- Joined
- Mar 9, 2010
- Messages
- 4,508
- Reaction score
- 4,726
Still nothing? You are pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
Still nothing? You are pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
Still nothing? You are pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
I'm gonna try to moderate this a little bit. What is a nuclear winter?Wait are you serious?
Wait are you serious?
It is weird
Sadly it's pretty obvious. No offence Strychnine but you defended ghost because you said it was his opinion not a source. Yet ghost himself tried to claim he posted a source.. ( he lied ) but still claimed he posted a legitimate source. Somehow no warning. No public call out . Nothing. Different strokes for different folks shrug.
I still like ya though lol
He was warned, it's just hiding way back on page 185 with pebs source for 500k foreign fighters and rationalposters source on thermobarics being fired into residential areas
Do you think the Red Baron would've done interviews like that? Jesus Christ.
In 2018, Trump warned Germany that they will become dependent on Russia for energy and the German politicians openly laughed:
I wonder if they are still laughing...
Damn bro, you can't even answer basic questions like "what hard evidence do you have?" What motive does any leader of any country have to start a nuclear war? It would lead to complete and total self annihilation, the exact opposite of what their interests are.
In 2018, Trump warned Germany that they will become dependent on Russia for energy and the German politicians openly laughed:
I wonder if they are still laughing...
Well you have just added more questions...
As to the evidence of the general threat to human life there's a whole bunch here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter#General_references
As to your theoretical question to the motives when Mutually Assured Destruction exists is that MAD is a possibility.
You claim that it is an inevitability.
Can you prove that?
What if the first nuclear strike is conducted miles in the sky?
What if it's in an incredibly lowly populated area?
Government run simulations on possible outcomes if a nuke is dropped. It's considered an important thing for some people. It doesn't always lead to massive escalation by both sides.
Turns out that there is a lot of thought that goes into the process of deciding whether a 500 odd nuclear missile retaliation is the appropriate response to a nuclear attack.
Aerial escalation is the most commonly accepted likely course of the initial phases of a nuclear war. A superpower, likely Russia launches a nuclear strike well above a low populated area in a show of force and deterrent. In most scenarios America returns a singular aerial nuclear device of its own.
From there it quickly shifts into hasty talks to avert nuclear war or nuclear escalation. Mainly nuclear escalation.
Guys who have access to Russian combat videos, info about the war and stuff like that, can you suggest some telegram groups where to check those out?
I'm gonna try to moderate this a little bit. What is a nuclear winter?
Yes more questions but they are only the outcrop of the first question. However complicated the scenarios are, yet it's exactly the fear of being destroyed by other nuclear powers that stops a nuclear power from using said power. This scenario where Russia uses nukes as a deterrent sounds like total BS because they have other weapons they can use as deterrents.