• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU-NATO | DISCUSSIONS

Status
Not open for further replies.
REALHumanRights said:
Advocacy of WWIII literally does not make anyone safer.
USA POTUS Kennedy: ""Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war." June 10, 1963
https://jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/american-university-19630610
(And he was murdered five months after that statement in Dallas in November 1963, but it doesn't make it less true.)
Click to expand...
You don't need to use WMD to change a country's current standing in this world.
 
REALHumanRights said:
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg: "circumstances in which NATO might have to use nuclear weapons are extremely remote"
https://twitter.com/x/status/1580579383051362304
Click to expand...
Not only is Russia's nuclear rhetoric dangerous, so is NATO's, Mr. Jens Stoltenberg. (And it is not Sky News fault for the question.)
Reckless talk on nuclear bombs from ANY military leaders is unnecessary and unproductive.
No, the "extremely remote" part was not in any way productive or helpful for world peace.
Military, government, and political leaders making public statements on nuclear bombs need to find restraint in their statements. Surely these are educated enough individuals who know (otherwise) how to deflect such direct escalatory remarks.
We don't need Putin, Biden, NATO, etc. talking about nuclear weapons - period - unless they really DO want to take the world to nuclear war. "Appropriate response," "necessary actions," etc. are all that is needed in this terrible period of pre WW3.

My read (and much of the world's - like it or not): if government/military/political figures - you are TALKING about nuclear bombs, then you are THINKING about using nuclear bombs. No matter who it is. No matter if they "are bluffing." They need to step back from this edge, and start thinking about the words they are using. And of course, this applies to Russia. But it does not JUST apply to Russia.
 
Last edited:
jealousmelon said:
Of course it was Sky asking that question - they just can't resist another bit of clickbait...
Click to expand...
For me, I have two significant questions:
1. WHY does NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg choose to talk about nuclear bombs at all?
2. WHY does President of France need to issue a statement in writing: "We do not want a World War."

I don't believe just the "crazy Russia talk" argument. Russia has been talking "crazy" for three weeks now.

What has motivated these statements in the past 24 hours?
 
Defiantly interesting. It seems like we're being normalized to ww3 and nuclear weapons use with all the current chatter about it. Maybe they suspect something. I doubt we would get advanced warning of a nuclear device being used tactically because if they do acknowledge it publicly then Putin really has to go through with it and probably can't face backing down.
 
REALHumanRights said:
Not only is Russia's nuclear rhetoric dangerous, so is NATO's, Mr. Jens Stoltenberg. (And it is not Sky News fault for the question.)
Reckless talk on nuclear bombs from ANY military leaders is unnecessary and unproductive.
No, the "extremely remote" part was not in any way productive or helpful for world peace.
Military, government, and political leaders making public statements on nuclear bombs need to find restraint in their statements. Surely these are educated enough individuals who know (otherwise) how to deflect such direct escalatory remarks.
We don't need Putin, Biden, NATO, etc. talking about nuclear weapons - period - unless they really DO want to take the world to nuclear war. "Appropriate response," "necessary actions," etc. are all that is needed in this terrible period of pre WW3.

My read (and much of the world's - like it or not): if government/military/political figures - you are TALKING about nuclear bombs, then you are THINKING about using nuclear bombs. No matter who it is. No matter if they "are bluffing." They need to step back from this edge, and start thinking about the words they are using. And of course, this applies to Russia. But it does not JUST apply to Russia.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we still do not even speak the same language.
 
So circumstances which might provoke a nuclear response Is extremely remote.

Yeah not even the same language, I hear a downplaying of the possibility or necessity of this as being very small. And it was in response to Russias frequently mentioning the possibility them having to resort to using them.
 
Seriously said:
So circumstances which might provoke a nuclear response Is extremely remote.

Yeah not even the same language, I hear a downplaying of the possibility or necessity of this as being very small. And it was in response to Russias frequently mentioning the possibility them having to resort to using them.
Click to expand...
NATO Secretary-General talking about a nuclear bomb AT ALL... is off the chart unhinged.
Of course, he knows how to deflect such questions, so does USA Secretary of Defense, POTUS, etc.

