‘The damage is done’: Russians face economic point of no return

Let's just say that to survive he HAS to start a nuclear war.

 

While I'd prefer we avoid a nuclear war entirely, I have lately found myself pondering some of the political implications of Russia turning, say for example, the 50 largest cities in the USA into piles of rubble under a Democrat administration, and well, at least there's a silver lining to that cloud.

 

Putin has changed over the years.

 

Russia has tools of it's own to use. Russia and Ukraine together are the biggest exporters of wheat, corn and barley in the world. They produce a quarter of the world's wheat. Russia alone produces more than 2/3rd's of 20 million metric tons of the fertilizer used to grow corn and wheat around the world. We have a big food security problem in this country and the world. Does Biden have a plan?

 

Fyi, most land based us nukes are in the mid west. But feel free to expose your blind hatred as many times as you wish.

 

Russia has approximately 800 more nuclear weapons than the US.

"Russia's nuclear threat to Ukraine and NATO brings to the fore what is known as the Tsar Bomba, a weapon of mass destruction that is 3,800 times more powerful than the nuclear bomb that hit Hiroshima in 1945."
https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2022/03/02/621f8e6dca47413f3a8b45e4.html

 

Why do you think he'd target then-empty silos in the case of a nuclear exchange? That's badly-flawed logic. Or do you have so little faith in Biden that you think he would leave our nukes sitting in their silos with Russian ICBMs inbound?

 

Those silos are not empty, but continue the classless and uninformed posts.

 

I understand they're not empty right now, but presumably if Putin were to launch ICBMs towards our own ICBM silos, we'd respond by launching the ICBMs contained therein towards Russia, and thus we'd have empty silos sitting there when the Russian nukes arrived. Putin presumably understands this and wouldn't waste his own warheads on empty silos. So ... what would he target with his own launches? Two realistic possibilities: military assets such as bases / command and control infrastructure, or major population centers, which are generally filled overwhelmingly with liberals.

 

I don't understand why you think Russia / Putin would bomb empty nuclear silos.... as Hurricane is correct with the statement of mutual destruction. Odd.

 

I suggest you simply do a web search of us nukes

I guess you must looked into those silos.

https://www.nps.gov/articles/mappingmissilefield.htm
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/07/31/336847318/to-find-america-s-nukes-try-google-maps

 

Rather than being vague and evasive, why don't you just state clearly what it is you're thinking?

Or, why don't you respond to the main problem with your apparent "thinking" - that Russia isn't going to target missile silos with their own nukes because they won't be holding ICBMs by the time their warheads can hit them.

 

Oh yeah when were they emptied.

 

The reality is you are wrong. The us nuclear land based nukes exist.

I forget who the poster was, but they claimed EA6 planes were flying around yet are decommissioned.

All that said, let's not forget your allusion to people getting nuked.

 

Maybe if they put Ukrainian children in those silos? Russia would definitely want to bomb them then.

 

I think you've lost the entire flow of the conversation: I understand that we have land-based missiles. Pretty much everyone understands this. We were discussing the hypothetical scenario of a Russian nuclear attack on the USA, in which case our own land-based (as well as other) nuclear weapons would be used in response. The missiles would be launched from their silos, and then those silos would sit empty.

Is this where you got cross-ways? You thought someone was denying the existence of America's nuclear arsenal, or at least the land-based portion of the triad? Let me state it clearly then: you misunderstood. Nobody in this thread has claimed that America's land-based nuclear weapons don't exist. That was your own poor reading comprehension at work.

 

Im not the one who posted about us cities getting nuked would be a silver lining, nor am I incorrectly stating strategic nuke silos are empty. Yet you now contradict yourself saying they are not empty.

All you did was to be continually classless by bringing petty politics into this.

Btw you are wrong again. They do not place strategic weapons and other facilities in a single location, the whole idea was to spread them around so a single nuke wouldn't take out the lot. Keep playing.

 

Keep making up crap. Biden gave Putin the go ahead to invade Ukraine. With his poll numbers in the toilet Joe needs a cause that will allow him to act out the tough guy patriot roll.

What you are failing to do now.

 

It's ok to just admit you were wrong....

 

https://thetexan.news/senate-democrats-block-cruzs-effort-to-sanction-russian-pipeline/

Yeah those dems are really anti Putin.

A month later Putin invades the Ukraine.

Then dems support Putin by voting against this bill.

https://republicans-energycommerce....american-energy-independence-from-russia-act/

Sounds like Putin has a political action committee in the democrat party.

 

I wouldn't wish that in my worst nightmares, not even 100 years of Democrat control would make me say that. The indiscriminate loss of civilian life, my brethren would be incomprehensible. My anguish, my sorrow would also then be replaced by an unquelled anger to assure the destruction of the Putin Regime, one way or another. If the Putin Regime wages war of the sort against the US, there would be no turning back for us or for them either.

 

Biden is more popular than Trump at the same point in his presidency.

And look closely at the polls, it's going to go up in the next few days.

 

Again, you're failing at reading comprehension. Nobody at all has claimed that our nuclear silos are currently empty. What I have said is that, in the event of a nuclear exchange, we would launch our ICBMs, and then the silos that now contain hundreds of Minuteman IIIs would be empty. That you can't grasp this rather plain English is profoundly disappointing.

Once again, you're inventing claims that were never made, and responding to them. It's like trying to have a conversation with a crazy person. Nobody at all has claimed that anybody places all of their strategic weapons "in a single location". That's either something you imagined, misread, misunderstood, or invented out of whole cloth.

Are you familiar with what a strawman fallacy is?

 

Yes, of course no rational person would wish for that. That's why I started out by saying, "I'd prefer we avoid a nuclear war entirely". But, as the possibility has increased in recent weeks, I find myself pondering the possible ramifications. That's a far cry from wishing for it. I ponder the ramifications of lots of things, plenty of which I hope never come to pass.

 

Which polls are you looking at? Here's what I see:

Biden RCP average on 3/2/2022 = 40.7

Trump's RCP average on 3/2/2018 = 41.2

It's close, but Biden's still losing as of today.

And why do you think Biden is going up? Thus far, the long-term trend has been pretty steadily downward for him: RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Biden Job Approval