"2023 Doomsday Clock announcement on Tuesday could warn of nuclear war"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/202 ... 047008002/
Clock's ticking.
Ukraine Crisis
Well, then you could not know that they are so puppet and cuckold.
.... and Iran has declared war on Ukraine by supplying drones to russia.
The russian hierachy are a joke. Any state can supply what they like to either protagonist in Ukraine. Russia doesn't rule the world. The opinion of Solovyov is irrelevent. russia's only solution is nukes, but sadly for russia, Nato can respond so they can't use that strategy. Putin is stuck with raining misery on Ukrainians from afar and failing on the battlefield. Putin has humilated russia and killed a lot of them and attracted sanctions that are hurting russia.
According to its notorious minister for foreign affairs Annalena Baerbock: ""We are fighting a war against Russia and not against each other".
https://www.newsweek.com/germany-says-q ... ar-1776593
But did he try to hype on her idiotic statement? - yes.
Last edited by napshnap on Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
greenmark wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:44 pm.... and Iran has declared war on Ukraine by supplying drones to russia.
The russian hierachy are a joke. Any state can supply what they like to either protagonist in Ukraine. Russia doesn't rule the world. The opinion of Solovyov is irrelevent. russia's only solution is nukes, but sadly for russia, Nato can respond so they can't use that strategy. Putin is stuck with raining misery on Ukrainians from afar and failing on the battlefield. Putin has humilated russia and killed a lot of them and attracted sanctions that are hurting russia.
Even a nuclear weapon?Any state can supply what they like to either protagonist in Ukraine.
Agree.The opinion of Solovyov is irrelevent.
Your politicians help a lot, sending guns, tanks, planes, what's next, a nuclear weapon?Putin has humilated russia and killed a lot of them
If we will follow this narrative (not the conspiracy-centric one) - if they will realise that they've been cornered, why won't they push the button? Either way - death. Are you a pragmatic, greenmark? Will you accept the death of 30 millions "here " vs 5 millions "there" (at your homeland or anywhere else)? Should it be you fixing this problems or should that be competent politicians, diplomats, to be exact?Nato can respond so they can't use that strategy.
...
Last edited by napshnap on Sat Jan 28, 2023 6:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine is defending it's territory. Nato countries are supplying assets to help that defence. There is no escalation from Nato. If they were to provide long range missiles then yes that would be escalation. The escalation started with Russia trying trundle into Kyiv and got their asses kicked. They focussed on Donbas and the land bridge to Crimea and have lost ground there too. So then the escalation was to lob missiles at Ukrainian infrastructure far from the front line in a cynical attempt to terrorise the civilian population.napshnap wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:48 amgreenmark wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:44 pm.... and Iran has declared war on Ukraine by supplying drones to russia.
The russian hierachy are a joke. Any state can supply what they like to either protagonist in Ukraine. Russia doesn't rule the world. The opinion of Solovyov is irrelevent. russia's only solution is nukes, but sadly for russia, Nato can respond so they can't use that strategy. Putin is stuck with raining misery on Ukrainians from afar and failing on the battlefield. Putin has humilated russia and killed a lot of them and attracted sanctions that are hurting russia.Even a nuclear weapon?Any state can supply what they like to either protagonist in Ukraine.
Agree.The opinion of Solovyov is irrelevent.
Your politicians help a lot, sending guns, tanks, planes, what's next, a nuclear weapon?Putin has humilated russia and killed a lot of them
If we will follow this narrative (not the conspiracy-centric one) - if they will realise that they've been cornered, why won't they push the button? Either way - death. Are you a pragmatic, greenmark? Will you accept the death of 30 millions "here " vs 5 millions "there" (at your homeland or anywhere else)? Should it be you fixing this problems or should that be competent politicians, diplomats, to be exact, who instead of it are cosplaying Rambo (seriously, look at politicians trying to fit their asses into a tank - they look like a dog wearing a ridiculous hat - totally inappropriate unnatural blatantly fake, look at EU Josep Borrell who cannot shut up his warcries even for a second, he's fkn "The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs" damn it, but NOOO - he's a fkn retired Predator with oxygen tank)!!)? I know we'are fckd up in some way, I know what's wrong with us, BUT WHAT THE FK IS WRONG WITH YOU!!! WHERE IS YOUR FKN DEMOCRACY, WHY CANT <<<YOU>>> PULL THE LEASH REIN IN <<<YOUR>>> CRAZY POLITICIANS <<<YOUR>>> BLOOTHIRSTY "MOTHERS COURAGE", WHY DO <<<YOU>>> ALLOW THEM TO ESCALATE THIS CRAZINESS FURTHER AND FURTHER??!!!!Nato can respond so they can't use that strategy.
