Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
|
Because Nukes are not a viable option, they come with far too many issues. They mass kill civilians not only in their blast, but after with the radiation fall out leaving waste zones of areas for many years. Also, that has an effect on other countries who are not involved which leads to them suffering from the fall out being carried to other locations, possibly other states who are our allies or neutral.
Not only that, but it tells other countries we are willing to strike first even with all of the consequences to such a weapon, which increases tensions and actually encourages the possibility of a first strike preemptive perceived retaliation because the country thinks we will aggressively act first.
The cold war was safer because we followed a policy of not attacking unless provoked with nukes, a response attack only. This helped in situations where there were false emergencies as both countries second guessed the situation because they knew both sides didn't want a war and were not likely to strike first. If we would have had first strike policy then, we or they would have launched. You can read about these situations, its pretty scary, but as I said, our policy that sought to avoid nukes is what helped us to avoid using them.
There is no reasonable justification for having a first strike policy with nukes. It is not peace seeking, it is antagonistically aggressive and will lead to a higher likely use of them. Anyone who honestly thinks using nukes as such an option isn't concerned about peace, life, or justice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
As for what may be in it for Putin to add to the chaos of the 2016 election, is speculation.
Putin wants sanctions lifted.
Some sources claim the US funded massive demonstrations in Russia during their last election cycle. Quid pro quo? Putin intends to run for his 4th term in 2018.
|
It is not unreasonable to assume that Russia has such interests or hands in various aspects, the US puts its hands in many things around the world (more than it should).
Russia is best served by our own politics not being in direct conflict with their own. Obama's actions have been amateur, reckless and provoking. Syria is a mess and it almost seems like the US has been seeking instability in the middle east, it is like they are looking to get into conflict with Russia. Russia doesn't want this and if you read about what is going on, they aren't the antagonists here (the US MSM is propagandizing the issue or ignoring it).
Regardless, we have no evidence to support Russia interfering. It is more propaganda that the US claims it is Russia and they are using the publics complete ignorance about hacking and this issue to manipulate opinion. Fact is, there is more interference by our own media and government in this election than there has been with Russia. We are at a point in our country where the US's corruption is open for all to see and we are doing nothing about it and that makes the world very nervous.
Like I said... we have been the center of the world for years and the US falling into complete Chaos and collapse will have an effect on the rest of the world, Russia does not want that, it serves no benefit to them.
We know that Russia does not like Clinton, but then this is simply because Clinton is part of the policies this administration has had that has created issues with Russia, the middle east and the rest of the world. More Obama policies does not help the world, it creates more chaos, just as it has done within our own country and Clinton has stated she wishes to continue on those policies.
If Russia was involved in anything, it is logical speculation, but so far it is not founded in any facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
Seems to me regardless of which nominee wins, they will likely have no clear mandate, and a substantial percentage of the population and Congress is not going to be happy campers. This is not particularity conducive to a coherent foreign policy which could favor Russia.
|
That wasn't the question though.
You stated:
Quote:
|
Would anything make Putin happier than watching the US dissolve into a Civil War?
|
This isn't simply an issue of non-conductive policy, civil war is out and out collapse and disruption. My question to you was contingent on that premise, not what you state above. What benefit would Russia have to such? Russia does not benefit from the US collapsing into chaos and Civil War. The world does not benefit from this, as I said... it would lead to a third world war.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Conservative Christians need to start thinking seriously about armed secession if Trump loses.
