3 ms·
We're talking about a person who has less than 48 ours ago threatened nuclear Armageddon on the entire world. [1] Strictly speaking, he said that bad things yo
by vanusa 5y ago
We're talking about a person who has less than 48 ours ago threatened nuclear Armageddon on the entire world. [1]
Strictly speaking, he said that bad things you're talking about would happen "if Ukraine joins NATO and tries to retake Crimea by military means." Not, as you seem to imply, just for the fun of it.
The U.S. has also threatened, or considered first-strike nuclear attacks several times (albeit not publicly) numerous times, as recently as 1997. Usually against smaller countries (the usual suspects) but also against the Russians in the event of an attack on Berlin during the 1961 crisis:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/10/jfks-first-strike-plan/376432/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/10/jfks-fir...
So say what you want about the petulant madman - but really he was just pulling a move from Kennedy's playbook, essentially.
- rasz 5y agoStrictly strictly speaking, what he really meant was "if after Russian invasion happening in weeks time Ukraine joins NATO and tries to retake territories east of Dnieper by military means."
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- vanusa 5y agoCould be.
- emptysongglass 5y agoMaking idle threats of nuclear holocaust is inexcusable independent of context. I don't come into your house and idly drop threats of murdering your family, your family's extended family, and anyone who ever associated with your family but only if they join a club I don't like.