Russia attacks Ukranian nuclear power plant. Still not our war?

You sound like a psychopathic nationalist.
If Russia succeeds in Ukraine, then takes Latvia, Poland, etc, THEN collaborates with emboldened China and North Korea, maybe you will see another Pearl Harbor, version 2. Outcome could be different next time.
Both Latvia and Poland are pure economic leaks.
To deter (or fight) Russia and China simultaneously we don't need Latvia or even the whole Europe. We need only two things - money (and real resources to buy) and time. Defense of Europe is the useless waste of both. "F#ck the EU", as Victoria Jane Nuland said.
 
Why should we get involved in the Ukraine. It is none of our business.

Well, the earth becomes a pretty small place when there is a nuclear winter.



View attachment 610402
What about when you rushed into Vietnam?
Was that your war?
Iraq operation freedom.
He was being attacked by anyone was that your war?

You don't think much son.
 
What about when you rushed into Vietnam?
Was that your war?
Iraq operation freedom.
He was being attacked by anyone was that your war?

You don't think much son.
Vietnam, definitely a war that needed fighting. Sadly we poorly supported the French. Sadder yet the French really did not know what they were doing. But yes, when a country needs us we should be there.

Iraq, again with the poor leadership of Bush. But, Saddam did not abide by the terms of his surrender with the first Iraqi war. Saddam not abiding by his agreements guaranteed the war.

A rush into Vietnam? Our involvement began with the French in world War 2, our involvement continued through the Kirean conflict. Eisenhower sent advisors, Kennedy sent more advisors, Johnson sent troops. It took 3 different presidents, 4 different presidents involved before troops got sent? That is a rush.

You have the knowledge of a boy.
 
Why should we get involved in the Ukraine. It is none of our business.

Well, the earth becomes a pretty small place when there is a nuclear winter.



View attachment 610402
all what we need it stop buying Moscow oil and gas
 
Actually, some Russian military experts believe that Russia already has a Credible First Strike Capability (in the case of cancelling or violation of the New START treaty). In the case of their first counter-force strike (which will destroy 90% of the US nuclear arsenal, but only 1-5% of the American population), they believe that:
1) 75% chances that their post-attack blackmail will be successful, and the USA will agree to sign a peace treaty on quite generous terms without retaliation.
2) 20% chances that their post-attack blackmail will be unsuccessful, the American double-weakend retaliation counter-value strike will kill 1-3% of their population, but then the Russian counter-value strike will kill more than 90% of the American population.
3) 5% that something will go catastrophically wrong, and Russia will lost up to 30% of their population, but the USA will lost 70-90% of their population.
The scariest part of all this is seeing how incompetent, untrained, unsupplied, and generally unorganized the Russians have been. Clearly they pose NO threat in any conventional war against any NATO country. They can only attack the weak.

But this country and man have a nuclear arsenal. terrifying.
 
The scariest part of all this is seeing how incompetent, untrained, unsupplied, and generally unorganized the Russians have been. Clearly they pose NO threat in any conventional war against any NATO country. They can only attack the weak.

But this country and man have a nuclear arsenal. terrifying.
Don't watch Ukrainian propaganda too much. It consists mostly from simple fakes (like "The Ghost of Kiev" and thousands of killed Russian troops).
The Russians are advancing, the problems are mostly politically-origin (and may be, those limitations will help them win hearts and minds of the Ukrainians later).
Ukraine wasn't weak. Actually, it was stronger than most of NATO countries.
And yes, the Russians don't have a term "conventional war". They have terms: "Local war", "Regional war", "Large-scale war".
 
Maybe Biden should send Barry over to be flexible for Putin?
1646740264136.jpeg

Putin would shit his pants.
 
We are part of NATO for a reason.

Yes we are. And neither Russia nor Ukraine are members.

The Chernobyl disaster in the 1980's created substantial radiation across Europe.

Define substantial.
Nato's job is to nip european world wars in the bud----PUTIN will keep invading other european nations. It's best to take his ass out like 2 weeks ago instead of waiting allowing things to get worse.
 
Vietnam, definitely a war that needed fighting. Sadly we poorly supported the French. Sadder yet the French really did not know what they were doing. But yes, when a country needs us we should be there.

Iraq, again with the poor leadership of Bush. But, Saddam did not abide by the terms of his surrender with the first Iraqi war. Saddam not abiding by his agreements guaranteed the war.

A rush into Vietnam? Our involvement began with the French in world War 2, our involvement continued through the Kirean conflict. Eisenhower sent advisors, Kennedy sent more advisors, Johnson sent troops. It took 3 different presidents, 4 different presidents involved before troops got sent? That is a rush.

You have the knowledge of a boy.
Corrupt swamp got us in ---JOHNSON was a mob crook
 
The scariest part of all this is seeing how incompetent, untrained, unsupplied, and generally unorganized the Russians have been. Clearly they pose NO threat in any conventional war against any NATO country. They can only attack the weak.

But this country and man have a nuclear arsenal. terrifying.
So true….

Needless to say, Washington continues to create its “own reality” almost weekly, and this one’s a doozy. There manifestly would be no war in the Ukraine today save for Washington’s machinations back in February 2014, but that bit of crucial history is now deader than a doornail. - David Stockman.
 

Forum List

Back
Top