AfD sagt "geil", aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus.
-
AfD sagt "geil", aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus. Was ist schlimmer, eine AfD-Regierung mit Atombombe oder eine russische oder vielleicht amerikanische Invasion? Pest oder Cholera ...
-
System shared this topic on
-
AfD sagt "geil", aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus. Was ist schlimmer, eine AfD-Regierung mit Atombombe oder eine russische oder vielleicht amerikanische Invasion? Pest oder Cholera ...
Yup! In Frankreich wir haben nukes und für defensive Zwecke das sieht gut aus. Aber wenn Lepen oder ihr Hundchen wird Präsident sein, dann tickt das Doomsdayclock noch einmal für alle...
-
AfD sagt "geil", aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus. Was ist schlimmer, eine AfD-Regierung mit Atombombe oder eine russische oder vielleicht amerikanische Invasion? Pest oder Cholera ...
What's worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA?
Why pick one when you can have both? Hitler and Stalin used to have a deal until they didn't.
-
What's worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA?
Why pick one when you can have both? Hitler and Stalin used to have a deal until they didn't.
So far, nuclear deterrence has worked without fail. The soviets had their first successful nuclear weapon test in 1949, Stalin died in 1953 - neither he no his successors ever fired a nuclear weapon at an enemy, despite being in a cold war the entire time until the end of the USSR.
And frankly, if the German faschists were dumb enough to use nuclear weapons offensively against enemies, I'd assume they would be bombed into oblivion instead of invaded.
-
So far, nuclear deterrence has worked without fail. The soviets had their first successful nuclear weapon test in 1949, Stalin died in 1953 - neither he no his successors ever fired a nuclear weapon at an enemy, despite being in a cold war the entire time until the end of the USSR.
And frankly, if the German faschists were dumb enough to use nuclear weapons offensively against enemies, I'd assume they would be bombed into oblivion instead of invaded.
I'd assume the faschists would gift the nukes to their buddies, or just attack someone else. Afterwards we can still get invaded.
-
So far, nuclear deterrence has worked without fail. The soviets had their first successful nuclear weapon test in 1949, Stalin died in 1953 - neither he no his successors ever fired a nuclear weapon at an enemy, despite being in a cold war the entire time until the end of the USSR.
And frankly, if the German faschists were dumb enough to use nuclear weapons offensively against enemies, I'd assume they would be bombed into oblivion instead of invaded.
There were proxy wars though.
Would one have invaded the other without them? I kind of doing it.
The cold was escalated with the atomic bomb arsenal and proxy wars. But that doesn't necessarily mean they were necessary or actually effective that was like that.
-
System shared this topic on
