It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Is the US pushing Russia to the brink of a nuclear war?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I was thinking of the US really...plus European member states.




posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: midicon

They have no overt demands. The only reason they are posturing is to let our leaders know to stay out of their security interests... specifically their oil supply and alliances.

This isn't a hostage situation. It's one bully going up against another. We have been bullying Russian allies (Iran, Syria) and interfering with Russian plans (Ukraine) for a while now. They aren't demanding anything. They're just letting us know they're upset and ready to take action if we don't back off.

If you come across a bear in the wild and poke it into a corner, it's not going to demand anything; it's going to eat you for lunch.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: midicon

Im in the UK so Russia would have rather a had time landing there tanks and APC on our shores, nothing a few of there ICBM could not compensate for all the same.

It's those very same European member states i'm referring to, we would be hard pushed to stop a armored mobilized Russian assault into bordering NATO nations.

Just look at what Hitler accomplish with his Blitzkrieg tactics, and imagine a force 100 times greater.

Only way we could stop them would be with tactical battlefield nukes and possibly EMP warheads.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Of course Russia isn't threatening any of that scenario. It's really is just calling it like it is. I just was commenting on why Russia would warn that it would use nukes if attacked. I would have thought in a real all out war without nukes that the US would always win.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Couldn't agree more. I was just questioning Xcathdra's comment about giving in to Russia's demands.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: midicon

Whoever has air superiority generally wins the conflict but Russia's no slouch and has a effective modern air force and air defense network. Plus America is not in exactly occupying Europe although they do have bases there. Lets just say i don't think it would be as easy as any of the rest of the air superiority battles to date. Probably could go ether way. But then the nukes would fly i imagine.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

yes



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Peace could be achieved IF the US could produce a president with moral courage or leadership capacity.

Obama has none of this inside him. Neither does Hillary or Donald Trump even come remotely near that capacity!

The US can’t produce such an individual so we’ll blindly wander on to destruction.

Any president who doesn’t support Israel even with all the evil Israel does, or support the conflict with Russia, or the continuation of the ME conflicts will not last. Or in-fact COULD NEVER be elected president.



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Peace could be achieved by sitting around a table and coming to an amicable decision the suits the needs of all party's involved.

But "They" don't want to do that or so it seems. "They" would rather posture and wave there nuclear penis in the air.

Eisenhower knew the score the real culprits behind this debacle is the military industrial complex and the banking cartels aka the real bastards that run the show.




Politicians are just the window dressing really.
edit on 18-10-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2016 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Xcathdra


However giving into russia demands while they constantly threaten the use of nukes is a dangerous precedent to set.


What are Russia demanding? I don't see them demanding anything.

It's no surprise that they threaten with nukes. The US would win in any other type of confrontation.



then you are either missing the news or are purposely ignoring Russia on this topic. Russia scrapped a nuclear agreement with the US and said the only way to get it back on track was for the US to end all sanctions on Russia and to reduce troops in NATO countries...


Putin Halts Plutonium Pact, Demands End to Sanctions by U.S.


President Vladimir Putin abandoned a key nuclear disarmament treaty with the U.S. and demanded the removal of sanctions and troop reductions from Russia’s former Cold War enemy to restore the agreement.




In a separate document submitted to Russia’s parliament, Putin indicated his readiness to revive the treaty provided the U.S. reduces its military and troop presence in NATO member states to the level that existed on Sept. 1, 2000. He also called for an end to sanctions against Russia imposed in 2014 over the conflict in Ukraine, and the abolition of restrictions under the so-called Magnitsky Act of 2012, which was aimed at officials accused of involvement in the prison death of whistle-blower Sergei Magnitsky.


Like I have been saying Putler has lost his effing mind.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 02:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

All of that in response to the US's actions. Crimea is none of the US's business and we all know the shady hand they had in the resulting coup. Ditto for Syria.

I haven't heard of anyone called 'Putler'. If you are referring to Putin then I am sure he knows exactly what he is doing.

Not to mention the non stop barrage of propaganda tripe coming from the US aimed at demonising Russia.

edit on 19-10-2016 by midicon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 04:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
All of that in response to the US's actions.


and what actions might those be?


originally posted by: midicon
Crimea is none of the US's business and we all know the shady hand they had in the resulting coup. Ditto for Syria.

There was no coup in Ukraine. The elected government, including members of Yanukovych's own party, voted to impeach him, which was successful. Before they could convene the trial he fled the country to Russia. The government that removed him from power was elected in Dec 2012 and was recognized by Russia.