We don't actually PAY MONEY to Russia Dictator Putin, Lunatic (no slur intended, but statement of fact) Kim Jong Un, etc.
Yes, of course, they are crazy psychopaths (again - statement of fact). And... ?
We didn't put them in power, vote for them, pay them, etc.
But as a matter of actual fact, the USA public DOES pay Joseph Biden, Lloyd J. Austin III, and yes Jens Stoltenberg.
NATO exists due to USA taxpayers in a nation of 350 million, where 40 million live at the poverty level, but we still find $700B/year for a Department of War for foreign wars (as if we were the USSR).

So no, it is not acceptable for Joseph Biden, Lloyd J. Austin III, Jens Stoltenberg, and the literal crackpots (again fact) in the USA "media" to be talking about if we should use nuclear bombs. We are not the United Nations, but just one long-suffering country, which has been in foreign wars literally for 20 years. We have had over 1 million of our people die recently from disease. We are in massive debt. The USA and its people are really struggling. We are not the handful of "billionaires" like Bezos, Musk, Trump, etc., (out of 350,000,000).

There is absolutely NO PLACE for unhinged in USA government, military, politicians, rabid writers, to be talking about using nuclear bombs. Not 1 percent chance. Not extremely remote chance. Not at all. There is simply no rational and sane reason to do this... other than they actually DO want to take the world to WW 3. And that they are THAT crazy.

I recommend a new LAW for USA Congress. Any publicly funded individual, government official, government media, institution, etc., which talks about "using nuclear bombs" - will be automatically and COMPLETELY defunded without any appeal. Any USA media rants calling for USA use of nuclear bombs will automatically lose their FCC license, and access to any Government press or news events forever. Since they are willing to roll the dice with our lives, lets make sure that when they choose such reckless gambling, they know there are real and tangible consequences for such actions. (If I were France, Hungary, Germany, Spain, Italy - I would be suspending all NATO funding due to this. Jens Stoltenberg does not have the right to put all of their lives at risk because he decides to appear "tough.")
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JPod
REALHumanRights said:
NATO Secretary-General talking about a nuclear bomb AT ALL... is off the chart unhinged.
Of course, he knows how to deflect such questions, so does USA Secretary of Defense, POTUS, etc.

We don't actually PAY MONEY to Russia Dictator Putin, Lunatic (no slur intended, but statement of fact) Kim Jong Un, etc.
Yes, of course, they are crazy psychopaths (again - statement of fact). And... ?
We didn't put them in power, vote for them, pay them, etc.
But as a matter of actual fact, the USA public DOES pay Joseph Biden, Lloyd J. Austin III, and yes Jens Stoltenberg.
NATO exists due to USA taxpayers in a nation of 350 million, where 40 million live at the poverty level, but we still find $700B/year for a Department of War for foreign wars (as if we were the USSR).

So no, it is not acceptable for Joseph Biden, Lloyd J. Austin III, Jens Stoltenberg, and the literal crackpots (again fact) in the USA "media" to be talking about if we should use nuclear bombs. We are not the United Nations, but just one long-suffering country, which has been in foreign wars literally for 20 years. We have had over 1 million of our people die recently from disease. We are in massive debt. The USA and its people are really struggling. We are not the handful of "billionaires" like Bezos, Musk, Trump, etc., (out of 350,000,000).

There is absolutely NO PLACE for unhinged in USA government, military, politicians, rabid writers, to be talking about using nuclear bombs. Not 1 percent chance. Not extremely remote chance. Not at all. There is simply no rational and sane reason to do this... other than they actually DO want to take the world to WW 3. And that they are THAT crazy.
Click to expand...
I think it is deterrence. There are circumstances where the USA would use nukes. It’s important that Putin understand so as to not miscalculate. Putin has shown to not be very good at predicting the consequences of his actions. So perhaps he needs it spelled out.
 
