Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Russia Masses Military Equipment Near Ukraine Borders: A Prologue to WWIII?


Grim Reaper 6

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

People still fall for their lies.

Well, everything goes according russky plan...

Edit to add: I'll have to check selftermination options in some EU countries... As per professor Hubert J. Farnsworth...)))

Edited by bmk1245
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

You don’t need to bow, but that doesn’t mean that NATO/US will be willing to risk nuclear war by retaliating against the world‘a second nuclear superpower over a tactical nuke in Ukraine.

I think that it would result in a complete and utter isolation of Russia in the hopes that his own people would deal with him - hell, maybe even professional attempts made on his life (ie special forces operation to kill him), but I don’t think NATO/US would respond with conventional military action.

Just my opinion of course. 
 

Either way, the decision the US/NATO makes should Russia choose to nuke Ukraine will be a very difficult one. 

Oh, now it's tactical nuke in Ukraine. How about strategic one in London? Ever think of these? Oh-oh-oh, that would be completely different, right, article 5. Amen. 

Well, be advised that putler keeps threatening to nuke western cities, not use tactical nuke in Ukraine. 

But speaking of tactical nukes in Ukraine, fallout will at least touch a NATO country which is Article 5. No need to make decisions, they've been made before various putlerian leeches in the West started selling appeaser narrative under excuse of nuclear fear. 

And I'll tell you again: there are hundreds of millions of us who will never surrender to any form of russian demands. 

What will you do to pacify us? 

What appeasement you can offer, so we stop fighting against putlerianism? What narrative, what fear you can sell to Poland or Baltic, so they betray their traditions which they kept during soviet occupation? (You don't really know what I'm talking about so you're excused for not understanding the weight this subject has in my part of the world. Just trust me that a few *****s may be bought, but not entire nations, full of very stubborn when needed people.) 

You are willing to imply putler should be appeased because you are afraid of him. Fine. Be afraid of me too. Because I'm going to get you nuked. (edit to add: according to your fears, of course. I bet my life on the fact that putler knows he's dead if he uses the first nuke and the West certainly won't use it first.)

Edited by Helen of Annoy
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Back to real events, as opposed to hypothetical situations. 

 

With that pace russkys  will end up with Kukuruzniks as main assault aircrafts...

600px-Polikarpov_Po-2_28_(G-BSSY)_(67407

Edited by bmk1245
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lavrov accused Ukraine of becoming a fully totalitarian state. 

Everything russians say is a projection, every accusation is something they themselves are guilty of. 

Let me present the newest example (I also posted the additional info because it's relevant to pro-russian internet brigade): 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

With that pace russkys  will end up with Kukuruzniks as main assault aircrafts...

600px-Polikarpov_Po-2_28_(G-BSSY)_(67407

Reminded me of what was circulating earlier in the war that Russia had bi-planes that might be pressed into service.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44532/russia-appears-to-be-preparing-its-ancient-an-2-biplanes-for-war-in-ukraine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of russian propagandists got so used to lying she can't state any fact anymore, she just automatically says the opposite. 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason why I'm not afraid of "escalations" of any kind. I've simply got no right to be afraid. 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Oh, now it's tactical nuke in Ukraine. How about strategic one in London? Ever think of these? Oh-oh-oh, that would be completely different, right, article 5. Amen. 

Yes, a strategic nuke in the UK would warrant a NATO response, but that is entirely different from a non-NATO Ukraine. 

13 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Well, be advised that putler keeps threatening to nuke western cities, not use tactical nuke in Ukraine. 

Not just nuking western cities, also alluding to nuking those who threaten the state of Russia and cited attacks on Belgorod, so that would include Ukraine. This is why the US was issuing warnings to Russia over using nukes in Ukraine. It is quite relevant.

17 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

But speaking of tactical nukes in Ukraine, fallout will at least touch a NATO country which is Article 5.

Not necessarily. It depends on how they are detonated. An air burst will generate minimal fallout compared to detonating at the surface, and most residual radiation is gone within 24 hours or so, if memory serves.

The type of detonation would be factored into their decision. 

21 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

And I'll tell you again: there are hundreds of millions of us who will never surrender to any form of russian demands. 

There are ways to respond that don’t involve conflict. Russia could be fundamentally completely isolated from the world, such as no Russians allowed to enter NATO/EU countries at all, EU/NATO countries ceasing all Russian imports, etc. 

 

23 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

You are willing to imply putler should be appeased because you are afraid of him.

Not at all, Helen. I don’t consider complete and utter isolation appeasement, nor do I consider championing a coordinated assassination on him to be appeasement, either. 

I am also not afraid of him. I don’t think NATO et al are afraid of him, either - there is a difference between tempered caution and fear. This is why they have all been treading so softly. 

