Russia threatens nuclear war if it loses in Ukraine

New York Post ^ | January 19, 2023 | Evan Simko-Bednarski

[GOPJ]

Governments ‘of the world’ need to put their own people and countries first and stop thinking of themselves as akin to God. “The World” is not their problem. Making sure their people are free, decent and productive is their problem. NOT SAVING THE WORLD like those fools Al Gore and John Kerry.

The ‘world savers’ need to check their big fat egos - that includes the pampered old whore mongers who rush to Devos in their private jets.

[linMcHlp]

Somebody trespasses on your land, sets fire to your garage, and then, breaks into your house.

I am your neighboring farmer, and I see the flames; so I rush over to help you and notice the front door break in . . .

So, I enter thru the tornado storm door to your basement at the rear of your house and discover your son and wife there.

I hand over my rifle and some ammo to your son, and we head up the kitchen stairs, going to the main floor in order to assist you.

Am I, and is my assistance, provoking the “somebody” who has invaded your property?

[Chunga85]

What you’ve done is eliminate all context. The Maidan Coup, Minsk II, etc. has been argued to death and I see no merit in rehashing all of that. You reject it or are just ignorant.

I have to give you credit. This might be the most ridiculous, self-serving analog I’ve seen yet. A lot of US proxy Ukrainians are going to die for nothing.

[BroJoeK]

Chunga85: "There was a span of 4 years in between Pearl Harbor and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki."

And this is relevant to what, exactly?

Chunga85: "For those of you in Rio Linda, the US is arming the former state of Ukraine on Russia’s border.
It is the US, once again, looking for trouble.
You warmongers wanted to provoke Russia into war, well guess what.
You’ve got one."

That's lunatic talk, and you know it.
First, the entire world recognises the state of Ukraine, so there's nothing "former" about it.
Virtually nobody except other lunatics recognise Russian conquests in Ukraine.

Second, the only actual provocations to Putin were his own insanities, channeling the ghosts of Peter the Great and Ivan the Terrible.
Ukraine did NOTHING that any fair court or jury would recognise as valid "provocation" for war.

There was no significant western military aid to Ukraine BEFORE Russians invaded.

So Ukraine is not "former" but Putin is pushing Russia into national suicide, and for not one good reason.

And you well know it.

[Chunga85]

“And this is relevant to what, exactly?”

Use your head. Over that four year period Japan was militarily exhausted. It’s simple. There was no need to drop “humanitarian” nukes on civilian populations.

[BroJoeK]

Chunga85: "Over that four year period Japan was militarily exhausted. It’s simple.
There was no need to drop “humanitarian” nukes on civilian populations."

"Exhausted" or not, Japanese leaders kept huge strategic reserves in Japan and had prepared their civilians to accept many millions of casualties in order to make American conquest at best costly and at worst impossible.

Even after two A-bombs were dropped, many Japanese leaders were not willing to surrender.
Only the Emperor himself forced them to accept defeat.

Any student of history knows all this, and only dedicated propagandists ignore it for their own nefarious purposes.

[Chunga85]

Here’s some history for you to study.

Second-Guessing Hiroshima?

https://origins.osu.edu/history-news/second-guessing-hiroshima?language_content_entity=en

“Second-guessing the necessity and morality of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 53 years ago is nothing new. Contrary to widely held opinion, the first critics of America’s use of atomic weapons were not disillusioned 1960s radicals but figures from the conservative establishment and the highest ranks of the military.”

You’ll be equally level-headed and pragmatic, I’m sure, if Russia decides to employ “humanitarian” Sarmats on cities full of civilians, perhaps the one you are in.

[BroJoeK]

Chunga85 quoting: " Second-guessing the necessity and morality of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 53 years ago is nothing new.
Contrary to widely held opinion, the first critics of America’s use of atomic weapons were not disillusioned 1960s radicals but figures from the conservative establishment and the highest ranks of the military."

Sure, and they were all wrong then, and ever since.
The facts are that A-bombs ended WWII many months or years early, thus saving millions of American and Japanese lives.
Further, nukes have helped prevent the next world war through a doctrine called Mutual Assured Destruction.

And sure, I "get" that as a dedicated Russian propagandist, Chunga85, you'd like us to fantasize a moral equivalence between Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and the U.S. response to Pearl Harbor.
But fantasize all you wish, there is still no moral equivalence.

Chunga85: "You’ll be equally level-headed and pragmatic, I’m sure, if Russia decides to employ “humanitarian” Sarmats on cities full of civilians, perhaps the one you are in."

And why ever would Russians be so eager to commit national suicide?
It makes no sense.
A Russian nuclear attack on Ukraine, for the purpose of restoring Russia's old empire, would raise global opposition to a level we cannot imagine and the result would be destruction of the Russian government and some of Russia itself, I.e., Chechnya.
No Russian leader could be so foolish.
And for what?

[JonPreston]

They cowardly “guaranteed” Ukraine security in the nineties and grabbed Ukraine’s nukes

when are you going to the front?