USA needs to attack Russian military in Ukraine

[Trenchcoat]

Russia blew up the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station

So now we are going to have nuclear disaster without a bomb.

If the nuclear cat is 'out of the bag' then USA and other like minded countries should immediately bomb Russian terrorists in Ukraine.

If it blows it's reckoned by some that it will be ten times worse than Chernobyl. Apparently it's much larger than Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, one of the largest in Europe. There is a fire raging in the plant at the moment as a result of the fighting. I vaguely recall the Chernobyl plant went into meltdown as a result of a fire in the reactor I think. They eventually managed to contain it and stop the whole thing completely blowing. This is very bad news, it doesn't look good. Firefighters need to get in quick but can't because of the fighting do the fire will likely get worse and worse and hence the risk. A massive risk of massive loss of life here!! If it blows odds are we may even gear it here in Blighty. To say nothing of the environmental contamination and global warming.

[2tallbill]

USA needs to attack the Russian military in Ukraine.

I think you are a smart guy but what do you want? Do you want the
zombie apocalypse? nuclear winter, a billion dead?

That's the dumbest statement I have heard in maybe a decade.

There was a guy at another place who honestly believed the Somali Pirates
could play cat and mouse and defeat a Nuclear US Navy Destroyer that was
augmented with Navy Seals. That was pretty dumb too.

[fathertime]

 

3. The clear interpretation of your statement is that additional countries need to acquire nuclear weapons to protect themselves from the US. Which countries FT?

Nations under threat from the US may need some nuclear weapons to create a counter measure and prevent us from destroying them.   

4. You mistake my posts as trying to convince you. I honestly do not care what you think and my posts don't seek to persuade/convince you of anything. I engage only till I am satisfied my point is understood.

So far, your point has seems to be understood, but not convincing enough.  With the rigid mentality you have displayed, most counter arguments are 'ridiculous'.   Fairly typical of the Western response, and look where it has led. 

6. Not a chance. Tactical nukes have been obsolete for some time now. Near-peer powers won't deploy tactical nukes. Your fear obscures your logic. The bully has you pissing your pants.

Ok tell that to the experts, security advisors, et all that are talking about it being a serious possibility.    I checked and my diaper is still clean, check yours and the floor around you.   I'm not concerned about dying, but that isn't the point.   If nukes are on the table (And I believe they are) then it is in the best interest of the globe to create a track for an outcome that doesn't create global disaster. If that means after a long battle and Ukraine falls into Russian hands, then so be it.     Russia is willing to put all their chips in the pot on this one.   

Fathertime! 

[fathertime]

Russia blew up the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station

So now we are going to have nuclear disaster without a bomb.

If the nuclear cat is 'out of the bag' then USA and other like minded countries should immediately bomb Russian terrorists in Ukraine.

As this story develops, we will learn more about how serious it is. If it turns into a nuclear event, it may provide an offramp in the overall battle.
  It can also provide an excuse for the West 'experts' (and military) to jump in, which always raises suspicions in me. 

If Russia intentionally created a situation where a nuclear meltdown is a real possibility it provides further evidence of how far they are willing to go with this war.  No, I don't think we now go in and start bombing Russians. Western escalation isn't the best option.  Ukraine is more important to Russia than it is to the USA.   

Fathertime!   

[Chelseaboy]

...and order (From China) a lot of 1950's desks for the rest of us to take cover under when the missiles start flying.   



Fathertime!

Desks won't do you any good if this Nuclear reactor blows.


It's now on fire,the Russians are still shelling it and shooting any firefighters trying to put the fire out.


If it blows it has ten times the power of Chernobyl,,it's the biggest in Europe...i can only imagine how far the radiation fallout could extend to.

[Admin]

1. Nations under threat from the US may need some nuclear weapons to create a counter measure and prevent us from destroying them.   


2. So far, your point has seems to be understood, but not convincing enough.  With the rigid mentality you have displayed, most counter arguments are 'ridiculous'.   


3. Fairly typical of the Western response, and look where it has led. 

4. Ok tell that to the experts, security advisors, et all that are talking about it being a serious possibility.    I checked and my diaper is still clean, check yours and the floor around you.   I'm not concerned about dying, but that isn't the point.   If nukes are on the table (And I believe they are) then it is in the best interest of the globe to create a track for an outcome that doesn't create global disaster. If that means after a long battle and Ukraine falls into Russian hands, then so be it.     Russia is willing to put all their chips in the pot on this one.   

