High Street Sales Slumpm Government...
News0 min ago
Is The Unilateralist Argument Now In Tatters?
31 Answers
Ukraine gave up it's nuclear deterrent in 1994. Would Russia be doing what they are if it was still in place? Discuss....
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
well done jno for missing the point by a mile.
"plenty of the countries condemning Russia have nukes. " what has that got to do with the price of eggs?
If your country was about to be invaded and subjugated and you had nuclear weapons would you use them to stop the invasion or would you simply surrender?
"plenty of the countries condemning Russia have nukes. " what has that got to do with the price of eggs?
If your country was about to be invaded and subjugated and you had nuclear weapons would you use them to stop the invasion or would you simply surrender?
yeah, your question is purely hypothetical, whereas mine is a firm prediction.
But just for the record: no, I don't think Ukraine would use a nuke on its own territory any more than Britain would. And if you think they'd use one on Russia in the knowledge that the Russians could use 20 in return, the answer is still no.
But just for the record: no, I don't think Ukraine would use a nuke on its own territory any more than Britain would. And if you think they'd use one on Russia in the knowledge that the Russians could use 20 in return, the answer is still no.
jno: "yeah, your question is purely hypothetical, whereas mine is a firm prediction." - what planet are you on? there is nothing hypothetical about the Ukraine situation it's very real.
"But just for the record: no, I don't think Ukraine would use a nuke on its own territory any more than Britain would. And if you think they'd use one on Russia in the knowledge that the Russians could use 20 in return, the answer is still no. " - Who said anything about their own territory. Just be prepared to nuke Russian Cities, no threat any more if they believe you are serious, both sides win, no damage, it's known as Mutually Assured Destruction and it has kept the peace since 1945.
"But just for the record: no, I don't think Ukraine would use a nuke on its own territory any more than Britain would. And if you think they'd use one on Russia in the knowledge that the Russians could use 20 in return, the answer is still no. " - Who said anything about their own territory. Just be prepared to nuke Russian Cities, no threat any more if they believe you are serious, both sides win, no damage, it's known as Mutually Assured Destruction and it has kept the peace since 1945.
Ukraine had a huge stockpile.
The world’s third largest at the time.
It takes time to decommission. And that’s only when you gave agreed to do so.
The Budapest agreement signed by UK. US and Russia at the time guaranteed Ukraine’s safety and territorial integrity, as compensation. And pledged to come to that country’s military aid if it was attacked by nuclear weapons
So if Putin nukes Kyiv he’ll be obliged to invade himself :-)
The world’s third largest at the time.
It takes time to decommission. And that’s only when you gave agreed to do so.
The Budapest agreement signed by UK. US and Russia at the time guaranteed Ukraine’s safety and territorial integrity, as compensation. And pledged to come to that country’s military aid if it was attacked by nuclear weapons
So if Putin nukes Kyiv he’ll be obliged to invade himself :-)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.