Who started what?Resorting to nukes due to losing a conventional war that you started
This^^^^. The Russians can't even build a world class commercial aircraft. How about world class passenger vehicles? The Germans and Japanese did, even after being bombed into submission. Exactly what do the Russians excel at?Russia would only use nuclear weapons if a significant conventional force invaded their land(not happening) or if they were nuked first. A hypothetical war between Russia and America would be isolated to a small region such as Ukraine, Syria, etc. Neither side wants direct war with each other and the Russians fear nuclear war just as much as we do.
While there's a lot of sentiment in this thread that's accurate, there's also a lot that reads as straight propaganda. The Russians have been bragging about their nukes in recent years because it's the only card they have. The more they brag about it, the less likely their boasting is accurate. Soviet Premier Khruschev bragged they were popping out nukes "like sausages" when America had over 10 nukes for every Soviet missile. This lead to a popular misconception that the Soviets were far ahead in the arms race and helped Nixon lose to JFK. JFK ironically learned how wrong his campaigning was when he became President.
Literally, the same arguments that got the US into endless global conflicts which we failed to convincingly win in the last 7 decades.The Russians can't even build a world class commercial aircraft. How about world class passenger vehicles? The Germans and Japanese did, even after being bombed into submission. Exactly what do the Russians excel at?
Do you have specific intelligence proving Russia does NOT have such weapons? Or China for that matter?The Russians have been bragging about their nukes in recent years because it's the only card they have.
The Ukraine will be divided into overlapping pieces that will never achieve a true peace.I wonder how much longer war In Ukraine will last ?
There have been clear Ukrainian strikes inside Russia, as well as sabotage acts. Russia has also given a few red lines, including the west sending certain military arms to support Ukraine. I will not be surprised if Russia flexes by retaliating with a targeted tactical nuke hitting a western military base somewhere in Europe, as a show of serious force to Europe to stand down.Russia would only use nuclear weapons if a significant conventional force invaded their land(not happening) or if they were nuked first.
I hope, not long.I wonder how much longer war In Ukraine will last?
You're losing the plot, leadcounsel. Show me a world class Russian automobile.Literally, the same arguments that got the US into endless global conflicts which we failed to convincingly win in the last 7 decades.
How the US propaganda continues to thrive, I will not understand.
Do you have specific intelligence proving Russia does NOT have such weapons? Or China for that matter?
Can you prove the US has any nuclear weapons at all? How?
You better hope not. Dont wish for it just to make your point here, leadcounsel.There have been clear Ukrainian strikes inside Russia, as well as sabotage acts. Russia has also given a few red lines, including the west sending certain military arms to support Ukraine. I will not be surprised if Russia flexes by retaliating with a targeted tactical nuke hitting a western military base somewhere in Europe, as a show of serious force to Europe to stand down.
I was responding to the suggesting that Russia (or China) don't have nukes. We know they do. Russia is reported to have the most first class and various nukes on earth, FYI. Since I have no personal observation or knowledge of nukes anyone has, I have to take reports at face value.what is the point in asking whether or not Russia or China has nukes? I think it's safe to say the Russians do. And to ask for proof that the US has any nukes at all...huh?
Show me the Taliban's Naval forces. Show me Al Queda's Air Force. Show me Vietnam's 1970 satellite network.Show me a world class Russian automobile.
I think I've pretty solid on what wins wars and what doesn't, and where we (the US) misplace our overconfidence and under-estimate adversaries.You're losing the plot,
Your reading comprehension is really off. Drone strikes and sabotage are in no way comparable to an invasion. Russia would only use nuclear weapons in response to something that threatens their existence as a state. This is something that's publicly available in their national security policy. Nukes greatest value is as a deterrent.There have been clear Ukrainian strikes inside Russia, as well as sabotage acts. Russia has also given a few red lines, including the west sending certain military arms to support Ukraine. I will not be surprised if Russia flexes by retaliating with a targeted tactical nuke hitting a western military base somewhere in Europe, as a show of serious force to Europe to stand down.
