I'm with Edwin Starr on this one.
I'm with Edwin Starr on this one.
Ah, but rebuilding is the key to war. And without people for whom we claim to rebuild, it's pointless. Create a need (mass destruction), send gazillions of dollars, and the scammers get fabulously wealthy. War is a racket, said Smedley Butler.
West Ham ?![]()
No. Not at all.
![]()
..has never been off the table in regards to Russia. IMHO it isn't a matter of if but when.
I doubt it will be neutron or strategic weaponry, but local battlefield (aka "theatre") nukes such as Russian OTR-21's and the like.
Chemical and biological agents are what I'm expecting before the nukes are used.
Putin has painted himself into a corner; a perfect no-win situation for him and his cronies. He knows it. He has nothing to lose at this point except to destroy Ukraine and send a strong message to the NATO alliance.
When the weapons are used, I expect NATO's response to be tepid to put it mildly. As for Ukraine and possibly one or two other nations, I expect a response similair to the Munich Agreement of 1938.
My bad. I thought it was about tactical neutron bombs . . .
And you are correct.
So no problem.
![]()
Talked to a good friend who is retired from US Military with a "I WOULD HAVE TO kill you if I ever told you anything" level clearance. He thinks China would take out Putin for doing such a thing. But he also fears that nuke use could still start WWIII.
When the weapons are used, I expect NATO's response to be tepid to put it mildly. As for Ukraine and possibly one or two other nations, I expect a response similair to the Munich Agreement of 1938.
Have you ever noticed people you are talking to will just walk away mid-sentence . . . ?
They'll come back, but they're just being nice . . .