1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.AUDIO.OPINION

  • Worth a read IMO

    From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 27 09:44:58 2023
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27

    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal is fraught with peril.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Tue Jun 27 17:06:03 2023
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27

    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to a
    lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal is
    fraught with peril.

    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine. With no Russian Empire,
    there'll be less incentive to keep them for deterrence.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 27 16:15:34 2023
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27

    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to a
    lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal is
    fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after we reneged on Ukraine?

    How deeply can you shove your head up there anyway?


    With no Russian Empire,
    there'll be less incentive to keep them for deterrence.

    With a history of war and conquest between the various ethnic groups going back to the dawn of man....
    How much weed do you smoke every day?

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Wed Jun 28 09:43:44 2023
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27



    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to
    a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal
    is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after we
    reneged on Ukraine?

    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    How deeply can you shove your head up there anyway?

    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an effort to
    secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of the Russian empire?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jun 28 08:41:21 2023
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27



    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to
    a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal
    is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after we
    reneged on Ukraine?
    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    Absolutely zero in common.

    How deeply can you shove your head up there anyway?
    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an effort to
    secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't succeed.
    Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover them?

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Wed Jun 28 11:39:20 2023
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27



    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to
    a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal
    is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after we
    reneged on Ukraine?
    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    Absolutely zero in common.

    Reneged agreements meant to control nuclear weapon capability.

    How deeply can you shove your head up there anyway?
    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an effort to
    secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't succeed.
    Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover them?

    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose nukes'?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jun 28 19:28:23 2023
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27



    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to
    a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal
    is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after we
    reneged on Ukraine?
    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    Absolutely zero in common.
    Reneged agreements meant to control nuclear weapon capability.

    and the people who make the deals all breathed air.

    How deeply can you shove your head up there anyway?
    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an effort to
    secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't succeed.
    Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to defend them.

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian pillsbury dough boy with nukes
    or you trying to take 'em away.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Art Sackman@21:1/5 to ScottW on Wed Jun 28 20:57:32 2023
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 10:28:24 PM UTC-4, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27



    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among >>>>> the likely successors. A splintering of the republics leading to >>>>> a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits the nuke arsenal
    is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after we
    reneged on Ukraine?
    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    Absolutely zero in common.
    Reneged agreements meant to control nuclear weapon capability.
    and the people who make the deals all breathed air.
    How deeply can you shove your head up there anyway?
    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an effort to
    secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't succeed.
    Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose nukes'?
    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to defend them.

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian pillsbury dough boy with nukes
    or you trying to take 'em away.

    ScottW

    neither one, Biden is most dangerous. He doesn't know the difference between the Ukraine and Iraq.
    If we get into a nuclear war, he will probably retaliate against the wrong country.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Thu Jun 29 09:24:17 2023
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27





    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics
    leading to a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits
    the nuke arsenal is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after
    we reneged on Ukraine?
    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    Absolutely zero in common.
    Reneged agreements meant to control nuclear weapon capability.

    and the people who make the deals all breathed air.

    But not everyone who breathed air made these deals:

    https://www.npr.org/2014/03/09/288298641/the-role-of-1994-nuclear-agreement-in-ukraines-current-state

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework

    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an
    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of
    the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to defend
    them.

    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that caution
    when you several times proposed escalating the present conflict with Russia?

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian pillsbury
    dough boy with nukes or you trying to take 'em away.

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Art Sackman@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 29 13:48:34 2023

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.

    I'm more of a buff shirtless RFK, Jr. kind of guy

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fascist Flea@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 29 13:50:52 2023
    Confession time!

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.
    I'm more of a buff shirtless RFK, Jr. kind of guy

    They're both insane, but at least Kennedy isn't a (proven) murderer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Art Sackman@21:1/5 to Fascist Flea on Thu Jun 29 16:27:53 2023
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 4:50:53 PM UTC-4, Fascist Flea wrote:
    Confession time!

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.
    I'm more of a buff shirtless RFK, Jr. kind of guy

    They're both insane, but at least Kennedy isn't a (proven) murderer.

    Not that Kennedy. His uncle was.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fascist Flea@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 29 16:33:41 2023
    Thumpety-thump...

    Confession time!

