Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Carragher who wrote (768327)	9/21/2022 10:07:32 AM
From: skinowski	Respond to of 794261

I don’t know if it’s a threat - but he said, basically, that if Russia is in trouble, they would use nukes. To me this was obvious from day 1. Kept me worried all along - which, of course, is totally useless - because it won’t change a thing. If they accept defeat, the country, more likely than not, would be broken up. If not immediately, then over time. The West may decide to do the same thing if it becomes obvious that Russia is heading for victory. No one would break it up in case of a defeat - but it would have consequences for the leadership of many countries. Plus, the embarrassment.

To: John Carragher who wrote (768327)	9/21/2022 5:55:18 PM
From: Maurice Winn	5 Recommendations Recommended By 3bar fred woodall garrettjax Hoa Hao John Carragher Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 794261

John, Putin isn't really "threatening nukes again", it's an explanation of the process the USA is intent on pursuing. He is explaining that if the USA uses its enormous, vast, unstoppable conventional military power, in cahoots with Eurostan and Euroserfs in Barbarossa II, 1812 Overture, Charge of the Light Brigade, then Russia would have nothing to stop them other than nuclear weapons. He is saying, let's vote, not nuke. Americans, Liz Truss, Ursula and the 4th Reich say "No voting!! We want war and to conquer Russia, reduce it to helplessness, disarm it forever so it can never again be consequential." It's absurd that those purporting to be in favour of democracy, freedom blah blah blah are totally the opposite. They do NOT want eastern Ukrainians having an Irish-style vote for independence, a Scottish vote for secession,, a Brexit vote for freedom. How come voting is okay in UK but not for Russians in eastern Ukraine? I have yet to see a single person do reasoning to explain why I'm wrong. Ipso facto they are moronic murderous scum who deserve to be nuked into oblivion if they pursue their murderous attacks on the eastern and southern Ukrainians or Russia. Their reasoning to Russia is "Shut up, surrender, or die." Understandably, Russians dislike that idea. First Crimea, then Yank tanks to Murmansk, then Moscow = I can see why they resist that process. Putin is not threatening nuclear war, he's defending, explaining the logical outcome of continued and increased USA attacks. He is far more reasonable than I am. I would have gone nuclear long ago = cut to the chase and say VOTING or WE ALL DIE NOW. There are people who say he wants to take over Eurostan. Or maybe just all the old Warsaw Pact countries. After 20 years and with only a few more years on his clock, he has not done anything at all to achieve that. Blah blah blah Georgia = totally minuscule and in response to a USA plot. The only other territorial action was after 8 years of attacks on the eastern Ukrainians by the NATO/USA run coup and conquest gang of evil murderous Azovs. Those mind-reading people are obviously totally wrong and what's more, mind reading is not possible. Guessing is a bit of a fool's game. Especially when such mind-reading flies in the face of reality as shown over 20 years and with no mechanism for such an absurd idea to be achieved. Russia's 150 million relatively poor people have zero prospect of conquering 340 million high GDP Yanks combined with 750 million high GDP Euroserfs. They also have zero reason to think that's a slightly good idea. Never has any of them suggested it. 1 billion well-off well-armed vs 0.1 billion relatively poor, with not such a good military. Votes Now, or DIE Looks like an easy and sensible and very good idea that should have been done 8 years ago. Who likes democracy, freedom, self-determination [albeit in various size collectives]? Who prefers the end of the world = the end of USA, UK, Eurostan, Russia and a lot more besides if not really every person in every nook and cranny in Brazilian jungle or Australian Outback. The astronauts in orbit will be in trouble - circling until they run out of air, food .... People in large cities will be doomed even if not nuked as they won't have food. Or water. And small cities and towns. Antarctica will be inhospitable so tough luck for Scott Base. I guess about 100 million would survive 1 year after D-Day. [Doom-Day]. Mqurice