ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 450 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

No, I can do math.

---

"Europe can not survive without the USA"

Wow does the CIA pay you to shill like that?

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 450 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

No, I can do math.

---

"Europe can not survive without the USA"

Wow does the CIA pay you to shill like that?

---

So you are attributing something you said to me and then throwing another one of your America loathing pot shots as a side dish? What kind of basement dwelling Twitter troll are you?

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 450 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

No, I can do math.

---

"Europe can not survive without the USA"

Wow does the CIA pay you to shill like that?

---

So you are attributing something you said to me and then throwing another one of your America loathing pot shots as a side dish? What kind of basement dwelling Twitter troll are you?

---

America is the people.

Not the regime or current leadership in DC that claims to speak for us.

You constantly imply that criticism of the government and the intelligence agencies is somehow an attack on America.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 450 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

Survive is one thing. But, we are discussing the Chinese long game and Russia. China wants the US out of the Pacific, not destroyed. The Chinese need resources and markets, Russia provides resources and the US the market.

US sales with China worth 5 trillion. China sales with EU 700 billion. Not a contest. If any market is sacrificed by China it is the EU, which is why the Chinese are sitting on their hands whlile NATO and the Ukraine are weakening Russia by the day.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China as little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

Don't disagree, until they don't. Chinese long game attitude makes it difficult to predict and they can turn on a dime. If Russia weakens enough, does it become advantageous to torment? China is a tough "friend" to have.

---

all of the foregoing is true. But it will create Sino-Russian tension in Central Asia. Russia owned it all in 1991. The Belt & Road Policy is all about changing that. And that's before we get to oil & gas considerations. And amid all that, Russia does not have the ability to honor its commitments in the Caucus.

Russia is in a tight spot and continues to weaken.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You guys would be hell of a group of allies. No wonder China and Moslem are coverting more than Capitalim and Christianity.

---

You need to get out more, if you think China and Islam are converting folks.

Those two are gaining through childbirth, not attention to what people want.

---

Moslem is the fastest growing religion in the world.

China is gaining access and allied through there road and belt program.

You guys want us to turn our back on those that want to be capitalist and democracies. How is that going to end up?

---

You might consider not lumping me in with others just for making a point.

Your post does not change the fact of my statement, that Islam and China through birthrates not policy.

Lots of folks prefer Capitalism and Freedom, even in the Middle East. But as long as Europe has a net negative native birthrate, so they let Islamic young men come into their country to do manual labor and incite violence.

Now as for China, things have a brighter outlook. A lot of African countries are welcoming China with their machinery and projects, but China is making many of the same mistakes the US made in the 1960s, providing valuable resources for nothing but the promise that China will later be the beneficiary of trade deals. Those trade deals with the US never worked out in the 1960s, nor with the Soviets in the 1970s, nor will they pan out now.

But what else should be considered, and this addresses Ukraine somewhat, is what South Korea and Japan are doing. If you don't know, you should find out.

---

---

---

I thought Indonesia was the area of most growth. I do not know the specifics well enough to go into a discussion on how it is happening.

Either way, Muslim is growing whether through birth rate and/or conversion and will be the top religion by 2050.

China is increasing its sphere of influence.

I brought up this point, not to argue the particulars of those facts but to illustrate that the US may have to do things that are costly if we want to maintain our position in the world (which has lowered). We are losing ground and to not support Ukraine that is asking for European/North American help will lead to a vacuum that the Chinese and Muslim Nations will not think twice about filling.


https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/year-2050-top-10-countries-to-have-the-highest-muslim-populations.html

---

Yea it is certainly an interesting topic.

And I don't disagree that the Islamic world will still be growing for decades to come.

But it is interesting to note that the growth rate is certainly slowing down.

Indonesia as you say is the largest Muslim country on earth. But it now has a 2.2 fertility rate (right at replacement) and will probably start losing population by around 2070

https://www.populationpyramid.net/indonesia/2100/

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/IDN/indonesia/fertility-rate

---

Demography within the islamic world is not the driver of growth of islam. The growth rates of islam in the developed world have tended to always run higher than indigenous groups, and then there's the millions of refugees who've entered Europe in the last 20 years. Plus, there is net conversion in religiously diverse third world countries. And finally, the exit clause in islam is pretty effective, as draconian disincentives tend to be.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

Sounds like a very good reason to avoid nuclear war at all costs.