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.
    I'm more of a buff shirtless RFK, Jr. kind of guy

    They're both insane, but at least Kennedy isn't a (proven) murderer.
    Not that Kennedy. His uncle was.

    How many children did he have mutilated? And why do you believe
    forcible gender reassignment for children was legitimized before 1963?

    Or maybe you're talking about Robert, or possibly Edward.
    Which of them scared you the most?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Art Sackman@21:1/5 to Fascist Flea on Thu Jun 29 20:42:54 2023
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:33:43 PM UTC-4, Fascist Flea wrote:
    Thumpety-thump...

    Confession time!

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.
    I'm more of a buff shirtless RFK, Jr. kind of guy

    They're both insane, but at least Kennedy isn't a (proven) murderer.
    Not that Kennedy. His uncle was.

    How many children did he have mutilated? And why do you believe
    forcible gender reassignment for children was legitimized before 1963?

    Or maybe you're talking about Robert, or possibly Edward.
    Which of them scared you the most?

    The drunk driver.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to Fascist Flea on Fri Jun 30 08:48:17 2023
    On 6/29/23 3:50 PM, Fascist Flea wrote:
    Confession time!

    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.
    I'm more of a buff shirtless RFK, Jr. kind of guy

    They're both insane, but at least Kennedy isn't a (proven) murderer.

    Both have a big fan in Steve Bannon.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 30 21:02:51 2023
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:24:20 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/27/23 6:15 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, June 27, 2023 at 3:06:05 PM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:
    On 6/27/23 11:44 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-prigozhin-s-mutiny-another-russian-ultranationalist-said-that-putin-must-transfer-his-war-powers-if-he-can-t-win-in-ukraine/ar-AA1d4E7e?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=f78af5926e4a4b0e92f35f240ed8ef8d&ei=27





    Such is the problem with a coup in Russia. These schmucks are among
    the likely successors. A splintering of the republics
    leading to a lesser Russia sounds good, but who inherits
    the nuke arsenal is fraught with peril.
    They'll need deals like that of Ukraine.

    How do expect any country to ever make a deal like that after
    we reneged on Ukraine?
    And Iran. Both troubling failures.

    Absolutely zero in common.
    Reneged agreements meant to control nuclear weapon capability.

    and the people who make the deals all breathed air.
    But not everyone who breathed air made these deals:

    https://www.npr.org/2014/03/09/288298641/the-role-of-1994-nuclear-agreement-in-ukraines-current-state

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework
    That's uncalled for. Are you saying there shouldn't be an
    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin disintegration of
    the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to defend
    them.
    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that caution
    when you several times proposed escalating the present conflict with Russia?

    Stephen's memory failures are resurfacing...again.

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian pillsbury
    dough boy with nukes or you trying to take 'em away.
    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.

    Are you trying to confiscate Russia's nuclear arsenal now?

    Thanks for proving my point. The only thing that saves us from your stupidity is your impotence.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Sat Jul 1 07:47:43 2023
    On 6/30/23 11:02 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:24:20 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:

    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin
    disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose
    nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to
    defend them.
    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that
    caution when you several times proposed escalating the present
    conflict with Russia?

    Stephen's memory failures are resurfacing...again.

    As I recall, you are for escalating by providing new weapons to be used
    against a nuclear power: planes, long-range missiles, cluster munitions.

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian
    pillsbury dough boy with nukes or you trying to take 'em away.
    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.

    Are you trying to confiscate Russia's nuclear arsenal now?

    I'd wait for the collapse of the Russian Federation.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 1 08:09:37 2023
    On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 5:47:45 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/30/23 11:02 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:24:20 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:

    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin
    disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose
    nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to
    defend them.
    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that
    caution when you several times proposed escalating the present
    conflict with Russia?

    Stephen's memory failures are resurfacing...again.
    As I recall, you are for escalating by providing new weapons to be used against a nuclear power: planes, long-range missiles, cluster munitions.

    Which is a far cry from threatening their nuclear arsenal in an epically stupid "use it or lose it" idiotic strategy.

    And nobody know how China will react....they may be salivating at their "opportunity".
    You going to attack them if they would move to secure Russian bases in
    a collapse of the RF?

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian
    pillsbury dough boy with nukes or you trying to take 'em away.
    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.

    Are you trying to confiscate Russia's nuclear arsenal now?
    I'd wait for the collapse of the Russian Federation.

