Russian invasion of Ukraine

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Is it Bojo?

 

[CTID1977]

 

[Scottyboi]

A good fuck you to China doing this.

 

[Metal Biker]

Can you answer me this. Do you think NATO and the International community doesn't already have sufficient justification to take Putin and his regime out due to him already having broken international law in this (and previous) wars?

Yes, they do, and i'm surprised they haven't. What are you on about?

Has NATO gone against Putin's instructions lest they feel the wrath of his 'nuclear might' by supplying weapons, tanks and now jets to Ukraine? Yes they have. And he's still not used any nuclear weapons in response, so why are people now so convinced he'd use them?

They aren't worried about his nukes.

 

[CTID1977]

i don't know who is coming but i'm sure there'll be some pissboiling in kremlin because of this visit ;]

 

[mosssideblue]

Yes, they do, and i'm surprised they haven't. What are you on about?

Has NATO gone against Putin's instructions lest they feel the wrath of his 'nuclear might' by supplying weapons, tanks and now jets to Ukraine? Yes they have. And he's still not used any nuclear weapons in response, so why are people now so convinced he'd use them?

They aren't worried about his nukes.

What I'm on about is that you have convinced yourself that Putin will not use nucs because they break international law and will give NATO justification to take him out.

Yet you agree he has already broken international laws and NATO hasn't taken him out.

So why are tact nucs different?

 

[cleavers]

Your opinion of the UN still doesn't change the fact that use of nuclear weapons are banned under international law, and once used that nation becomes intantly vilified and NATO would be given carte blanche to use all necessary force to remove the current regime from power, with the UN's blessing.

Well the UN security council still includes russia sadly, so good luck getting consensus at the (pretty much useless) UN, over use of a nuke by russia, even if the world would condemn that use, and China (another security member) would probably veto the vote anyway.

The biggest reason he doesn't use them, is that most of the blow back would come his way, ie to moscow, and st petersburg (and other cities in the west of russia), so basically he can't escape the fallout either.

 

[Metal Biker]

What I'm on about is that you have convinced yourself that Putin will not use nucs because they break international law and will give NATO justification to take him out.

Yet you agree he has already broken international laws and NATO hasn't taken him out.

So why are tact nucs different?

You'd have to ask NATO why they haven't deployed their forces. You'd have to ask the UN why they haven't intervened more. I'm all in favour of crushing the cunts. They might be able to shake their head and tut at the use of phosphorus, but when it comes to nuclear weapons, they have no excuse, and would act.

What you seem to have misinterpreted is my stance; I am sick to death of people using the "Putin could use nukes" threat as a means to be afraid of their potential deployment. What's the alternative? Stop supplying Ukraine? Giving in to Putin? You've convinced yourself he WOULD use them, yet he hasn't despite threatening that if NATO and the EU supplies Ukraine with HIMARS/Tanks/Jets, he would use them.

Well we did, and he hasn't. So maybe stop thinking he will use them and wanting to avoid escalating the war? Because even he knows if he uses them, he is done. Nuclear weapons cause mass destruction on a scale unlike any other weapon developed. Are you seriously suggesting that a nation using a nuclear weapon wouldn't face intervention if they used them against another nation by the international community? That the United States wouldn't see it as the perfect excuse to intervene regardless of matters like 'membership of NATO, etc?

They aren't useful to him except in the event of a threat against his nation, which nobody is suggesting. We want Russian forces out of Ukraine and only an increased level of force will do it, so stop being afraid of Putin's response to NATO involvement in Ukraine, and get rid of the bastards.

 

[Metal Biker]

Well the UN security council still includes russia sadly, so good luck getting consensus at the (pretty much useless) UN, over use of a nuke by russia, even if the world would condemn that use, and China (another security member) would probably veto the vote anyway.

The biggest reason he doesn't use them, is that most of the blow back would come his way, ie to moscow, and st petersburg (and other cities in the west of russia), so basically he can't escape the fallout either.

Yes I know this.

I'm not the one stating that he ever would use them. I'm stating the many, many reasons why Putin would not seriously consider using nuclear weapons in this conflict. It's a complete non-debate yet it somehow keeps appearing on here about Russia's nuclear arsenal.

 

[CTID1977]

"It is likely that Russia will claim that Bakhmut has been captured to align with the anniversary, regardless of the reality on the ground"