So Long And Thanks For All The Fish - Ukraine bombs Russian Nuclear Bombers

[transam]

2 minutes ago, jas007 said:

I think everyone here needs to stop, focus, and not lose sight of the fact that the issue at hand is not right or wrong. The issue at hand is not about internationally recognized borders, or who started the war or for what justification. At this point, that's all history. 

 

Russia currently holds all the cards, so to speak. The war on the ground is all but over, and parts of the Donbas have been annexed to Russia, along with Crimea.  That's not going to be undone.  Right or wrong, it's a done deal.

 

So what happens now?  Is the world going to experience WWIII and likely nuclear annihilation?  Everyone dead simply because some clowns in the UK are living in the past and think they still have an empire?  Everyone dead because the bankers and the US war machine needs more and more money to sustain a fiat money Ponzi scheme that's now entering it's last years? 

 

It's not hard to understand why the Ukrainians want to fight to the death, regardless. Ukraine is their "motherland."  And unfortunately for them, they're being used simply as pawns in a proxy war.  It's a human tragedy and didn't have to happen.  Over a million young kids, dead.  God knows how many more crippled for life.  The time to stop is now, before any more people die needlessly. Eight billion people would probably agree with me. 

You need medication chap, you wrote all leaving out Ukraine was attacked by a tyrant, thank gawd you weren't around in Hitlers time, mind you, you probably would have met a noose if you were........🥺

[jas007]

6 minutes ago, transam said:

You need medication chap, you wrote all leaving out Ukraine was attacked by a tyrant, thank gawd you weren't around in Hitlers time, mind you, you probably would have met a noose if you were........🥺

During Hitler's time, no one had nukes that could end the human race.  The nukes were dropped on Japan, and there was no fear of retaliation.  Yet. 

 

And you obviously missed my point.  Right and wrong isn't at issue. Tyrant or not, justified or not, Putin's Russia attacked Ukraine.  

 

So we should count you as yet another person who wants to end humanity?  That could easily happen. 

[sharot724]

9 minutes ago, jas007 said:

During Hitler's time, no one had nukes that could end the human race.  The nukes were dropped on Japan, and there was no fear of retaliation.  Yet. 

 

And you obviously missed my point.  Right and wrong isn't at issue. Tyrant or not, justified or not, Putin's Russia attacked Ukraine.  

 

So we should count you as yet another person who wants to end humanity?  That could easily happen. 

Men like Vlad don't care how many die.

As you said the people of Ukraine have good reason to defend themselves.

The citizens of Russia have to wake up to the reality.

Then a shift could roll out.

It has begun now and that is the face we need to expedite.  Rather than your choice:

Not surrendering to a freak that only has the threat of a nuclear bomb ending left.

[Smokin Joe]

3 minutes ago, jas007 said:

During Hitler's time, no one had nukes that could end the human race.  The nukes were dropped on Japan, and there was no fear of retaliation.  Yet. 

 

And you obviously missed my point.  Right and wrong isn't at issue. Tyrant or not, justified or not, Putin's Russia attacked Ukraine.  

 

So we should count you as yet another person who wants to end humanity?  That could easily happen. 

 

You are obviously very impressed with the size of Russia's nuclear arsenal. The number of warheads he has isn't nearly as important as how many of them would actually work.

 

ICBMs require a lot of maintenance and the chances that Putin has been spending the millions necessary are slim to none. 

 

Of course there would be a handful that might work and a small chance that one or two could reach the US. And Bombers could strike the other Nato countries so there would be some horrific damage.

 

But the only total annihilation would be Russia. It would cease to exist if they ever used a nuke on a Nato country. The rest of the world would recover but not Russia and Putin knows it. I am not worried about the end of humanity.

 

Using a couple of tactical nukes in Ukraine would be a tough response to predict however. Putin might just be crazy enough to do that.

 

[sharot724]

1 minute ago, Smokin Joe said:

 

You are obviously very impressed with the size of Russia's nuclear arsenal. The number of warheads he has isn't nearly as important as how many of them would actually work.

 

ICBMs require a lot of maintenance and the chances that Putin has been spending the millions necessary are slim to none. 

 

Of course there would be a handful that might work and a small chance that one or two could reach the US. And Bombers could strike the other Nato countries so there would be some horrific damage.

 

But the only total annihilation would be Russia. It would cease to exist if they ever used a nuke on a Nato country. The rest of the world would recover but not Russia and Putin knows it. I am not worried about the end of humanity.

 

Using a couple of tactical nukes in Ukraine would be a tough response to predict however. Putin might just be crazy enough to do that.

 

Those prevailing winds might catch a few Russian territories but Vlad sees that as necessary costs to complete his Land Grab.