Or is it your pension funds or investment funds good performance ("oh, honey, look they invested in this steel/tank manufacturer right before a decision to send them to a conflict zone, what professionals! Now we will buy a pool with ducks!") is all that bothers you?
So far Nato has been very measured in their words and actions. There's always hawks mouthing off in these situations but they are irrelevent too, they don't make the decisions.
The most hawkish person in this is Putin, unless of course you think he's a scared, paranoic that sees Nato as a genuine threat to Russia. Time will tell but I think Nato is no threat to Russia, it's the other way round.
-
- Posts: 3193
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
As I see it Putin only has 3 options:
1. Withdraw his armed forces and leave Ukraine alone.
2. Try and seek a negotiated peace, keeping Crimea.
3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
If he goes for:
1. He and Russia are humiliated. Probably ending in him falling out of a window somewhere.
2. Ukraine and to some extent the west will not allow that.
3. China would hastily distance themselves from him. Not sure what exactly the west would do but I think the US and NATO might take a huge risk and destroy all his military infrastructure at home and abroad. That could be done with a huge amount of planning and secrecy.
I think by June either Ukraine is destroyed, Zelensky is a hero and/or Putin is dead and/or Russia is militarily crippled for decades.
One thing is clear and a fact, Ukraine is using more military munitions in a week than the USA can make in a month. Not sure how long that is sustainable much past June.
Anyway, my bunker facilities have been upgraded and water stock replaced. Food stock still has 9 years shelf life left.
Happy days.
1. Withdraw his armed forces and leave Ukraine alone.
2. Try and seek a negotiated peace, keeping Crimea.
3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
If he goes for:
1. He and Russia are humiliated. Probably ending in him falling out of a window somewhere.
2. Ukraine and to some extent the west will not allow that.
3. China would hastily distance themselves from him. Not sure what exactly the west would do but I think the US and NATO might take a huge risk and destroy all his military infrastructure at home and abroad. That could be done with a huge amount of planning and secrecy.
I think by June either Ukraine is destroyed, Zelensky is a hero and/or Putin is dead and/or Russia is militarily crippled for decades.
One thing is clear and a fact, Ukraine is using more military munitions in a week than the USA can make in a month. Not sure how long that is sustainable much past June.
Anyway, my bunker facilities have been upgraded and water stock replaced. Food stock still has 9 years shelf life left.
Happy days.
1. Putin cannot withdraw.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:57 pmAs I see it Putin only has 3 options:
1. Withdraw his armed forces and leave Ukraine alone.
2. Try and seek a negotiated peace, keeping Crimea.
3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
If he goes for:
1. He and Russia are humiliated. Probably ending in him falling out of a window somewhere.
2. Ukraine and to some extent the west will not allow that.
3. China would hastily distance themselves from him. Not sure what exactly the west would do but I think the US and NATO might take a huge risk and destroy all his military infrastructure at home and abroad. That could be done with a huge amount of planning and secrecy.
I think by June either Ukraine is destroyed, Zelensky is a hero and/or Putin is dead and/or Russia is militarily crippled for decades.
One thing is clear and a fact, Ukraine is using more military munitions in a week than the USA can make in a month. Not sure how long that is sustainable much past June.
Anyway, my bunker facilities have been upgraded and water stock replaced. Food stock still has 9 years shelf life left.
Happy days.
2. Well, let's hope negotiation can replace stupidity.
3. Nukes are not an option. They are not only colloquially, but literally mad.
Finally, what kind of food lasts 9 years? This week I succeeded in poisoning myself with mushrooms one day early than the best before date.
Only food I know might last would be freeze dried.
Yum. Years of rehydrated food. I'm envisioning a sort of post-apocalypse pot noodle scenario. Or perhaps that is a definition of an apocalypse.
Tactical nuclear weapons have little use on the battlefield. KIlotons of conventional explosives have already been used and are far more devastating than a single kiloton nuke because they can be spread out over a large area.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:57 pm3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
-
- Posts: 3193
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
Vacuumed freeze dried food has a 10 year shelf life. You just add hot water and hey presto good nosh.greenmark wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:22 pm1. Putin cannot withdraw.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:57 pmAs I see it Putin only has 3 options:
1. Withdraw his armed forces and leave Ukraine alone.
2. Try and seek a negotiated peace, keeping Crimea.
3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
If he goes for:
1. He and Russia are humiliated. Probably ending in him falling out of a window somewhere.
2. Ukraine and to some extent the west will not allow that.
3. China would hastily distance themselves from him. Not sure what exactly the west would do but I think the US and NATO might take a huge risk and destroy all his military infrastructure at home and abroad. That could be done with a huge amount of planning and secrecy.
I think by June either Ukraine is destroyed, Zelensky is a hero and/or Putin is dead and/or Russia is militarily crippled for decades.
