Yes. You are correct. This is called sympathetic or preemptive launch and is included in nuclear policy/strategy.

Essentially if you launch something towards the US or especially Russia and people don’t believe it’s not a nuke they then have to decide if they launch towards the launcher or their closest rival/enemy and those launches trigger other launches.

Most nukes are in known places in hardened bunkers or silos or better at sea in a long haul ICBM sub. If you don’t use them you lose them because they’re 100% gunna get destroyed if you don’t.

They’re literally calling him a useful idiot… That means something in security circles.

Common sense is implicit bias dude.

Removed by mod

So your bias is the reason you dislike their bias and you somehow think that makes it ok to paint them as terrorists and murder them? The actual fuck is wrong with you?

Agreed, moral labels just aren’t necessary they’re just sorta implied by current action and intent.

It’s not an excuse but what I’m saying is no one is the good guys, we’re on a shitty merry go round of human misery. Different faces different places different ages all the same horrific shit done for land, profit or resources.

Correct. That list of countries is simply a list of countries with intentions that differ from Western Europe, they aren’t the bad guys and the and the English aren’t the good guys. We’re all just doing what suits our nations best as determined but rich dudes who haven’t ever had to take part in the real world.

No nation is the good guys, there are shades to these turds but they’re all still just turds.

They probably already have them.

That’s the very best of situations. Ignoring that a majority are armed takeovers of occupied buildings.

They’re threatening to build nukes because they have nukes, I believe both France and Israel came out as nuclear nations in the same “we’ll just float becoming a nuclear nation and see what happens.”

There’s still Soviet nuclear material missing and Ukraine has both mines and the know how to assemble older nukes anyway because that was done to some extent in Ukraine during the Soviet Union.

Ya.

Then your proof of my point Dr dumb dumb.

They can try to avoid civilian casualties and still have civilian casualties…

For a major thoroughfare 3 casualties is extremely low, even for a multi car accident that’s low. You can throw shade on Ukraine for some stuff but clearly by every military definition they are actively avoiding civilian casualties.

Why you would even mention it when Russia is bombing hospitals and schools is … Either very clear or just wildly stupid.

In July 2023 two sea drones targeted the bridge & killed 2 & injured 1. The two killed were a husband & wife. The injured one was their child.

Traveling into a warzone… I mean yeah it sucks but mentioning they are a family is irrelevant.

Duh, yes they did. They admitted that much, try harder.

Not really, it needs something very heavy moving very fast to hammer a few pylons 3- 4 pylons out from shore.

Infrastructure is surprisingly weak to kinetic impacts applied in the wrong direction.

You think it’s just Biden that has hands in this? Israel would never have been so bold if the USA didn’t move it’s embassy to Jerusalem and that choice was not Bidens.

We have a top secret base there, just like Korea and Vietnam early troops usually come in and break shit you can’t let go.

No it’s because Russia is preoccupied and we’re testing near peer weapons from 3+decades ago there with little to no risk to mainland usa. It’s morally wrong sure but it does at least make sense.

I mean sorta but not really, we’re selling most stuff at a loss. The benefit is really seeing how well our stuff works against the enemy or was designed to fight. Don’t get me wrong people are getting rich but that’s from buying more weapons to replace the ones we sold.