Сето тоа што го спомнуваш е вагинален чад во однос на можните насоки на развој накаде се движат случувањата сега. Психопативе си играат „чикен“. Демек кој прв ќе трепне, да ги заебат Русиве да ги збунат некако (тактика луд хебе збуњенога) па им опнат уште една голема НАТО држава на нивна граница, и да им донесат уште бази за нуклеарни проектили на само пар минути далеку од Москва и од скоро сите други поголеми популациски центри... Ова е црвената граница на црвените граници, и на сите во Русија им е јасно дека ако попуштат сега, слободно може веднаш да ги соблечат гаќите и да пополнат формулар за идни робови на газдите на САД.
Замисли Украина почнува офанзива, Русија одговара како што се очекува (не како што се надеваат америте, дека ќе ги збунат). Што ако во сето тоа се деси збрка, лошо прочитан одраз на радар, нервозен офицер во трета смена, дезинформација на ракодството каде командите се во рацете на сенилен зомби... И некако се деси да полетаат проектили кон Москва, а таму да им вратат со иста мера (а што друго и можат да направат). Лошо, многу лошо.
Идиотиве може да не вратат во камено доба... Ако воопшто остане некој да почне одново.
едит, нешто од тој аспект:
Nearly 60 years ago, leading U.S. military and intelligence officials saw only one viable pathway to resolve the Cuban missile crisis: war with Russia and the use of “the bomb.”
www.washingtontimes.com
Nearly 60 years ago, leading U.S. military and intelligence officials saw only one viable pathway to resolve the Cuban missile crisis: war with
Russia and the use of “the bomb.” Mocked by Stanley Kubrick’s brilliant “Dr. Strangelove” and exposed by John Frankenheimer’s “Seven Days in May” (both released in 1964), the psychology of leading cold warriors in Washington was shaped entirely by the belief that a nuclear war with
Russia was not only worth risking, but could somehow be won with minimal collateral damage to the “civilized democracies” on the good side of the Iron Curtain.
Luckily during that crisis, there was one man who disagreed devoutly with this assessment. President
Kennedy surprised everyone by demonstrating that
he would not bend to the pressures of the joint chiefs and instead chose the path of negotiation and concession rather than Armageddon.
Who would have thought that nearly 60 years later, the world would once again be brought back to the same precipice of nuclear annihilation? This time, however, there are thousands more nuclear warheads peppering the face of the earth and no
Kennedy occupying the Oval Office.
...
This brings us to
Russia‘s obvious concern expressed by President Vladimir Putin during the two-hour call with Mr. Biden on Dec. 7. Is it any wonder that Putin demanded a written and legally binding agreement that NATO would not encroach one more inch upon
Russia‘s border and certainly not install any ballistic missiles in Ukraine? Sure, Secretary of State Antony Blinken was quick to dismiss these concerns by stating NATO is a defense pact alone with no intention of ever doing anything offensive. But when the clamor for nuclear war with
Russia is made by leading representatives of the western alliance, can you blame Mr. Putin for not being awash in trust?
Among the loudest of these modern-day incarnations of Lyman Lemnitzer and Curtis LeMay, we have heard
NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg threatening to move U.S. nukes from Germany to an eastern European state closer to Russia‘s border. We have heard German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer state, “We must make it very clear to
Russia that we are ready to use such measures as well, so that it would have an early deterrent effect.”
On Dec. 8, Sen. Roger Wicker joined this end-times cheerleading squad saying: “We don’t rule out first-use nuclear action, we don’t think it will happen, but there are certain things in negotiations, if you are going to be tough, that you don’t take off the table.”
Even Adm.
Charles Richard, head of U.S. Strategic Command, said earlier this year that, “
the U.S. military must shift its principal assumption from ‘nuclear employment is not possible’ to ‘nuclear employment is a very real possibility.’”
Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard offered a voice of sanity opposing these warmongers, telling Tucker Carlson: “Let’s go and launch a nuclear attack that would start a war that would destroy the American people, our country and the world and oh, also, the Ukrainians so that we can save Ukraine’s democracy? I mean, it literally is insane.”
Russia is watching the growth of NATO, the forward basing of anti-ballistic weapons under its soft underbelly, NATO war games in the Black Sea and the systemic breaking of the Minsk accords by Kyiv, and they see where the wind is blowing.
...
Wars with other nations, especially those in possession of nuclear warheads must be recognized as part of an obsolete age. Instead of provoking a war with either
Russia or China, American patriots must pick up the torch where it was dropped with the assassination of
Kennedy nearly six decades ago. This means refocusing U.S. values on repairing the self-induced decay while reaching out to
Russia as our partner and ally for the remaining decades of the 21st century and beyond.
en.wikipedia.org