Including not supporting proxy wars in Ukraine.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

Sounds like a very good reason to avoid nuclear war at all costs.

Including not supporting proxy wars in Ukraine.

---

Zero chance Ukraine sparks a nuclear war. Almost as low that any professional military general wants a direct conflict much less an exchange of nukes, even if we are not the target.

Frankly, I doubt the Russians can count on their ICBM fleet delivering a reliable First Strike. But if all they want to do is hurt us in retaliation, they absolutely can do that. Same for us, even if our missiles are painted with Gay Pride symbols.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

Sounds like a very good reason to avoid nuclear war at all costs.

Including not supporting proxy wars in Ukraine.

---

Zero chance Ukraine sparks a nuclear war. Almost as low that any professional military general wants a direct conflict much less an exchange of nukes, even if we are not the target.

Frankly, I doubt the Russians can count on their ICBM fleet delivering a reliable First Strike. But if all they want to do is hurt us in retaliation, they absolutely can do that. Same for us, even if our missiles are painted with Gay Pride symbols.

---

The chance might be low...but it is certainly not zero.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

Sounds like a very good reason to avoid nuclear war at all costs.

Including not supporting proxy wars in Ukraine.

---

Zero chance Ukraine sparks a nuclear war. Almost as low that any professional military general wants a direct conflict much less an exchange of nukes, even if we are not the target.

Frankly, I doubt the Russians can count on their ICBM fleet delivering a reliable First Strike. But if all they want to do is hurt us in retaliation, they absolutely can do that. Same for us, even if our missiles are painted with Gay Pride symbols.

---

The chance might be low...but it is certainly not zero.

---

OK, the chance is lower than my chance of starting at Center tomorrow against Texas Tech.

The Dangers of Interventionism....

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win. The best way to avoid that is remain strong and show that you will bite.

The Triad and, believe it or not, situations like Ukraine show bullies like Putin that if they cross the line, they will pay. Not only that, NATO doesn't have to even commit troops. This support of Ukraine is read loud and clear by both China and Russia. Will Ukraine win? Probably not, but the cost will be high and reaffirm not to mess in Europe.

What is dangerous is isolationism. US stays out and a weak leader like Obama goes around apologizing, now people like Xi and Putin think they can pull it off.

This war is coming close to a year old and nobody in the West is still gonna acknowledge what the Ukrainian Gov't did to the people in the Donbass for 8 years.

— Black in the Empire (@blackintheempir) February 3, 2023

Redbrickbear said:

---

This war is coming close to a year old and nobody in the West is still gonna acknowledge what the Ukrainian Gov't did to the people in the Donbass for 8 years.

— Black in the Empire (@blackintheempir) February 3, 2023

---

PolitiFact | Vladimir Putin repeats false claim of genocide in Ukraine

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

This war is coming close to a year old and nobody in the West is still gonna acknowledge what the Ukrainian Gov't did to the people in the Donbass for 8 years.

— Black in the Empire (@blackintheempir) February 3, 2023

---

PolitiFact | Vladimir Putin repeats false claim of genocide in Ukraine

---

Did he say there was an active genocide in the Donbas?

What there certainly has been is an aggressive war against the people there.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

This war is coming close to a year old and nobody in the West is still gonna acknowledge what the Ukrainian Gov't did to the people in the Donbass for 8 years.

— Black in the Empire (@blackintheempir) February 3, 2023

---

PolitiFact | Vladimir Putin repeats false claim of genocide in Ukraine

---

Correct.

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win. The best way to avoid that is remain strong and show that you will bite.

---

What if one side believes they have nothing to lose?

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

---

I am not sure that has been proven. The ONLY time nuclear weapons have been used is when we knew there was no retaliation in kind possible. No nation no matter how bad the situation has resorted nucleR weapons. You assertion is speculation that
has no data to suport it.

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

---

I am not sure that has been proven. The ONLY time nuclear weapons have been used is when we knew there was no retaliation in kind possible. No nation no matter how bad the situation has resorted nucleR weapons. You assertion is speculation that
has no data to suport it.

---

If you look anywhere from history, to religion, to literature, to today's headlines, all the data says the same thing. Humans are flawed, sinful, irrational creatures.

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

---

Sam has nukes?

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

---

I am not sure that has been proven. The ONLY time nuclear weapons have been used is when we knew there was no retaliation in kind possible. No nation no matter how bad the situation has resorted nucleR weapons. You assertion is speculation that
has no data to suport it.

---

If you look anywhere from history, to religion, to literature, to today's headlines, all the data says the same thing. Humans are flawed, sinful, irrational creatures.

---

Yet God is merciful and hears our prayers.

Forget that part, did you Sam?

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

---

There's always something to lose. And the bigger the gamble, the larger the loss. Losing Russia > losing Ukraine.

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Rand corporation insiders leak that, when asked why they reversed their position on the merits of a long war with Russia in Ukraine, responded "we took the previous position before we realized that they would win."

— Garland Nixon (@GarlandNixon) February 1, 2023

Oh look, Pentagon think tank starting to realize and admit that Russia will win, it will retain the Donbas & Crimea and Ukraine will still be not in Nato.

---

That is a revelation? Ukraine can't win a long war with Russia, they do not have the capacity. They can fight a decisive defensive action and apply the hurt to Russia. But if this thing goes long, all advantage goes to Russia for several reason, namely it will mean Putin has survived and eliminated his rivals.

The only wild card in this equation is China. They support Russia, until they don't. If Russia gets too weak, China's long game starts to change and their are areas that they can exploit to cause Russia all sorts of problems. There are a lot of proxies out there.

---

China has little if any reason to mess with Russia.

As of now Russia is cut off from EU markets...so China is its main buyer of oil, natural gas, timber, wheat, potatoes, and minerals.

Its has become for China what Canada is for us.

The leadership in Beijing has little reason to upset that situation.

Long term Russia then settles in a junior partner status to China...and Xi Jinping likes it that way.

---

China is the reason the Russian nuclear threat is a ruse.

---

Wishful thinking.

---

So you think China is going to stand by and let Putin destroy or irradiate the 2 biggest markets for Chinese goods?

---

Probably one but not both.

I would not put it past them to let Russia respond with nukes at the USA.

This removing a long term strategic rival to China.

While leaving the EU as a trading partner for Chinese goods.

---

What type of trading partner do you think the EU would be after a nuclear launch against its most important ally?

And I won't even mention the economic MAD a loss of US trade does to China.

---

You don't think the 600 million person EU can survive without the USA?

Man you really are a true believer in the Empire.

---

It's cute to see people post the idea of a major nuclear exchange that only affects a few countries and leave most alone to go about their business.

---

I didn't start this hypothetical nuclear talk.

But in a far fetched hypothetical situation where the USA and Russia destroyed themselves in war.

I have no doubt the EU could rebuild and survive.

---

In any scenario where the US and Russia go Nuke-Nuke to the point that they are both gone, the fallout effects alone will make 'rebuilding' a daydream more than 50 years away from even starting.

---

The only way anything goes nuclear is if one side believes they can win.

---

It happens just as quickly if one side believes they have nothing to lose.

---

I am not sure that has been proven. The ONLY time nuclear weapons have been used is when we knew there was no retaliation in kind possible. No nation no matter how bad the situation has resorted nucleR weapons. You assertion is speculation that
has no data to suport it.

---

If you look anywhere from history, to religion, to literature, to today's headlines, all the data says the same thing. Humans are flawed, sinful, irrational creatures.

---

Yes, humans are flawed, sinful, and irrational. How does that prove that they will resort to Nukes if they cannot win a war in Ukraine?

When has a regional war, which is all we have had since WW2 gone nuclear? Not even the Israelis have used nukes on Iran. THE only time Atomic weapons were used was when we didn't know what they could really do by the winning side, in 1945. Give me one historic situation that the losing side went Masada? Even the fire bombing has been done by the side winning, not the losing side.

There is no chance Ukraine goes nuclear. Russia is not going nuclear over a regional action. If they do, they will cease to exist from both NATO and China, Russia is not suicidal. Opportunistic, but not suicidal.

Another US insider publication spells it out. The #UkraineRussiaWar is all over bar the dying of more poor Ukrainian conscripts. Russia has won, and a deal will be done. Watch for Biden to declare victory and leave. It is, after all, the American way!https://t.co/Hu7zrwdmZ9

— Nick Griffin (@NickGriffinBU) February 2, 2023

surprising no one, i hope? https://t.co/Hk7VAvEaQ9

— kaitlin (@thefactualprep) February 4, 2023

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.


P.S.

The Wall Street journal is not Russian propaganda.

Nor is advocating peace the same as advocating Russian interests.

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.


P.S.

The Wall Street journal is not Russian propaganda.