    You think some Russian kind hearted peace loving schmuck is going to arise
    from the rubble of PMC cutthroats?
    What kind of a mind altering delusion inducing drugs are you on?

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Sat Jul 1 10:50:21 2023
    On 7/1/23 10:09 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 5:47:45 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/30/23 11:02 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:24:20 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:

    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin
    disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose
    nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to
    defend them.
    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that
    caution when you several times proposed escalating the present
    conflict with Russia?

    Stephen's memory failures are resurfacing...again.
    As I recall, you are for escalating by providing new weapons to be used
    against a nuclear power: planes, long-range missiles, cluster munitions.

    Which is a far cry from threatening their nuclear arsenal in an epically stupid
    "use it or lose it" idiotic strategy.

    It's advocating physical attacks on a nuclear power where I proposed
    diplomacy.

    And nobody know how China will react....they may be salivating at their "opportunity".
    You going to attack them if they would move to secure Russian bases in
    a collapse of the RF?

    China is already a nuclear power. If they can secure nukes in a
    transparent diplomatic way, that's acceptable if not ideal.

    I'm not sure who would be more dangerous. That fat russian
    pillsbury dough boy with nukes or you trying to take 'em away.
    But buff shirtless Vlad fills you with good feelings.

    Are you trying to confiscate Russia's nuclear arsenal now?
    I'd wait for the collapse of the Russian Federation.

    You think some Russian kind hearted peace loving schmuck is going to arise from the rubble of PMC cutthroats?

    No, several warlord governor oligarchs possibly open to deals, for
    instance avoiding crippling sanctions in exchange for giving up nukes.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 1 08:56:58 2023
    On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 8:50:24 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 7/1/23 10:09 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 5:47:45 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/30/23 11:02 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:24:20 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote: >>>>>> On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:

    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin
    disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose
    nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to
    defend them.
    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that
    caution when you several times proposed escalating the present
    conflict with Russia?

    Stephen's memory failures are resurfacing...again.
    As I recall, you are for escalating by providing new weapons to be used >> against a nuclear power: planes, long-range missiles, cluster munitions.

    Which is a far cry from threatening their nuclear arsenal in an epically stupid
    "use it or lose it" idiotic strategy.
    It's advocating physical attacks on a nuclear power where I proposed diplomacy.

    No...you said "effort to secure".
    and then clarified when I asked would you resort to a military armed recovery effort
    using a movie reference (to emphasize how stupid the idea is)
    to which you said..."Yes".


    I sense a moving goal post.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Sat Jul 1 11:26:19 2023
    On 7/1/23 10:56 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 8:50:24 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 7/1/23 10:09 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 5:47:45 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/30/23 11:02 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:24:20 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 6/28/23 9:28 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 9:39:22 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/28/23 10:41 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 7:43:47 AM UTC-7, mINE109
    wrote:

    effort to secure loose nukes in a post-Putin
    disintegration of the Russian empire?

    Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't
    succeed. Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover
    them?
    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose
    nukes'?

    Not if the people who control them are willing to use them to
    defend them.
    That's quite the deference to their deterrence. Where was that
    caution when you several times proposed escalating the present
    conflict with Russia?

    Stephen's memory failures are resurfacing...again.
    As I recall, you are for escalating by providing new weapons to be used >>>> against a nuclear power: planes, long-range missiles, cluster munitions. >>>
    Which is a far cry from threatening their nuclear arsenal in an epically stupid
    "use it or lose it" idiotic strategy.
    It's advocating physical attacks on a nuclear power where I proposed
    diplomacy.

    No...you said "effort to secure".

    Which I compared to the Ukraine diplomatic deal.

    and then clarified when I asked would you resort to a military armed recovery effort
    using a movie reference (to emphasize how stupid the idea is)
    to which you said..."Yes".

    Speaking of stupid, here's the exchange to which you refer:

    "> Make all the effort you want. Without cooperation you won't succeed.
    Are you going to send in George Clooney to recover them?

    That's 'yes, there shouldn't be an effort to secure loose nukes'?"

    So George Clooney = military armed recovery effort and my single-quotes indicating I'm paraphrasing your presumed position is a gotcha you've
    been saving for days?

    Whatever sparks joy for you, I guess.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)