REALHumanRights said:
NATO Secretary-General talking about a nuclear bomb AT ALL... is off the chart unhinged.
Of course, he knows how to deflect such questions, so does USA Secretary of Defense, POTUS, etc.

We don't actually PAY MONEY to Russia Dictator Putin, Lunatic (no slur intended, but statement of fact) Kim Jong Un, etc.
Yes, of course, they are crazy psychopaths (again - statement of fact). And... ?
We didn't put them in power, vote for them, pay them, etc.
But as a matter of actual fact, the USA public DOES pay Joseph Biden, Lloyd J. Austin III, and yes Jens Stoltenberg.
NATO exists due to USA taxpayers in a nation of 350 million, where 40 million live at the poverty level, but we still find $700B/year for a Department of War for foreign wars (as if we were the USSR).

So no, it is not acceptable for Joseph Biden, Lloyd J. Austin III, Jens Stoltenberg, and the literal crackpots (again fact) in the USA "media" to be talking about if we should use nuclear bombs. We are not the United Nations, but just one long-suffering country, which has been in foreign wars literally for 20 years. We have had over 1 million of our people die recently from disease. We are in massive debt. The USA and its people are really struggling. We are not the handful of "billionaires" like Bezos, Musk, Trump, etc., (out of 350,000,000).

There is absolutely NO PLACE for unhinged in USA government, military, politicians, rabid writers, to be talking about using nuclear bombs. Not 1 percent chance. Not extremely remote chance. Not at all. There is simply no rational and sane reason to do this... other than they actually DO want to take the world to WW 3. And that they are THAT crazy.

I recommend a new LAW for USA Congress. Any publicly funded individual, government official, government media, institution, etc., which talks about "using nuclear bombs" - will be automatically and COMPLETELY defunded without any appeal. Any USA media rants calling for USA use of nuclear bombs will automatically lose their FCC license, and access to any Government press or news events forever. Since they are willing to roll the dice with our lives, lets make sure that when they choose such reckless gambling, they know there are real and tangible consequences for such actions. (If I were France, Hungary, Germany, Spain, Italy - I would be suspending all NATO funding due to this. Jens Stoltenberg does not have the right to put all of their lives at risk because he decides to appear "tough.")
Click to expand...
He got a question about it from a journalist. I don't think dodging the question would've looked good either.
 
Dissident Elephant said:
I think it is deterrence. There are circumstances where the USA would use nukes. It’s important that Putin understand so as to not miscalculate. Putin has shown to not be very good at predicting the consequences of his actions. So perhaps he needs it spelled out.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree, and see it as escalatory language that Russia can use to justify nuclear attacks on USA.
 
WeirdnessUnfolds said:
He got a question about it from a journalist. I don't think dodging the question would've looked good either.
Click to expand...
Dodging is what responsible people do about questions from the press on when would you use nuclear bombs.
They don''t reply about when they would "use nuclear bombs" because they are smarter than that.\
Because obviously nuclear bombs would create massive devastation to human life.
 
Countries that possess the nuclear weapon of the USA: Turkey, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands. NATO command in Europe is governed by USA

France and the United Kingdom have their own nuclear weapons,
These 2 countries can refuse an American order, my not the first 4
 
REALHumanRights said:
NATO Secretary-General talking about a nuclear bomb AT ALL... is off the chart unhinged.
Click to expand...
Well as the administrative head of a multi-national defense treaty organization. I believe it is completely reasonable for them to respond to a reporters question with very general and minimizing statement regarding a hypothetical nuclear exchange.
 
Saguenay said:
Countries that possess the nuclear weapon of the USA: Turkey, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands. NATO command in Europe is governed by USA

France and the United Kingdom have their own nuclear weapons,
These 2 countries can refuse an American order, my not the first 4
Click to expand...
There are some in germany too. Büchel airbase in West germany. German Tornado jets got the capability to carry them
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom