Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Thanks, ALB, for the elucidation. I am no longer bothering with Youtube videos on the subject. One can easily get sucked into catastrophism.
Yes, but in 1962 the Soviet Union was not facing war on its borders, threatening its regime’s existence, so it could back down.
But it obliges all of NATO to officially declare war, whereas at the moment it is unofficial. And surely, where Europe is concerned, an official and open war with Russia could not but be nuclear.
What if Article 5 is triggered? Movimiento says no nuclear weapons will ever be used, but, because of Article 5, NATO will be obliged to, won’t it?
Youtubers are really hyping up the nuclear war angle; really pushing catastrophism.
Do you think all this military muscle-flexing by all states at the moment is to divert workers from class issues and climate change? And to reinforce patriotic hysteria?
What is the real reason they are doing all this now, more than the usual?
Now that TS is gone, I want to ask again: why is Russia the only power constantly threatening nuclear use?
Russia keeps saying its goals are basically achieved. This means control of the south and east. If that is so, then partition would be a way out. Would NATO then admit western Ukraine? The problem is, how would they prevent a NATO west Ukraine from continuing to shell the Russian east? (Which likewise would force NATO and Russia into war with each other?
