opinion that regardless of who is killed with the tactical nuke, it would o ly cause the Ukrainians to dig in their heels. As I said earlier, most military opinions see little use for tactical nukes on the battlefield. We absolutely will agree to disagree on this.

Thanks for the clarification though.Eading through a bunch of data or responses is hard for me these days.

Kind of weird so many people in Pentagon want the US to use one against Russia then isn't it...?

 

[hmt5000]

Gazprom shares are a bargain, about a $1 a share.
You should buy in, HMT.

Nah. I'm at 80% cash right now. The market is going to crash further I fear. Warren Buffet is setting on $350billion in cash waiting to buy on the cheap. I'm going to follow his lead. War wrecks economies. We still are pretending everything is OK.

 

[WildcatofNati2]

White House Pressing Ukraine To Draft 18-Year-Olds for War - News From Antiwar.com

The White House is pressuring Ukraine to increase the size of its military by lowering the minimum age of conscription from 25 to 18, The Associated Press reported on Wednesday. A senior Biden administration official said the outgoing administration wants Ukraine to start drafting 18-year-olds...

news.antiwar.com

This is as ludicrous as it would be if Russia or China had insisted on lowering the Iraqi draft age after we ruthlessly, and illegally, bombed them to the Stone Age. Perhaps they did so advocate, but I don’t know. I mean, I honestly don't understand this. Why are we making requests to a country, which is at war, when we're not at war? Have we gone mad?

Sanity returns to America in January- let's hope that the world isn't in a radiation zone before that.

 

[hmt5000]

This is as ludicrous as it would be if Russia or China had insisted on lowering the Iraqi draft age after we ruthlessly, and illegally, bombed them to the Stone Age. Perhaps they did, but I don’t know. I mean, I honestly don't understand this.

It's a story because they've lost too many men to man the front lines and Russia gains more and more ground leading up to Jan 20th. The globalist want Ukraine to draft "everyone" to hold as much ground as possible before the adults shut this shit down. Gains in the East used to be meters per day. Russia is taking miles per day on 3 to 5 fronts.

 

[KAB Cats]

Zelensky: I’ll give up Ukrainian territory to Russia to achieve peace

President says for first time that his country could cede land temporarily in exchange for protection of a ‘Nato umbrella’

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Zelensky: I’ll give up Ukrainian territory to Russia to achieve peace

President says for first time that his country could cede land temporarily in exchange for protection of a ‘Nato umbrella’

www.telegraph.co.uk

Please speak up if this is a surprise to you.

 

[KAB Cats]

Please speak up if this is a surprise to you.

Who are you talking to?

 

[SDC888]

Please speak up if this is a surprise to you.

Damn, I'm surprised: looks like even Zelly himself has been reduced to Russian propaganda talking points.

 

[KAB Cats]

Damn, I'm surprised: looks like even Zelly himself has been reduced to Russian propaganda talking points.

He can’t win and everyone knows it. Best thing they can do is give up what they’ve lost rather than losing more.