One thing is clear and a fact, Ukraine is using more military munitions in a week than the USA can make in a month. Not sure how long that is sustainable much past June.
Anyway, my bunker facilities have been upgraded and water stock replaced. Food stock still has 9 years shelf life left.
Happy days.
2. Well, let's hope negotiation can replace stupidity.
3. Nukes are not an option. They are not only colloquially, but literally mad.
Finally, what kind of food lasts 9 years? This week I succeeded in poisoning myself with mushrooms one day early than the best before date.
Only food I know might last would be freeze dried.
Yum. Years of rehydrated food. I'm envisioning a sort of post-apocalypse pot noodle scenario. Or perhaps that is a definition of an apocalypse.
-
- Posts: 3193
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
Derek, I served in the forces. When I talk about a tactical nuke then I am talking about ones with a variable yield. It would still yield the same devastation as a nuclear weapon, the only difference would be no fall out. If your within a 30 mile radius then you will be toast one way or another as Joe Public won’t know what to do. If Putin were to drop 100 of those then blast radius stays the same. You just don’t die from the shit falling out of the sky. In theory, if everyone believes what Russia has then he could destroy all living material in Ukraine. And nothing would drift or harm countries adjoining.Derek27 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:31 pmTactical nuclear weapons have little use on the battlefield. KIlotons of conventional explosives have already been used and are far more devastating than a single kiloton nuke because they can be spread out over a large area.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:57 pm3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
The question for me is, would he actually do it. I think if he is backed into a corner, then yes, he will. If he does, he damned, if he doesn’t, he falls out of a window somewhere very cold.
The only difference with tactical variable yield nukes is the lack of fallout, the blast radius remains the same as does the shock. Your insides end up mushed. A bit like a high speed car crash whereby your internal organs fly forward against bone, blood vessels, archeries and muscle. The good news is you die instantly.
Technically, tactical nukes are short-range missiles. A 10-megaton warhead would be tactical if it was on a short-range rocket. But generally, when people talk about tactical nukes they mean low-yield battlefield weapons with friendly forces in the surrounding area. Those weapons wouldn't be easy to use.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 1:48 amDerek, I served in the forces. When I talk about a tactical nuke then I am talking about ones with a variable yield. It would still yield the same devastation as a nuclear weapon, the only difference would be no fall out. If your within a 30 mile radius then you will be toast one way or another as Joe Public won’t know what to do. If Putin were to drop 100 of those then blast radius stays the same. You just don’t die from the shit falling out of the sky. In theory, if everyone believes what Russia has then he could destroy all living material in Ukraine. And nothing would drift or harm countries adjoining.Derek27 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:31 pmTactical nuclear weapons have little use on the battlefield. KIlotons of conventional explosives have already been used and are far more devastating than a single kiloton nuke because they can be spread out over a large area.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:57 pm3. Realise from a military point of view he will have to use a tactical nuclear weapon.
The question for me is, would he actually do it. I think if he is backed into a corner, then yes, he will. If he does, he damned, if he doesn’t, he falls out of a window somewhere very cold.
The only difference with tactical variable yield nukes is the lack of fallout, the blast radius remains the same as does the shock. Your insides end up mushed. A bit like a high speed car crash whereby your internal organs fly forward against bone, blood vessels, archeries and muscle. The good news is you die instantly.
-
- Posts: 3193
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
Rumours are he is considering removing his forces and using multiple high yield tactical weapons of 20 megaton each, assuming he has them and they work, they would be devastating.Derek27 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 3:20 amTechnically, tactical nukes are short-range missiles. A 10-megaton warhead would be tactical if it was on a short-range rocket. But generally, when people talk about tactical nukes they mean low-yield battlefield weapons with friendly forces in the surrounding area. Those weapons wouldn't be easy to use.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 1:48 amDerek, I served in the forces. When I talk about a tactical nuke then I am talking about ones with a variable yield. It would still yield the same devastation as a nuclear weapon, the only difference would be no fall out. If your within a 30 mile radius then you will be toast one way or another as Joe Public won’t know what to do. If Putin were to drop 100 of those then blast radius stays the same. You just don’t die from the shit falling out of the sky. In theory, if everyone believes what Russia has then he could destroy all living material in Ukraine. And nothing would drift or harm countries adjoining.
The question for me is, would he actually do it. I think if he is backed into a corner, then yes, he will. If he does, he damned, if he doesn’t, he falls out of a window somewhere very cold.
The only difference with tactical variable yield nukes is the lack of fallout, the blast radius remains the same as does the shock. Your insides end up mushed. A bit like a high speed car crash whereby your internal organs fly forward against bone, blood vessels, archeries and muscle. The good news is you die instantly.