27 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

(edit to add: according to your fears, of course. I bet my life on the fact that putler knows he's dead if he uses the first nuke and the West certainly won't use it first.)

This is another common thread that I see: if I talk about avoiding confrontation with Russia, I must be afraid. Literally every time I bring up this discussion here there is a response identical to what you have just said.

No, I am not afraid. I am simply arguing that NATO and US are unlikely to react militarily to Russia if there are nukes in Ukraine. A nuke on a nato country is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

^_^

Dangerous animals, heck I wouldn't dare to step on their path. Maybe not as mama bear, but pigs are no less ferocious when it comes to defend their younglings. Stay away.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

Yes, a strategic nuke in the UK would warrant a NATO response, but that is entirely different from a non-NATO Ukraine. 

Not just nuking western cities, also alluding to nuking those who threaten the state of Russia and cited attacks on Belgorod, so that would include Ukraine. This is why the US was issuing warnings to Russia over using nukes in Ukraine. It is quite relevant.

Not necessarily. It depends on how they are detonated. An air burst will generate minimal fallout compared to detonating at the surface, and most residual radiation is gone within 24 hours or so, if memory serves.

The type of detonation would be factored into their decision. 

There are ways to respond that don’t involve conflict. Russia could be fundamentally completely isolated from the world, such as no Russians allowed to enter NATO/EU countries at all, EU/NATO countries ceasing all Russian imports, etc. 

 

Not at all, Helen. I don’t consider complete and utter isolation appeasement, nor do I consider championing a coordinated assassination on him to be appeasement, either. 

I am also not afraid of him. I don’t think NATO et al are afraid of him, either - there is a difference between tempered caution and fear. This is why they have all been treading so softly. 

This is another common thread that I see: if I talk about avoiding confrontation with Russia, I must be afraid. Literally every time I bring up this discussion here there is a response identical to what you have just said.

No, I am not afraid. I am simply arguing that NATO and US are unlikely to react militarily to Russia if there are nukes in Ukraine. A nuke on a nato country is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Honestly, smells 'unbreaded'....

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Occult1 said:

Putin invaded to put 'decent people' in Kyiv, says Italy's Berlusconi

''ROME, Sept 23 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin was "pushed" into invading Ukraine and wanted to put "decent people" in charge of Kyiv, former Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi has said, drawing fierce criticism just ahead of Italy's election.

The Italian leader, whose Forza Italia party belongs to a right-wing coalition expected to win Sunday's parliamentary election on Sunday, is a long-time friend of Putin and his comments are likely to alarm Western allies.

"Putin was pushed by the Russian people, by his party, by his ministers to come up with this special operation," Berlusconi told Italian public television RAI late on Thursday, using the official Russian wording for the war.''

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-was-pushed-into-ukraine-war-says-italys-berlusconi-2022-09-23/

 

Seems Italy is becoming a Russian ally.

Hi Occult

Putin has no business invading a country period, the only reason he wants to install people in the Ukrainian govt is to control it and their resources not because the current government is abusing it’s citizens.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Occult

Putin has no business invading a country period, the only reason he wants to install people in the Ukrainian govt is to control it and their resources not because the current government is abusing it’s citizens.

Heh, putler wants peace, who can argue with that?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

So Occult, dare I ask, what's your thoughts on these referendums?

They are not held in ideal conditions, but we have pushed Russia and the leaders of these regions to make a quick move.

I expect a tremendous pro-Russian victory in the Donbass. There is no doubt about that.

Kherson might not be so clear-cut but since it has had its share of pro-Russia citizens, there is likely a majority of people who supports annexation.

Since the occupied part of Zaporizhzhia is that which is traditionally pro-russian, I also expect a clear win.

 

In any case, it's not good news for the West. Russia will be able to declare legitimate defense of these territories by all means necessary.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Occult1 said:

They are not held in ideal conditions, but we have pushed Russia and the leaders of these regions to make a quick move.

I expect a tremendous pro-Russian victory in the Donbass. There is no doubt about that.

Kherson might not be so clear-cut but since it has had its share of pro-Russia citizens, there is likely a majority of people who supports annexation.

Since the occupied part of Zaporizhzhia is that which is traditionally pro-russian, I also expect a clear win.

 

In any case, it's not good news for the West. Russia will be able to declare legitimate defense of these territories by all means necessary.

So you havent heard the reports of russian troops forcing people to vote "join russia"? There are videos of armed troops walking to peoples houses. Russia cant declare legitmate defense of the territories if these referendums are illigitimate. The Crimea referendum in 2014 was a farce with about 30% voting turn out, we're seeing the same things here.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's nothing legitimate in regard to the illegal invasion and annexation Russia has been conducting. The lands they claim is not theirs to defend. It's ridiculous to state otherwise.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.