[transam]

23 minutes ago, jas007 said:

During Hitler's time, no one had nukes that could end the human race.  The nukes were dropped on Japan, and there was no fear of retaliation.  Yet. 

 

And you obviously missed my point.  Right and wrong isn't at issue. Tyrant or not, justified or not, Putin's Russia attacked Ukraine.  

 

So we should count you as yet another person who wants to end humanity?  That could easily happen. 

Get behind your curtain, chap.................🙄

 

How long have the Russians had nukes......?......🙄

 

Did you quake over Vietnam & N.Korea too............🤭

[sharot724]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

To the folks celebrating the attack on the Russkie bombers, it's not going so well for the people of Kiev last night,..

 

Depending one whose (very early) reports you read, it's either a major or a minor attack.

 

 

Personally, I think it's tragic and wrong.  But very predictable.  That's what happens when you poke the bear.

 

Russia launches missile, drone attack on Kyiv days after Ukraine’s audacious strike on bomber fleet | CNN

 

It's long past time to concede the facts and out an end to it.  The only way Russia loses this is NATO boots in Ukraine and the risk of WW3 and nuclear annihilation.  Anyone postulating dreaming otherwise is fooling themselves.

 

Reportedly Bryansk airport in russia

 

[jas007]

8 minutes ago, Smokin Joe said:

 

You are obviously very impressed with the size of Russia's nuclear arsenal. The number of warheads he has isn't nearly as important as how many of them would actually work.

 

ICBMs require a lot of maintenance and the chances that Putin has been spending the millions necessary are slim to none. 

 

Of course there would be a handful that might work and a small chance that one or two could reach the US. And Bombers could strike the other Nato countries so there would be some horrific damage.

 

But the only total annihilation would be Russia. It would cease to exist if they ever used a nuke on a Nato country. The rest of the world would recover but not Russia and Putin knows it. I am not worried about the end of humanity.

 

Using a couple of tactical nukes in Ukraine would be a tough response to predict however. Putin might just be crazy enough to do that.

 

 So you're one of the people who thinks a nuclear war is "winnable."  Insanity.  Even if we assume 90% of Russia's ICBM's are faulty, what about the rest? What about the long range bombers and the submarines?  And don't forget the "Dead Hand" system.  

 

Do you understand how a nuclear war is fought?  Apparently not. There will be no such thing as a "limited" nuclear war.  It doesn't pan out that way. It's "use it or lose it."  Once there's an initial attack by one side, the other side doesn't wait around to assess the damage. If they don't fire off what they have left, that could be the end of them.  And so it goes.  Over in 45 minutes.  

 

 

[jas007]

9 minutes ago, transam said:

Get behind your curtain, chap.................🙄

 

How long have the Russians had nukes......?......🙄

 

Did you quake over Vietnam & N.Korea too............🤭

Russia tested its first nuclear bomb in 1949.  And I wasn't old enough to worry about anything during the Korean War. 

 

As for Vietnam?  Why would anyone have worried about that?  Russia certain wasn't engaged in an existential conflict during that war, and China was still a largely agrarian country with a nuclear program still in its infancy.

 

Any more nonsense?

 

 

[transam]

3 minutes ago, jas007 said:

 So you're one of the people who thinks a nuclear war is "winnable."  Insanity.  Even if we assume 90% of Russia's ICBM's are faulty, what about the rest? What about the long range bombers and the submarines?  And don't forget the "Dead Hand" system.  

 

Do you understand how a nuclear war is fought?  Apparently not. There will be no such thing as a "limited" nuclear war.  It doesn't pan out that way. It's "use it or lose it."  Once there's an initial attack by one side, the other side doesn't wait around to assess the damage. If they don't fire off what they have left, that could be the end of them.  And so it goes.  Over in 45 minutes.  

 

 

Can you sleep at night...........?  🥺

 

Don't you think that those with far more between the ears than you know all the facts in front of them regarding nuke stuff...........🙄

 

Do you honestly think they don't know what they are dealing with..........🙄

[transam]

2 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Russia tested its first nuclear bomb in 1949.  And I wasn't old enough to worry about anything during the Korean War. 

 

As for Vietnam?  Why would anyone have worried about that?  Russia certain wasn't engaged in an existential conflict during that war, and China was still a largely agrarian country with a nuclear program still in its infancy.

 

Any more nonsense?

 

 

Russia and China were assisting the commies in both conflicts.

 

The USA could have nuked both if they wanted too, but they walked....

 

Get the message........

[RayC]

47 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

So, can I presume you're in favor of NATO boots on the ground and risking WW3 and Armageddon?  Because that's what you're advocating.  Risking the end of the world as we know it.

 

 

 

It's only a risk if you believe that Putin is insane. He would have to be to risk MAD. Even if Putin is mad enough to contemplate such action, are all the rest of the Russian high command also insane?

