I disagree about the nuke thing. Nukes are too traceable, it’s too brinksmanship-like with Russia and risks nuclear retaliation even if on a limited scale. Far more likely is they false flag with biological or chemical weapons. Those are almost impossible to trace and just as outrageous. Just whip up some novichuk or similar, drop it on one of those areas, scream bloody murder that the Russians did it and there you go, got your NATO involvement under another name.
They’ve been hinting at it for some time now. The previous misinformation about the Russians imminently going to use such things. The new conditions for intervention. It doesn’t even have to be a political decision the Pentagon or Executive makes. The CIA sees this and they’ll just go for it on their own because they were told in other words the price of involvement is that.
Maybe except the nuke, which isn’t as improbable as people think though*, he is 100% right here.
*Because this is what they are doing since the beginning of the war, and really from the very maidan coup in 2014, they now tried basically everything except the nuke.
Doubt. Possible the US will bomb the country, but nuking it? Nah. That’s suicide. But even bombing the country is just a waiting for retaliation. First, the US would have to destabilize the RF even further to where any threats of retaliation are meaningless and hold no weight. A sort of Iran situation, where Iran was under oath to not use or create nukes. They would first have to drain out Russian resources enough through the current conflict and slowly amp it up over time. Of course I’m no war professional but it just seems like something the US would do. The US is a blood thirsty monster but it wouldn’t use nukes as the population of the US is not warmed up enough to the idea of nukes being “safe” and will “never harm the US in return” and will wait after destabilizing the whole of Eastern Europe beyond this already existing destabilization.
threats of retaliation are meaningless and hold no weight
Unless of course they’re counting on retaliation being either impossible (due to USA’s missile defences) or not happening due to capitalists in Russia being unwilling to go that far. After all, if the world burns, so do their money and power.
I hope you’re right. But the US is failing fast now, and with the overturning of Roe V Wade people are gonna be PISSED. I worry the US elites will be looking for distractions.
For posting news about NATO’s wars in Ukraine, Serbia, Kosovo, and The Middle East, including anywhere else NATO is currently engaged in hostile actions. As well as anything that relates to it.
Rules:
Follow Site Rules
No support nor defence of Western-backed governments, NATO or Western Imperialism
Lol neoconservative anarchists
I disagree about the nuke thing. Nukes are too traceable, it’s too brinksmanship-like with Russia and risks nuclear retaliation even if on a limited scale. Far more likely is they false flag with biological or chemical weapons. Those are almost impossible to trace and just as outrageous. Just whip up some novichuk or similar, drop it on one of those areas, scream bloody murder that the Russians did it and there you go, got your NATO involvement under another name.
They’ve been hinting at it for some time now. The previous misinformation about the Russians imminently going to use such things. The new conditions for intervention. It doesn’t even have to be a political decision the Pentagon or Executive makes. The CIA sees this and they’ll just go for it on their own because they were told in other words the price of involvement is that.
Maybe except the nuke, which isn’t as improbable as people think though*, he is 100% right here.
*Because this is what they are doing since the beginning of the war, and really from the very maidan coup in 2014, they now tried basically everything except the nuke.
Doubt. Possible the US will bomb the country, but nuking it? Nah. That’s suicide. But even bombing the country is just a waiting for retaliation. First, the US would have to destabilize the RF even further to where any threats of retaliation are meaningless and hold no weight. A sort of Iran situation, where Iran was under oath to not use or create nukes. They would first have to drain out Russian resources enough through the current conflict and slowly amp it up over time. Of course I’m no war professional but it just seems like something the US would do. The US is a blood thirsty monster but it wouldn’t use nukes as the population of the US is not warmed up enough to the idea of nukes being “safe” and will “never harm the US in return” and will wait after destabilizing the whole of Eastern Europe beyond this already existing destabilization.
Unless of course they’re counting on retaliation being either impossible (due to USA’s missile defences) or not happening due to capitalists in Russia being unwilling to go that far. After all, if the world burns, so do their money and power.
I hope you’re right. But the US is failing fast now, and with the overturning of Roe V Wade people are gonna be PISSED. I worry the US elites will be looking for distractions.
Using nukes would also piss people off because it would endanger Americans.
Who is Oliver Stone?
A Chad
American filmmaker. He buys into a lot of conspiracy theories but he’s pretty based overall.
That’s absolutely terrifying.