Fathertime!

1. Destroying who? Which nations? Is this another of your hypotheticals/speculations/imagination?


2. If my goal was to convince you, my tack would be different. As I wrote, I am not trying to convince/persuade you of anything.

3. A dismissive comment made in ignorance without weight or substance.


4. You have little clue as to how far Russia will take their threat of nuclear weapons. Few do.

[fathertime]

It's now on fire,the Russians are still shelling it and shooting any firefighters trying to put the fire out.


If it blows it has ten times the power of Chernobyl,,it's the biggest in Europe.


You do know how close we were to Chernobyl blowing the world up when it's reactor started heading for the Earth's core ?


You might want to think again about NATO not getting involved....and i can imagine they are on hearing this horrific news.

People are already setting up for a NATO response. 

Shooting at firemen....

 I'm still cynical...i'm cynical but I'll wait to get more information (From both sides) before commenting further. 
Fathertime! 
 

[fathertime]

1. Destroying who? Which nations? Is this another of your hypotheticals/speculations/imagination?

I'm not going to educate you on the history of the world.  You have google, so I'll let you figure it out yourself.

2. If my goal was to convince you, my tack would be different. As I wrote, I am not trying to convince/persuade you of anything.

That's good because I'm not convinced.

4. You have little clue as to how far Russia will take their threat of nuclear weapons. Few do.

Nor do you.   If circumstances dictate, I believe they will use nuclear weapons. For Ukraine, all their chips go in.  For us maybe it was Cuba.   Call the bet or fold the hand. 

Fathertime!   

[Chelseaboy]

People are already setting up for a NATO response. 

Shooting at firemen....

 I'm still cynical...i'm cynical but I'll wait to get more information (From both sides) before commenting further. 
Fathertime!

The latest info is that Biden's very concerned and been in touch with the Ukrainian President.


Fireman are now being allowed by the Russian troops to get in to fight the fire and the site is now "secure" according to local sources.


Would be madness if Russian troops blow it up because the explosion would certainly kill them and the fall-out highly likely to hit Russia badly.

[LAman]

Brilliant point GQ Yep I can see all the excuses come rocking up now! Anyone willing to put themselves where their conviction are? Go to Ukraine to fight anyone???

Ahhh....  Trenchcoat= GQBlues 
Only difference is one is British the other is American(?)

[Trenchcoat]

The latest info is that Biden's very concerned and been in touch with the Ukrainian President.


Fireman are now being allowed by the Russian troops to get in to fight the fire and the site is now "secure" according to local sources.


Would be madness if Russian troops blow it up because the explosion would certainly kill them and the fall-out highly likely to hit Russia badly.

Not only them but take out the nearby city killing all inhabitants instantly then spreading nuclear waste all over southern and central Ukraine in a bad way. Then more beyond that in a not good way. Even that I would probably be underestimating the devastation it would cause. Surface to say Ukraine is unlikely to be the place to be in or want to visit in future if it were to blow.

[Trenchcoat]

Ahhh....  Trenchcoat= GQBlues 
Only difference is one is British the other is American(?)

Deflecting the question rather than leading with actions rather than your mouth?

[LAman]

Deflecting the question rather than leading with actions rather than your mouth?

You don't like humor???

[Jumper1]

Russia blew up the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station

So now we are going to have nuclear disaster without a bomb.

If the nuclear cat is 'out of the bag' then USA and other like minded countries should immediately bomb Russian terrorists in Ukraine.

Nuclear reactor disaster.and nuclear bomb,  are vastly different on a scale if magnitude you seem to not think about.


With family there why do you post such unverified  sensationalist crap.

The plant itself, nor any of its  6 independent reactors have been *blown up*.
There was no airstrike or missile strike.


The atrocities of this invasion are evident,
  so no need to invent or promote things to make it look worse for your wifes family,my family ,my wifes family , beos family, or others.

The Russian troops  have tried to take control of the plant ,and Ukrainian fighters are resisting .
It's incredible stupid of russian troops to battle there but that seems to have occured to some unknown extent.
A report of a generator on fire by the cities mayor  ,no details
At huge plant like that it could be a portable trailer unit  , one of 120 others in a parking lot ,thats quite common.Have you ever been on a nuclear plant site?

It could be a main generator,but the vids I've watched do not show that at all.
The fire they show  are 2 flares used in combat to aid visually .at night   .those are used by defenders as well.as attackers so they can SEE.