As a member of the UN its very much the business of the UN, as well as all other countries. Crimea is Ukrainian sovereign territory and Russia invaded it and then illegally annexed it.

Since no coup occurred in Syria I dont grant your premise.



originally posted by: midicon
I haven't heard of anyone called 'Putler'. If you are referring to Putin then I am sure he knows exactly what he is doing.

Yeah Putin is using the same playbook Hitler used when he tried to justify his illegal actions. So the name Putler is very much appropriate and correct.



originally posted by: midicon
Not to mention the non stop barrage of propaganda tripe coming from the US aimed at demonising Russia.

All of which is coming from Russian propaganda media outlets. Blaming the US is the only way for Putler to hide his failures as a leader. He is incapable of living in the 21st century and cannot accept the fact the USSR collapsed and wont be coming back.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Of course we will never agree on anything. I wouldn't expect anything else from someone echoing the US government stance.

Regards the coup in Ukraine, there is no escaping the $5 billion spent by the US to implement the agenda.

The 'coup' in Syria is ongoing and the US's role in supplying arms and weapons to terrorists in attempt to overthrow the legitimate government is there for all to see.

Everything you say about Putin is just nonsense, following the usual path of demonising anyone that stands up to US hegemony.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Dont forget American citizens...

Duck and Cover..... Duck and cover.....Dont forget folks, if you see a flash....Duck and cover under the nearest table or if you're on the road...lay near the gutter.....you'all will be fine.......


To bad the POTUS didnt listen to ol Douglas Mac after the war....he didnt want to stop at Japan.... he wanted to go on and Nuke Russia, then China, and while you're at it, Nuke the Middle East too.
Maybe Nuke Australia too, just for the hell of it....

Ahhh Dougy........those were the good ol daze.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
Of course we will never agree on anything. I wouldn't expect anything else from someone echoing the US government stance.

and I would expect nothing else from someone echoing the false Russian narrative.



originally posted by: midicon
Regards the coup in Ukraine, there is no escaping the $5 billion spent by the US to implement the agenda.

I see you lack education on this topic. Why dont you research the total amount the US has invested in Ukraine, including the years Yanukovych was in office. Had you done that you might see an interesting correlation between what was spent and the lie you are trying to pass as something its not. But again I would not expect the truth from a person echoing the Russian lies.



originally posted by: midicon
The 'coup' in Syria is ongoing and the US's role in supplying arms and weapons to terrorists in attempt to overthrow the legitimate government is there for all to see.

There is no coup in Syria as Assad is still in power. Assad is not the legitimate government of Syria. A legitimate government is elected by the people, which Assad was not.

Keep pushing that russian lie though while ignoring facts and the truth.



originally posted by: midicon
Everything you say about Putin is just nonsense, following the usual path of demonising anyone that stands up to US hegemony.

No its truth and is supported by facts. Putler is a sham, incapable of existing in the 21st century and who is desperately trying to live back in the 1980's and who thinks he is in charge of the Soviet Union.

Putler is leading Russia to its worst fate since stalin and the pro russians are to "proud" to see it. It will be their undoing, right up to the end while they and their apologists keep blaming everyone else for the outcome.

Have fun in that world.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: gort51

Actually its to bad Truman didnt listen to Patton...

duck and cover has not been used in decades but by all means keep proving my point about Russia and its apologists living in the wrong time period.
edit on 19-10-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Why not just "war"? Why "nuclear war"?

All the stupid boys want to play with their inventions. NO.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

"Why not just "war"? Why "nuclear war"?"

Because the loser of any kind of conventional war will inevitable spit the dummy out and employ the use of there nuclear arsenals in an attempt to stop the aggressor.

"All the stupid boys want to play with their inventions. NO."

Its not just the boys these days through, if Clinton becomes POTUS she will wield the nuclear penis also, god only know what that moronic buffoon Trump will get up to, that twat will probobly stumble and fall on the red button, then claim it was a Mexican at fault.

edit on 19-10-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
that twat will probobly stumble and fall on the red button, then claim it was a Mexican at fault.


Why not? Russia is claiming all its woes are the fault of the US.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Why not?

Because me and my children and family will die in the inevitable return exchange.

Or if that's not a good enough reason so will a significant percentage of the rest of the people on the planet.

Russia kind of have a point with some of there claims just as US/NATO also have legitimate grievances.

Nuclear war is not the answer though, that's a given really.




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join