US and NATO escalation of conflict with Russia is leading to war

Status
Not open for further replies.

ShaunSA

Derailment Squad
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
49,753
There are two sides in this conflict, Russia and Ukraine, To get balanced propaganda I want to hear from both.

Outside agencies, as quite correctly pointed out here, all have their own agenda - particularly China and India.

If DSTV only broadcast a Ukranian news channel, the pro-Russians would be having a cadenza.

Then I suggest you petition DTSV to broadcast Ukraine telly

Stopping RT is not the answer
 

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
21,147
Alright, so the Azov are smearing their bullets with lard? What's the deal here, exactly?

And naturally, the National Guard will post vids of their units regardless if they're Azov or not...

The ''Kadyrov orcs" are Chechens and Chechens are Muslim. Lard is made from pig fat. Cue offence.
 

ShaunSA

Derailment Squad
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
49,753
I think he is trying to say, in a very sarcastic way, that because Twitter is pointing out that this post goes against their TOS (which is arguably correct because it is glorifying extremists being violent against those they hate) means that Twitter does not really pick sides.

Goes against their TOS but they left it there anyways. That's picking a side.
 

PrimeSteak

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
15,126

Fulcrum29

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
55,037
Well, if Putin launches nukes first, then I reckon it's safeties off for NATO as well then...

The last I read, and not going to post the details in particular, but a country backed by the US has determined that they would have a ~80% success rate at neutralising a nuclear ballistic strike. 80% is rather low considering the weapon and its potential destruction, not to mention that neutralising a nuclear weapon would also carry consequences, pending where it is being neutralised. Considering that Russia has nuclear warheads by the thousands, and would desire to use the weapons, they would commit to multiple strikes to negate any possible neutralisation.

A nuclear launch won't be pretty, it can be assured that there would be an immediate nuclear response by the targeted alliance. From what is publicly known, I don't believe Russia could respond as well to nukes as the NATO and some other UN countries can. It is likely that Russia will come second, and second still being last should such circumstances arise.

Russians are intelligent, they know it is a last resort.
 

Gyre

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
9,928
Ahhhhh. Ok. Makes more sense now. But a question that I have next is the Chechens involved now as well?

Lots of beef between Chechens and Ukranians, not sure why Chechens were getting involved anyway but most of their army has already been cleaned up from what I heard.
 

Kosmik

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
25,659
There will not be a nuclear war or fallout.

I'm more concerned about Putin trying to rattle a saber and set off a nuke over some uninhabited part of the world, then use that to scare the rest of the world in toe-ing his line.
I'm actually wondering about this, fair to say that the largest Nuclear arsenals are USA, Russia and China , as nations. USA has clearly said they will not send in troops etc UNLESS NATO is attacked directly, China is on the fence but also certainly not going to press a button. Russia is likely disinclined to unless one of the weaker EU nations gets frisky.

If I was in the US, I'd actually be kind of pissed that this is even going near that level as it means they would be brought into a nuclear conflict without direct involvement.

MAD is stupid, wrong and dangerous but the threat of it does work in calming stuff down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top