If * two flares falling in between  some of  the electrical power distribution buildings  and admin building causes a meltdown , then holy shit the plant was already a foooking disaster.

Maybe that vid is the wrong side of the plant, but it's the one the news is using to show.a fire.

Fire fighters are allegedly.there and have whatever fire there was, controlled .
Fire certainly can be a huge huge  issue and I'm not downplaying that a fire at any plant is very very  serious.
There have been at least 20 fires at nuke plants.

No vid of the plant now shows a fire.it did show  flares, the parking lot lights were  on, there was smoke from the flares.

But it certainly did not get blown up.

There are back up  after back up.protocols for shutting the reactors down , in case of loss of cooling circulation,or fire.

The vast majority of fuel at the site would be  non activated rods.
The active  fuel rods currently in the reactors are under water, and the
fueler personal should be highly  trained in how to shut them.down and keep them.that way in case of such emergencies.

This is awful of course  but very low odds of a meltdown or release of radiation.

There are a pile of nuclear plants in Ukraine,  the fighting there is certain to envelope many of them.at some point.


Chernobyl was an outdated plant with poor  and flawed design,  not enough redundancy and backups that failed,as well.as operator.errors during a test

Things had already changed drastically in plants before the disaster , and changed radically after.

Sans a tsunami,there should be no serious chance of a true meltdown condition at zap.

Those type of plants are built to shutdown with any cooling issues present,or a fire that could disrupted circulation  circuits pumps, etc .
Honestly I cant believe.they did not shut them.down days ago.

This type of  sensationalist rhetoric if taken seriously would   endanger our loved ones more than they already are.

 In this 6 reactor meltdown hysteria- Where would the fall out of zap go??

If some of you  want to piss your pants about nuke reactors,  you know   Chernobyl, a huge disaster of that type , a complete open  air meltdown of reactor 4 happened as it blow the core out from.steam.explosion  ,  and operators in reactor 3 next door  ,just kept their reactor online,   5 hours or so later the.order was given to shut it down.
This catastrophe has about 100 lives lost directly.associated to it,many of whom were the workers or emergency personnel responding to it.
(Yes there have been other heath issues and 15 childhood thyroid cancer cases attributed)

But in a war, with bombing going on already this  possibility *  is  the cry for more escalating violence?

 

As someone who has been on the ground in combat zones , you knuckleheads  rhetoric , if believed at a decision making level, scare me more than the  war.
Get a flippin grip and recogize what is actually immediately dangerous to your  families and friends.
Russian troops ,and combatants , shelling and bombing  in the urban areas they may live.

If that's not enough ******** drama for you, wtf.

I swear to God , if a reactor did melt there,and cooler.heads prevailed in the correct response to such,it would probably be the best thing that happened so far in this mess  for f**ks sakes.
It's not a nuclear bomb,its a reactor,  loss of life  would be likely limited to those in the immediate vicinity, of THAT single reactor unit.
zap would be evacuated just like prypit was with an OPEN meltdown reactor still going.(incredibly unlikely to occur in a modern plant design meltdown ).
Butbif the world heard nuclear disaster!!! It might stop and take a deep.breath and end this madness,!@
 then clean up the pollution mess(which would be considerable sadly)
Many of you have  been  to Ukraine, did you notice anything related to Chernobyl in anyone's daily.lives?

There is a long list of fires in nuke plants, in the actual fueling trench  and pits even. 2 or 3.deaths  combined of workers in all  those incidents.

Fukushima all  3  on line active reactors meltdown ,total.disaster

1 death,16.injuried.

Noway are all.6 reactors online.at zap thats not how nuclear plants run.

I get the huge levels of pollution associated with any nuclear plant issue.

But loss of life is what i thought we were worried about during a war...


And TC  you say global.warming over a flipping nuke meltdown,you really need to go back to school.

One guy died a Fukushima, one worker also died later  cleaning up.

Im.curious do you think the level of therms produced is going to effect world temps if it only kills one guy at the actually site for the meltdown of 3.reactors?
Radioactive  isotope fallout  can make us sick or.kill.us ,it isnt going to warm  world temps.
Give Greta  a hug .

[Boethius]

Yes I know Zelensky is the 'hero of the hour' but there hides the danger that lies within. Zelensky is a showman, he had spent years in acting and knows how to sway the audience. He knows how to play on the situation, his new found fame, to sway matters the way he wants. At the moment he wants to sway the west/NATO into an all out war with Russia to save Ukraine, really? Is that a sane idea? Millions of deaths throughout the world and mass global devastation to save Ukraine.