I was responding to the suggesting that Russia (or China) don't have nukes. We know they do. Russia is reported to have the most first class and various nukes on earth, FYI. Since I have no personal observation or knowledge of nukes anyone has, I have to take reports at face value.
The Russians have been bragging about their nukes in recent years because it's the only card they have.
9/11/01Your reading comprehension is really off. Drone strikes and sabotage are in no way comparable to an invasion. Russia would only use nuclear weapons in response to something that threatens their existence as a state. This is something that's publicly available in their national security policy. Nukes greatest value is as a deterrent.
Mutual Assured Destruction has prevented nuclear war for many decades now. An exchange isn't going to occur over Ukraine.
If you think my expert reading comprehension is wrong perhaps be more precise in your use of language, or even make a coherent point. You literally wrote, "The more they brag about it (their nukes), the less likely their boasting is accurate..." "America had over 10 nukes for every Soviet missile."The Russians have been bragging about their nukes in recent years because it's the only card they have. The more they brag about it, the less likely their boasting is accurate. Soviet Premier Khruschev bragged they were popping out nukes "like sausages" when America had over 10 nukes for every Soviet missile. This lead to a popular misconception that the Soviets were far ahead in the arms race and helped Nixon lose to JFK.
Russia is, afterall, a world superpower with more active and superior nuclear weapons than any nation including the US.
They are near peers. Every expert agrees. If we were to manage to defeat them, Russia specifically, it would rain nuclear weapons down on the US and we would not exist as a functional nation any longer. Russia has more, and far more advance, nuclear weapons than the US. We would be unable to stop such an attack.
So we in the US would take the greater beating in an exchange, for whatever that is worth.
Russia would only use nuclear weapons if a significant conventional force invaded their land(not happening) or if they were nuked first. A hypothetical war between Russia and America would be isolated to a small region such as Ukraine, Syria, etc. Neither side wants direct war with each other and the Russians fear nuclear war just as much as we do.
While there's a lot of sentiment in this thread that's accurate, there's also a lot that reads as straight propaganda. The Russians have been bragging about their nukes in recent years because it's the only card they have. The more they brag about it, the less likely their boasting is accurate. Soviet Premier Khruschev bragged they were popping out nukes "like sausages" when America had over 10 nukes for every Soviet missile. This lead to a popular misconception that the Soviets were far ahead in the arms race and helped Nixon lose to JFK. JFK ironically learned how wrong his campaigning was when he became President.
You say they are boasting, yet apparently admit they do, in fact, have these weapons. I'm not the confused one in this discussion. You quoted me, me, as having stated they have these weapons. Now you're attempting to say I said they didn't. I truly cannot follow this. I have said they have nuclear weapons. What are you going on about?There was nothing about this that was hard to follow. It's only difficult for you. For a supposed expert, it should be obvious their boasting was in reference to all of the Russian talk over the last few years about their nuclear weapon delivery systems and hyper sonic missiles. It's been abundant in world news. The fact I have to specifically clarify Russia has nuclear weapons undermines any and all credibility you have in a discussion like this. For you to then fail in putting 2 and 2 together that the Russian's have a long history overselling their abilities makes for icing on the cake.
Yes, Russia, and only Russia, is the only nation to "oversell" their abilities. Good grief. Vietnam. Iraq. Afghanistan. N. Korea. Lebanon. Benghazi. And on, and on, and on. The US is wonderful at grossly overselling our abilities.Russian's have a long history overselling their abilities makes for icing on the cake.
None of this, FYI, is close to accurate.But when the person you're discussing with can't even follow their own comments, has no reading comprehension, spins everything said to something delusional, demands sources and doesn't source anything, there's no reason to bother.
Please explain what America should have done differently with 9/11 and the Ukraine. Or even bigger picture, what should America have done differently with respect to China’s impending world rule?I think I've pretty solid on what wins wars and what doesn't.
Succinctly. Honest and integrity in leadership. Prioritize realistic actionable tasks that legitimately secure the USA.Please explain what America should have done differently with 9/11 and the Ukraine. Or even bigger picture, what should America have done differently with respect to China’s impending world rule?
Scott