Nor is advocating peace the same as advocating Russian interests.

---

This is not expanding.

Russia is having a hard time with Ukraine being supplied by NATO. There is no way they escalate to take on NATO proper, it is a fools errand and Putin is not a fool.

He is struggling to control Donbass and Crimea, he is going to take on Poland? NATO?

He is stretched too thin as it is, he still needs to be worried about the Stans and Far East. Putin is trying to control 11 time zones with an outdated and undermotivated military. Ukraine is not happening in a vacuum. This is not the Nazi War machine of 1939, which couldn't take over and control 11 time zones! That was with a highly professional, motivated and top-in-class military.

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.

---

Actually, you haven't. In fact, you seem to have taken great care not to enunciate any firm positions beyond token expressions (when pressed) that Russia was wrong to invade...in between your many posts apologizing for Russia and explaining why it's really our fault. Even now your response is as vague and noncommittal as possible. "This war"..."it's a bad idea".

Ok, whose bad idea was it? Going off prior posts, you seem to believe it is NATO and Ukraine's fault that Russia invaded after being warned not to for years. The specific questions I asked you earlier were whether you supported military aid for Ukraine or not, or is it your belief that we should have stepped aside and let Russia take what it can from Ukraine (i.e. all of it) without our assistance?

You often whine about people's perception that you support Russia, but at the same time all of your criticisms and the sources that you share are almost exclusively all pro-Russian. Like, "state owned propaganda" style pro-Russian. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...

Responding to your edit. Sharing an old pro-Russian article from March 2022 is absolutely propaganda, and advocating for peace on Russian terms (which is what you're doing) is as pro-Russia as it gets.

HuMcK said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.

---

Actually, you haven't. In fact, you seem to have taken great care not to enunciate any firm positions beyond token expressions (when pressed) that Russia was wrong to invade...in between your many posts apologizing for Russia and explaining why it's really our fault. Even now your response is as vague and noncommittal as possible. "This war"..."it's a bad idea".

Ok, whose bad idea was it? Going off prior posts, you seem to believe it is NATO and Ukraine's fault that Russia invaded after being warned not to for years. The specific questions I asked you earlier were whether you supported military aid for Ukraine or not, or is it your belief that we should have stepped aside and let Russia take what it can from Ukraine (i.e. all of it) without our assistance?

You often whine about people's perception that you support Russia, but at the same time all of your criticisms and the sources that you share are almost exclusively all pro-Russian. Like, "state owned propaganda" style pro-Russian. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...

Responding to your edit. Sharing an old pro-Russian article from March 2022 is absolutely propaganda, and advocating for peace on Russian terms (which is what you're doing) is as pro-Russia as it gets.

---

If you think NATO should get directly involved in a war in Eastern Europe then you should come out and say so.

If not then you are just advocating for us to spend billions of taxpayer money turning Ukraine into another Syria.

A bloody long term conflict with no resolution.

A meat grinder and open wound on the European continent.

Something that may eventually spiral out of control or just bleed on for years.

You also refuse to acknowledge or even accept the reality that the actions of the US intelligence agencies helped to bring about this situation by getting involved in this region going back to the Obama administration.

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.

---

Actually, you haven't. In fact, you seem to have taken great care not to enunciate any firm positions beyond token expressions (when pressed) that Russia was wrong to invade...in between your many posts apologizing for Russia and explaining why it's really our fault. Even now your response is as vague and noncommittal as possible. "This war"..."it's a bad idea".

Ok, whose bad idea was it? Going off prior posts, you seem to believe it is NATO and Ukraine's fault that Russia invaded after being warned not to for years. The specific questions I asked you earlier were whether you supported military aid for Ukraine or not, or is it your belief that we should have stepped aside and let Russia take what it can from Ukraine (i.e. all of it) without our assistance?

You often whine about people's perception that you support Russia, but at the same time all of your criticisms and the sources that you share are almost exclusively all pro-Russian. Like, "state owned propaganda" style pro-Russian. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...

Responding to your edit. Sharing an old pro-Russian article from March 2022 is absolutely propaganda, and advocating for peace on Russian terms (which is what you're doing) is as pro-Russia as it gets.

---

If you think NATO should get directly involved in a war in Eastern Europe then you should come out and say so.

If not then you are just advocating for us to spend billions of taxpayer money turning Ukraine into another Syria.

A bloody long term conflict with no resolution.

A meat grinder and open wound on the European continent.