The snowball of hysteria is already rolling down the hill, he's just got to push it along faster until it rolls so fast it's unstoppable and the west is entering the war in Ukraine on his side without anyone dare uttering a word against it or just being deafened by those eager voices of mass support for us to enter into the Ukraine War and hence WWIII.

Of course I know not to voice my views on Zelensky to a Ukrainian Woman, he is no doubt Christ reborn to them at the moment. They won't likely see the greater danger he poses to world peace. Better to let events play out in Ukraine, bit get involved, not risk global war then move on in my opinion. None of this was our doing, the people of the west, it's not our fight.

Is it more sane to allow Russia to level Ukrainian cities?  Kill children?  Execute duly elected leaders of a sovereign country? 


You can't hide who you are.  Please just give up the idea of a UW.  It will never work out.


You either stand with freedom, in deeds, or you, pardon the expression, STFU.

[GQBlues]

And yet more appeal to hypocrisy.

You don't even recognize it anymore.

Sad.

Lol. Speaking of hypocrisy, have you booked a flight yet, or are you just staying put and just ‘talk’? Walk the talk, Dan.

Take along the chest beating gringos on the board, too.

I can’t think of a better way to prove your love to your collective inamoratas that you’re ready to die for their country! The odds are, you will all die. I’m sure they will all be touched.

sample flight to Poland. Readily available from any major airports close to any of the budding Rambos on the board.

[Admin]

Lol. Speaking of hypocrisy, have you booked a flight yet, or are you just staying put and just ‘talk’? Walk the talk, Dan.

Take along the chest beating gringos on the board, too.

I can’t think of a better way to prove your love to your collective inamoratas that you’re ready to die for their country! The odds are, you will all die. I’m sure they will all be touched.

sample flight to Poland. Readily available from any major airports close to any of the budding Rambos on the board.

GQ, that is beneath you.

You have no idea what I have done or am doing or planning to do to "walk the talk."

Your line of argument speaks to how low you will stoop to try making a point on an internet discussion forum. You've lost sight of the issue.

Knock it off or find another playground.

[Jumper1]

The latest info is that Biden's very concerned and been in touch with the Ukrainian President.


Fireman are now being allowed by the Russian troops to get in to fight the fire and the site is now "secure" according to local sources.


Would be madness if Russian troops blow it up because the explosion would certainly kill them and the fall-out highly likely to hit Russia badly.

The explosion(s) from a nuclear plant reactor meltdown would be unlikely to kill anyone other than the 2 or 3.operators in that reactors control room.
And possibly the rescue personal sent in  to contain it.

Troops outside a  plant would be unlikely to be killed by the explosion.
The radiation maybe if it was a unique situation and if they stayed there.

Nuclear reactor fuel rods are not compressed and dense enough  ,and the core desgn not such that they can explode in the nuclear.warhead way.

Two different worlds.

They can overheat so rapidly and so intensely to cause an  explosion of the cooling water as it vaporizes and of surrounding materials being turned to expanding gas.

A big boom yes,typically contained by design of the core and structure limited to the unit itself.
Even Chernobyl unit 4 with an.open core blast,did not harm.the adjacent unit 3.

Zap isnt an ancient desgn plant and its not a nuclear bomb waiting a structural fire to go off .

A meltdown would be a pollution disaster, the radiation released unlikely to kill anyone other than plant and initial containment workers.

The hysterics over the word nuclear ,needs to get some context.

Fukushima was disaster,  3 reactors melted down and killed one operator initially,one clean up person later.

[GQBlues]

GQ, that is beneath you.

You have no idea what I have done or am doing or planning to do to "walk the talk."

Your line of argument speaks to how low you will stoop to try making a point on an internet discussion forum. You've lost sight of the issue.

Knock it off or find another playground.

You’re the one talking about going to an all out war, telling us you have skin in the game. Then tell me I’m being a hypocrite for stating something counter to the idea of of an all out war?

I’m not drawing any line of argument but simply allowing you to show us your stated conviction.

[Admin]

You’re the one talking about going to an all out war, telling us you have skin in the game. Then tell me I’m being a hypocrite for stating something counter to the idea of of an all out war?

I’m not drawing any line of argument but simply allowing you to show us your stated conviction.

