Is there anything similar available from the Warsaw pact?
Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
41–50 of 139 posts
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#42> Just how many nuclear weapons do we actually need?
As many as you can maintain, really.
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#43>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…
Who are you quoting? > we put our guy at its head a couple years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Ukrainian_presidential_el... this is denying that ukraine has agency of its own. Nobody put a guy anywhere. He was elected. > we will bring forth the apocalypse. The only country that is threating 1st strike is Russia.
When people say something along these lines, they're usually pointing to 2014 when Ukraine had a revolution in which pro-Russian president was toppled, and a more pro-EU president was elected. That's also when Russian invasion started.
Note that I absolutely do not agree that anybody but Ukrainian people put Poroshenko there, just pointing out you're looking at the wrong elections to counter this narrative.
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#44Looking on the map, not really a surprise. Most of those are either Air Force Bases (or used to be during cold war) or industrially significant cities.
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#45>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…
I am struggling with the alternative. So a dictator can invade any country he wants because otherwise he can say "booh, nuclear apocalypse" and because we can't risk to be anywhere near that, we need to give the dictator whatever he wants? And the invaded country has to swallow it? It's easy to write off other people's freedom. This map is very the reason why Putin's threats are empty threats. The US, UK and France h…
> we need to give the dictator whatever he wants
Not whatever he wants. Some token prize that's big enough that he can protect his own ass domestically, but small enough that a re-run is obviously a bad idea.
The big downside is future dictators realize that nuclear blackmail is a get out of jail free card, which increases future wars and nuclear proliferation.
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#46>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…
So when some country invades the country you live in (you will be forced to stay there after invasion) and basically enslave all population, you will say, "Sure, I am fine with that, just don't start a nuclear war", right?
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#47>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…
I am struggling with the alternative. So a dictator can invade any country he wants because otherwise he can say "booh, nuclear apocalypse" and because we can't risk to be anywhere near that, we need to give the dictator whatever he wants? And the invaded country has to swallow it? It's easy to write off other people's freedom. This map is very the reason why Putin's threats are empty threats. The US, UK and France h…
He's more like a typical 4chan/Reddit troll. Meaning he cares about his comfy life even though he wants much more in life (even though he's got a lot already, but humans often overlook what they have and want more).
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if it’s the Internet’s fault. Maybe people have become so jaded by Online discourse and carry it over into IRL?
Also people in the 60s lived through a nuke (1945) and lived through WW2. That living memory is now gone. The problem with the "anti-war" crowd right now, is many appear to be closet Putin supporters. Or at least they're so anti-American that they support Putin by default. It would help the anti-war people not in that camp to carefully disambiguate between wanting to reduce the risk of nuclear conflict -- a laudable…
Yes, this is a very well known problem. Even in the '60s most of the people who were, for example, against the Vietnam war, were closet Stalin supporters, commies and reds under the beds. They were dirty hippies with long hair that smoked weed and were good for nothing but protesting against the war.
Even in Russia, all the people who protest the war are US supporters. It's incredible how much hate of one's own nation is the real cause underlying all those protests that are ostensibly for peace. It's as if people can't see the benefits of war for their own nation.
(yes, this comment is breaking the guideline against snark).
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#49>Because you invaded a country for no reason (like we did to Iraq), (except the one you invaded is at your borders and we put our guy at its head a couple years ago, and the one we invaded is half a planet from us), we will bring forth the apocalypse. Humans are crazy, seeing how we're speaking about a nuclear war now vs how people spoke about it in the 60s, it's like a mass psychosis, we don't care anymore, or maybe…
It's simply because the stocks of nuclear weapons are now so much smaller they can't bring nearly the end of the world.
Plus, in 1960s many still lived under illusion that communism/dictatorship provided some viable alternative to evils of capitalism. Now it is too dead obvious they don't.
Re: Declassified US nuclear targets – interactive map
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are you quoting? > we put our guy at its head a couple years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Ukrainian_presidential_el... this is denying that ukraine has agency of its own. Nobody put a guy anywhere. He was elected. > we will bring forth the apocalypse. The only country that is threating 1st strike is Russia.
Quoted post unavailable.
It really doesn't make much sense to lookup Putin's speeches, because as became obvious over the last couple of months, as soon as he's opening his mouth, a lie comes out.