Something that may eventually spiral out of control or just bleed on for years.

You also refuse to acknowledge or even accept the reality that the actions of the US intelligence agencies helped to bring about this situation by getting involved in this region going back to the Obama administration.

---

How is supplying a former Communist Nation that wants to align with the West and move to Capitalism a bad thing? Remember, Russia invaded. We are not sending troops. This is a long term investment, how Ukraine repays can be worked out later. Ukraine has the potential to be a very strategic allie and a great economic partner with the EU and North America. I fail to see the downside of helping them.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.

---

Actually, you haven't. In fact, you seem to have taken great care not to enunciate any firm positions beyond token expressions (when pressed) that Russia was wrong to invade...in between your many posts apologizing for Russia and explaining why it's really our fault. Even now your response is as vague and noncommittal as possible. "This war"..."it's a bad idea".

Ok, whose bad idea was it? Going off prior posts, you seem to believe it is NATO and Ukraine's fault that Russia invaded after being warned not to for years. The specific questions I asked you earlier were whether you supported military aid for Ukraine or not, or is it your belief that we should have stepped aside and let Russia take what it can from Ukraine (i.e. all of it) without our assistance?

You often whine about people's perception that you support Russia, but at the same time all of your criticisms and the sources that you share are almost exclusively all pro-Russian. Like, "state owned propaganda" style pro-Russian. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...

Responding to your edit. Sharing an old pro-Russian article from March 2022 is absolutely propaganda, and advocating for peace on Russian terms (which is what you're doing) is as pro-Russia as it gets.

---

If you think NATO should get directly involved in a war in Eastern Europe then you should come out and say so.

If not then you are just advocating for us to spend billions of taxpayer money turning Ukraine into another Syria.

A bloody long term conflict with no resolution.

A meat grinder and open wound on the European continent.

Something that may eventually spiral out of control or just bleed on for years.

You also refuse to acknowledge or even accept the reality that the actions of the US intelligence agencies helped to bring about this situation by getting involved in this region going back to the Obama administration.

---

How is supplying a former Communist Nation that wants to align with the West and move to Capitalism a bad thing? Remember, Russia invaded. We are not sending troops. This is a long term investment, how Ukraine repays can be worked out later. Ukraine has the potential to be a very strategic allie and a great economic partner with the EU and North America. I fail to see the downside of helping them.

---

You think this is a battle between capitalism and communism?

And this is not a long term investment…it's an exercise in taxpayer cash burning and money laundering.

The money that does not end up in the hands of US politicians, military contractors, Ukrainian politicians, or just our right stolen…is not actually going to be enough to force Russia out.

It's enough to keep Ukraine from losing…not enough to help them win.

Negotiated Peace is the best course here…not turning this into a long term bloody mess.

HuMcK said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Article is from April 2022, and it's predictions aged pretty poorly.

Remember that time I asked you to explicitly spell out your positions, but then you declined and kept sharing stale pro-Russian propaganda instead? Can't imagine why anyone would come to believe that you've sided with Russia interests in this conflict /s.

---

I have explained my position on this war probably 50 times.

It's a bad idea. Could escalate into a wider European war and even to a possible nuclear war. And is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the long term impoverishment of Ukraine and possible mass depopulation of the country.

The DC political-media class is immoral and monstrous to root on this proxy war.

---

Actually, you haven't. In fact, you seem to have taken great care not to enunciate any firm positions beyond token expressions (when pressed) that Russia was wrong to invade...in between your many posts apologizing for Russia and explaining why it's really our fault. Even now your response is as vague and noncommittal as possible. "This war"..."it's a bad idea".

Ok, whose bad idea was it? Going off prior posts, you seem to believe it is NATO and Ukraine's fault that Russia invaded after being warned not to for years. The specific questions I asked you earlier were whether you supported military aid for Ukraine or not, or is it your belief that we should have stepped aside and let Russia take what it can from Ukraine (i.e. all of it) without our assistance?

You often whine about people's perception that you support Russia, but at the same time all of your criticisms and the sources that you share are almost exclusively all pro-Russian. Like, "state owned propaganda" style pro-Russian. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck...

Responding to your edit. Sharing an old pro-Russian article from March 2022 is absolutely propaganda, and advocating for peace on Russian terms (which is what you're doing) is as pro-Russia as it gets.

---

It doesn't matter whose "fault" it is. A bad idea is a bad idea.