As I said, you haven't a clue as to anything in my personal situation. You 'calling me out' is a childish antic that will find you separated from RWD if it persists.

At no time have I called you a hypocrite. I've said you frequently employ the logical fallacy of appealing to hypocrisy that distracts from the key issues. You do. It's a common tactic used by many in internet fora, but it lacks critical thinking. It's a diversion. You occasionally start down a path to make a good point, only to become distracted yourself with the exchange. When it becomes more important to you to win or get the final word or make a final point, instead of exchanging in healthy debate to encourage understanding, it has gone too far.

This latest tactic of challenging my conviction is a similar diversion. Worst of all, you know full well you are doing it and you do it anyway.


I'll tolerate it to a point, and then I won't. It is, after all, my forum.

[Trenchcoat]

I'll tolerate it to a point, and then I won't. It is, after all, my forum.

So to win an argument you threaten with banning someone who disagrees with you? Or challenge you to make a stand by what you say we should commit to?

I think GQ made a valid enough point, I see nothing wrong with it nor offensive. If someone agrees with intervention then they should be willing to intervene themselves. It's available as an option here since they are allowing International War Tourists in for their pleasure, so anyone who thinks intervention is necessary can do so themselves and put their own lives by their stated position, seems fairest way to me.

[Chelseaboy]

Not only them but take out the nearby city killing all inhabitants instantly then spreading nuclear waste all over southern and central Ukraine in a bad way. Then more beyond that in a not good way. Even that I would probably be underestimating the devastation it would cause. Surface to say Ukraine is unlikely to be the place to be in or want to visit in future if it were to blow.

Of course.


I only focused on the Russian troops because for them it would be akin to committing suicide and would likely cause mass deaths in a very unpleasant way in  their own country.


I already assume they're not bothered how it would affect Ukraine and it's people.

[Trenchcoat]

Of course.


I only focused on the Russian troops because for them it would be akin to committing suicide and would likely cause mass deaths in a very unpleasant way in  their own country.


I already assume they're not bothered how it would affect Ukraine and it's people.

Apparently now the nuclear plant is in Russian hands, firefighters were allowed in to put the fire out which is now extinguished, apparently in some training room at least that is what they are saying. Anyhow with the plant in Russian hands it's a big bargaining chip for them in any negotiation. Not only that they can flick the switch at any time and deprive Ukraine of a lot of its electricity. I'm guessing they will do that as it sends a lot of Ukraine back to the dark ages, hinders their military, communication and Ukrainians lose morale.

[Chelseaboy]

The explosion(s) from a nuclear plant reactor meltdown would be unlikely to kill anyone other than the 2 or 3.operators in that reactors control room.
And possibly the rescue personal sent in  to contain it.

Troops outside a  plant would be unlikely to be killed by the explosion.
The radiation maybe if it was a unique situation and if they stayed there.

Nuclear reactor fuel rods are not compressed and dense enough  ,and the core desgn not such that they can explode in the nuclear.warhead way.

Two different worlds.

They can overheat so rapidly and so intensely to cause an  explosion of the cooling water as it vaporizes and of surrounding materials being turned to expanding gas.

A big boom yes,typically contained by design of the core and structure limited to the unit itself.
Even Chernobyl unit 4 with an.open core blast,did not harm.the adjacent unit 3.

Zap isnt an ancient desgn plant and its not a nuclear bomb waiting a structural fire to go off .

A meltdown would be a pollution disaster, the radiation released unlikely to kill anyone other than plant and initial containment workers.

The hysterics over the word nuclear ,needs to get some context.

Fukushima was disaster,  3 reactors melted down and killed one operator initially,one clean up person later.

It's caused enough concern that the Director General of the IAEA is holding a press conference to a packed audience as i write this.


He says "it's an unprecedented situation ",because a Nuclear Plant has never been attacked by military personnel before.


He says that a Russian projectile hit the plant.


The fire was put out,no radiation was released and the site is currently secure .


EU Foreign ministers have hastily arranged a meeting as it's considered as a Nuclear escalation.

[fathertime]

He says "it's an unprecedented situation ",because a Nuclear Plant has never been attacked by military personnel before.

EU Foreign ministers have hastily arranged a meeting as it's considered as a Nuclear escalation.

It seems that the nuclear power plant is controlled by Russia now.  I would say it is indeed an escalation and demonstrates Russia is willing to escalate to whatever point they have to. 

Fathertime!