 

And what's your alternative? Appease Putin, no matter what? What if he decides he wants more than just Ukraine? The only logical thing would be to give him everything he demands as the alternative is Armageddon as it's already been decided that Putin is insane enough to risk it.

[jas007]

9 minutes ago, transam said:

Russia and China were assisting the commies in both conflicts.

 

The USA could have nuked both if they wanted too, but they walked....

 

Get the message........

And why would the USA do that?  LBJ thought he could win the war with more and more troops. He finally gave up, and if you were around back then you saw his famous speech on TV. And by the time Nixon got on board, Kissinger was his national security advisor. Kissinger recognized that there could be no military solution, and that the MAD doctrine would have meant the end of both the USA and Russia.  And as we all know, Nixon changed the course of history with his trip to China in 1972.  We're living with the consequences of that today.  Nuking China was never in the cards.

[Smokin Joe]

26 minutes ago, jas007 said:

 So you're one of the people who thinks a nuclear war is "winnable."  Insanity.  Even if we assume 90% of Russia's ICBM's are faulty, what about the rest? What about the long range bombers and the submarines?  And don't forget the "Dead Hand" system.  

 

Do you understand how a nuclear war is fought?  Apparently not. There will be no such thing as a "limited" nuclear war.  It doesn't pan out that way. It's "use it or lose it."  Once there's an initial attack by one side, the other side doesn't wait around to assess the damage. If they don't fire off what they have left, that could be the end of them.  And so it goes.  Over in 45 minutes.  

 

 

 

I wouldn't use the word "Winnable" but the end result is that the west would survive and eventually recover while Russia would cease to exist.

 

You can't be serious about the long range bombers being a serious threat. Submarines, yes, but they are referred to as "priority targets" by our side. 

[jas007]

7 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

It's only a risk if you believe that Putin is insane. He would have to be to risk MAD. Even if Putin is mad enough to contemplate such action, are all the rest of the Russian high command also insane?

 

And what's your alternative? Appease Putin, no matter what? What if he decides he wants more than just Ukraine? The only logical thing would be to give him everything he demands as the alternative is Armageddon as it's already been decided that Putin is insane enough to risk it.

And that is why diplomacy is so important and why the little drone fiasco that went off the other day made diplomacy all the more difficult.  The people trying to stop Putin at any cost crossed the line. What they did was stupid beyond belief.  

[jas007]

2 minutes ago, Smokin Joe said:

 

I wouldn't use the word "Winnable" but the end result is that the west would survive and eventually recover while Russia would cease to exist.

 

You can't be serious about the long range bombers being a serious threat. Submarines, yes, but they are referred to as "priority targets" by our side. 

Exactly how many nukes do you think have to be shot off to trigger all out war?  Answer: not many.

 

And you're being silly in assuming the West would "survive and eventually recover."  You don't know that.  You don't know that at all.  You're just guessing. Gambling with the future of the human race. 

[Smokin Joe]

Just now, jas007 said:

Exactly how many nukes do you think have to be shot off to trigger all out war?  Answer: not many.

 

And you're being silly in assuming the West would "survive and eventually recover."  You don't know that.  You don't know that at all.  You're just guessing. Gambling with the future of the human race. 

 

You apparently get all your "knowledge" from video games and movies. 

[johng]

There was also attacks  on 2 railway bridges with civilian deaths and the attack on the crimean bridge (again)

Which Putin is calling terrorism.

 

I read that the airfield attacks destroyed 3 planes and damaged 3 more...a far cry from the 40 destroyed planes claimed originaly.

 

Anyway seems Russia/Putin may now reclassify the offensive as a war against terrorism with Zelensky and collaborating countries as legitimate targets and no more negotiation.

 

[RayC]

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

I think everyone here needs to stop, focus, and not lose sight of the fact that the issue at hand is not right or wrong. The issue at hand is not about internationally recognized borders, or who started the war or for what justification. At this point, that's all history. 

 

I'm sure that it is what Putin would prefer. Far from being history, the issue of right or wrong should be an active concern.

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

Russia currently holds all the cards, so to speak. The war on the ground is all but over, and parts of the Donbas have been annexed to Russia, along with Crimea.  That's not going to be undone.  Right or wrong, it's a done deal.

 

Others believe that NATO involvement on the ground would change things 

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

So what happens now?  Is the world going to experience WWIII and likely nuclear annihilation?  

 

See my reply to Impulse

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

Everyone dead simply because some clowns in the UK are living in the past and think they still have an empire?  Everyone dead because the bankers and the US war machine need more and more money to sustain a fiat money Ponzi scheme that's now entering it's last years? 

 

So the cause - and ongoing nature of this war - can be attributed to imperialists in the UK and US bankers and arms manufacturers?

