Yes but how will Russia respond to this?
I now think tactical nukes is a real possibility, Putin is soon without other options if he wants to win the war.
This discussion belongs in another thread as we are straying from the central topic of this thread.ibm9000 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:07 amYouCan I ask what conclusion you are referring to?are right.(Caltrek)
I find a bit simplistic that the end of capitalism -if ever- equates mankind happiness and 5.000 years of civilization tends to prove it.
"I think that initially Pentagon planners"
No, we have the Pentagon Papers. "Initially" is the Atlantic Charter in the 40's.
I am not sure of what point you are trying to make her"lost"
We were talking about the war, political/economic consequences 20 years later...
Well, I wasn't talking about "here, for us..." I was writing about the Russian occupation forces. Actions taken by said occupation forces are something for us to worry about. First, as to its negative consequences for the people of the Ukraine. Second, as to possible future actions regarding the possible threat to other allies in the region. Third, as to its disruption of the peace and order which the world might otherwise be able to enjoy."No, there may still be a war."
We are talking about WW3 or shelling along a 1.000 km front, guerrillas in occupied territories is nothing to worry about (here, for us, not that much to worry about).
I was not missing "the" irony. I was employing irony. I was also making comments about false equivalency, as well as comparing and contrasting statements made by you with statements made by another poster."...and of course the U.S. must never be allowed to use that excuse."
You are missing the irony... both walk like a duck.
Also, in "fighting" Wahhabism.
...because they regard that "power" as "legitimate"?"Self-censored as in being"
Submissive to the power without the need for coercion.
Not sure what "NI" refers to.Again, the A.I.M. may disagree about "extrajudicial killings" and I wouldn't be surprise to find more examples. In NI yes, but in US never?, in Spain, France, Germany... If I consider the history of honesty of the FBI, I am more than skeptic about it.
Ok, duly noted."What about at the middle-class"
I think you are missing something about "peasants", maybe your lack of vision? My point: are you a member of any Board of Directors? The day-to-day life of the people I met was not different to mine.
With all due respect, your first sentence here comes across as babbling. I am also not sure what your second sentence has to do with nuclear doctrine. As I have said before, I am not here to make your arguments for you"Rumsfeld is a retired"
That doesn't mean a new policy, I haven't been able to read any announcement on that; an important one, I would say.
Governments, I am talking about westerns democracies, tend to keep what they fought from the opposition because it favours its interests.
So, why didn't the war in Vietnam end in World War III?"the situation may go nuclear, but still be contained"
I'm afraid not, we start wars... the containment -Vietnam- doesn't happen, it's always escalation, "winning".
Oh, so NI refers to Northern Ireland?Yes, I know, but you cannot obviate the implications of your own words. The wishes of the catholics in NI are legitimate according to the British"My point was in response to a person who focused of the theme of "two imperialist"
Government?, the UN is going to decide on that?, the Atlantic Charter and a French colonial war... I am afraid I have to go back to hypocrisy about who is going to legitimize what according to its own interests.
What?
erowind wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 8:28 am https://tass.com/world/1515617
It's rather interesting that I can't find any mentions of the Putin Administration's threats of nuclear holocaust on Russian news agencies and websites...
"Otherwise, we can finish the war, but we will not have peace, and we will have another war," he said.
In a rare address to the nation earlier this week, Mr Putin said his country had "various weapons of destruction" and would "use all the means available to us", adding: "I'm not bluffing."
https://www.thedailybeast.com/noam-chom ... in-ukraineIn fact...repeatedly praised Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for being “an honorable person” who has shown “great courage” and “great integrity.” Even those of Zelensky’s requests that could have truly catastrophic consequences for the world, like his call for Western powers to establish a No-Fly Zone, are, Chomsky said, understandable from the Ukrainian perspective.
In other interviews Chomsky has also said that Zelensky was right to reject Russia’s immediate demands and that the Ukrainian president’s public response to Putin back in March was “judicious and appropriate.” None of this means that Chomsky and his critics don’t have real and deep disagreements about American policy toward the war in Ukraine. It’s just that the source of that disagreement lies elsewhere.
Source: https://www.newsweek.com/henry-kissinge ... ar-1709733said that while he isn't opposed to sending arms to Ukraine, so long as it's done under genuine concern for Ukrainians, it must be done in "a way which will not escalate the Russian attack and can lead, of course, to the destruction of Ukraine.'"
Here, context is important. Putin's references are in the context of defending recent territorial gains by Russia wherein said gains are in the process of being incorporated into Russia. This process involves use of sham referendums the legitimacy of which have not been recognized by the Ukrainian government as well as not recognized by much on the rest of the international community. So, no, this is not the sort of action that "any country" would engage in.ibm9000 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 10:01 amYou have a point there, we just take it from western media, their version... like that story about WMD. Still, I think it's more about politics,It's rather interesting that I can't find any mentions of the Putin Administration's threats...
sending a message, negotiating than about "consent".
"Putin has made veiled references... to nuclear/chemical weapons if threatened."
Wouldn't any other country?