Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Gator515151, Oct 7, 2022.
Made in America
He was told there wouldn’t be any math
I didn't know he was a fan
I was thinking the guy running the teleprompter screwed up.
What's more concerning is his musings on the nuclear threat last night catching many American officials off guard. Probably another gaffe, but those types of gaffes tend to have a little more blowback.
I don’t mind him speaking with a different tone on Russia when he thinks the cameras aren’t on to mitigate panicking the people. But what worries me is (in my perception) that we are doing little or nothing about the threat (except, of course, for the Jake Sullivan “hope the hardest” strategy). Since we are comparing the current situation to the Cuban Missile Crisis, let’s not forget that Kennedy went on TV and addressed the American people directly about the actions our government was taking. In just not seeing any particular action on our part to posture for the possibility of nuclear aggression.
All 57 states?
I think that's why so many officials were taken aback. Based on everything I've read, we're nowhere near a Cuban missile crisis scenario. To my knowledge, Russia has not moved any tactical nukes in a way that suggests they're going to strike Ukraine. Perhaps our intelligence agencies have something they've not shared with us. Anything is possible, but at least up until this point, it looks and feels like Putin just blowing hot air.
1962 and that crisis was much different. Russia was threatening to put nuclear missiles in our backyard. (I had just finished basic training and was at my firet duty station. We were all on edge.) They we're similar in that a response is called for, but I would submit the difference calls for a different response. Putin is a far different actor than Khrushchev was. Inasmuch as the threat here is more to our European allies than to America, I find the measured response to date adequate. Putin has been unequivocally warned, but I would not like to be President Biden and have to decide what action to take if Putin employs tactical nuclear weapons.
Turnabout is fair play, even if one guy loves and serves America and the other loved and served only himself. So, keep that in mind when you post your regular Biden gaffs.
I think most of us who are informed, which would include Putin, know tactical nukes used on Ukrainian soil would 100% mean NATO direct involvement and Russia's demise. In the case of nuclear war, the first to strike has an inherent advantage, right? So Putin deploys nukes on Ukraine. Response is US, France sending 100 nukes to Moscow. NATO wins.
Russia would bury themselves by hitting Ukraine with nukes. NATO would wipe them off the map. Once that line is crossed, it's no going back.
We had missiles, we were told they were Nikes, towed in and set up half mile from the house. You could see them the school bus on A1A
"in" only has two letters, so maybe he thought it was not a real word. He doesn't really care if things are made in America. Not two shits.
Whoever launches first, the other is only minutes behind. Its called mutually assured destruction. Millions would be killed and societies as we know them would crumble. Existence would be dog eat dog for at least a generation. DO NOT LAUNCH FIRST.
Don't you think Russia would respond by Nuking Paris and Washington in that scenario, though?
"... depends on what your definition of is, is..." Lol... is "in" a word?
Oh I see. I meant whoever launches first between NATO and Russia, but yeah, I get your point. Before our missiles land, they'd have some on the way to New York, LA, Miami...