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

It's not hard to understand why the Ukrainians want to fight to the death, regardless. Ukraine is their "motherland."  

 

Agreed

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

And unfortunately for them, they're being used simply as pawns in a proxy war.

 

Only if you consider Ukraine's right to self-determination to be a proxy war

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

 It's a human tragedy and didn't have to happen.  Over a million young kids, dead.  God knows how many more crippled for life.  

 

Yes it is a human tragedy and the responsibility for that lays at the feet of Russia.

 

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

The time to stop is now, before any more people die needlessly. Eight billion people would probably agree with me. 

 

Agreed. An immediate ceasefire and Russian agreement that they will withdraw from Ukraine on condition that measures are put in place to protect and safeguard the interests of any Russian speakers left in Ukraine should do the trick. Only problem is Putin won't agree to that.

[johng]

10 minutes ago, jas007 said:

You don't know that at all.  You're just guessing. Gambling with the future of the human race. 

That is why it's called MAD.

Seems the best way to stop bully's 

Imagine if Iraq or Afghanistan actually had nukes would those senseless  wars have happened ?

[johng]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

Others believe that NATO involvement on the ground would change things 

It most certainly would change things for the worse.

[RayC]

15 minutes ago, jas007 said:

And that is why diplomacy is so important and why the little drone fiasco that went off the other day made diplomacy all the more difficult.  The people trying to stop Putin at any cost crossed the line. What they did was stupid beyond belief.  

 

The actions came after Putin refused to be involved in any meaningful negotiations.

 

You constantly point to what you perceive as Ukrainian provocation while turning a blind eye seek to the root cause of this conflict - i.e. Russia's refusal to allow Ukraine to pursue closer ties with the EU - and Russian atrocities since the start of this conflict.

[johng]

6 minutes ago, RayC said:

safeguard the interests of any Russian speakers left in Ukraine

Most of the Russian speakers are in the territory that Russia has already taken...a major part of the reason for the “operation“ in the first place was to safeguard them..there were of course other reasons.

[RayC]

3 minutes ago, johng said:

It most certainly would change things for the worse.

 

Other than nuclear annihilation, it's hard to see how things can get much worse for Ukraine.

[johng]

1 minute ago, RayC said:

 

Other than nuclear annihilation, it's hard to see how things can get much worse for Ukraine.

They can declare themselves neutral ,not join NATO and EU

and not be nuked. 

[RayC]

Just now, johng said:

Most of the Russian speakers are in the territory that Russia has already taken...a major part of the reason for the “operation“ in the first place was to safeguard them..there were of course other reasons.

 

Just an excuse. Russia had been offering support to the separatists long before 2014.

 

As I have said previously, imo the root cause of this war is economic I.e. Russia's unwillingness to accept Ukraine's desire to forge closer ties with the EU. A secondary reason is Putin's belief that Ukraine is not a sovereign country and that it should form part of a 'Greater Russia' with Belarus.

[RayC]

2 minutes ago, johng said:

They can declare themselves neutral ,not join NATO and EU

and not be nuked. 

 

Militarily Ukraine was non-aligned in 2014 and had withdrawn its' application to join NATO. There is no reason to think that situation would have changed if Russia had not annexed Crimea.

 

Why should Ukraine not be allowed to join the EU?

[jvs]

1 hour ago, sharot724 said:

Men like Vlad don't care how many die.

As you said the people of Ukraine have good reason to defend themselves.

The citizens of Russia have to wake up to the reality.

Then a shift could roll out.

It has begun now and that is the face we need to expedite.  Rather than your choice:

Not surrendering to a freak that only has the threat of a nuclear bomb ending left.

One poster i have not seen on here for awhile was all about pleasing the bully.

He was adamant about not upsetting putin or else.

Strange some people have not learnt from the past.

Also sad.

[connda]

"Those whom the God's wish to destroy, they first make mad."
-Euripides

If you wish to see Russia overthrown, please go home and volunteer to be sent to the Russian fronts.  Take it to those Red Army Ruskies and show that Commie dictator Putin a thing or two.  Russia is weak and about to fall, it just needs a little push, so volunteer to arm up and have your Western country push those orcs back to Moscow and succeed where Napoleon and Hitler failed.  Third time's a charm because - Russia invaded the shining Democracy of Ukraine completely unprovoked. Go give them that final little push and save the West in the name of Liberty and Democracy and Global Tolerance and Peace Through Strength. 

World War 3 is coming.  Most folks in the progressive liberal West want it so bad they can taste it.  And they want you to go and fight it for them. Show them your patriotism and join the Army today!

[connda]

“Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth into battle—be Thou near them! With them—in spirit—we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended in the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames in summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it—

For our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimmage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet!

We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.
-Mark Twain, The War Prayer