Russia and Iran vow retaliation if US launches further strikes in Syria - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Russia and Iran vow retaliation if US launches further strikes in Syria

£0.00 @
Russia and Iran have issued a direct warning to Donald Trump saying his missile strike crossed a 'red line' and that further US action in Syria will lead to retaliation. Russian president Vladimir … Read More
Predikuesi Avatar
1m, 2w agoPosted 1 month, 2 weeks ago
Russia and Iran have issued a direct warning to Donald Trump saying his missile strike crossed a 'red line' and that further US action in Syria will lead to retaliation.

Russian president Vladimir Putin and Iranian leader Hassan Rouhani said American military intervention against Bashar Assad was a "violation of international law" in telephone talks.

An arm of Lebanese militant group Hezbollah issued a statement it claimed was on behalf of Russia, Iran and its allies, vowing to "reply with force" to any future US aggression "in a variety of ways".

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-and-iran-vow-retaliation-if-us-launches-further-strikes-in-syria-a3511201.html

Will Trump have the guts to strike again?
Will Putin back off?
Iran and Hezbollah are certainly mentally deranged enough to escalate things further.
Predikuesi Avatar
1m, 2w agoPosted 1 month, 2 weeks ago
Options

Top Comments

(1)
12 Likes
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.

Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.

However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.

All Comments

(89) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
Hell yes bring on World War 3.
#2
donaldduck2
Hell yes bring on World War 3.
Probably you did not mean what you said.
2 Likes #3
Thanks for letting us know!
2 Likes #4
Iran, but they were our fwends!
#5
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
12 Likes #6
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.

Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.

However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
#7
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.

Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.

We might end up as collateral damage though.
1 Like #8
I bet the Americans are running scared of the Iranians and their military might, the same can be said for the Russians - that Red Dog seen its day long ago. Putin still seems to think Mother Russia has the same sort of clout now that it had in the hayday of the Soviet Union. They'll not attack the US no matter what they do, they'll go for a softer target.
2 Likes #9
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.

If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.

Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.

And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
#10
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.
4 Likes #11
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.
Do you seriously believe that? Or are you just trolling?

I would not have thought that the threat of millions of deaths was something to get gung-ho about but, then, I suppose if you don't believe that any bombs are likely to be dropped on your part of Northern England, you probably don't care that much.
2 Likes #12
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.

Doesn't matter what they can detect both sides can see a soldier in a enemy base blow his nose via satellite imaging. Putins arsenal is newer and better the RS-24 for example would have no troubles getting to America no mater where in the world it is launched and it splits into 10 individual warheads, no ICBM in the US arsenal carries more then 1 warhead.

What the US tend to do is play the numbers game they produce a massive arsenal and then its just there for show, missiles from 1970s that kind of thing they don't actually update them that much and they don't really care if they work as they have no intention of using them, at the last count of testing the old stock it was estimated that at least 30% of the things would fail because they have just been sitting their collecting dust.

Sadly Russia doesn't consider a arsenal relevant unless it is usable, well Putin doesn't, personally i think Putin is a great man he's very intelligent, very savvy, very experienced in world affairs what with his former job in the KGB he's the kind of leader you want to make a country strong and by that account he's certainly not someone you want to make a enemy of.
1 Like #13
RonChew
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.
Do you seriously believe that? Or are you just trolling?
I would not have thought that the threat of millions of deaths was something to get gung-ho about but, then, I suppose if you don't believe that any bombs are likely to be dropped on your part of Northern England, you probably don't care that much.
My point is Russia are full of hot air and nothing to worry about, They won't retaliate with weapons of mass destruction, it's just a bit of willy waving.
#14
Thanks for letting us know!
1 Like #15
shauneco
RonChew
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.
Do you seriously believe that? Or are you just trolling?
I would not have thought that the threat of millions of deaths was something to get gung-ho about but, then, I suppose if you don't believe that any bombs are likely to be dropped on your part of Northern England, you probably don't care that much.
My point is Russia are full of hot air and nothing to worry about, They won't retaliate with weapons of mass destruction, it's just a bit of willy waving.

I agree with you about Russia they are not stupid they will attack the money not shoot missiles at America, however the USA has Trump and he's a idiot, possibly a mentally unhinged one so you can't be 100% sure.

But hypothetically speaking America would be wiped off the map regardless of who strikes first they wouldn't win because they would no longer exist
#16
Error440
shauneco
RonChew
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.
Do you seriously believe that? Or are you just trolling?
I would not have thought that the threat of millions of deaths was something to get gung-ho about but, then, I suppose if you don't believe that any bombs are likely to be dropped on your part of Northern England, you probably don't care that much.
My point is Russia are full of hot air and nothing to worry about, They won't retaliate with weapons of mass destruction, it's just a bit of willy waving.
I agree with you about Russia they are not stupid they will attack the money not shoot missiles at America, however the USA has Trump and he's a idiot, possibly a mentally unhinged one so you can't be 100% sure.
But hypothetically speaking America would be wiped off the map regardless of who strikes first they wouldn't win because they would no longer exist
Lets just hope we never get the chance to find out!.
banned#17
if North Korea joins these guys then nothing will be left out of America
banned#18
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.


you seem pleased. why don't you make a bet !!
2 Likes #19
Anyone care to examine source?

All jumping around discussing all sorts of scenarios before checking where story came from; imo, seriously crap journalism.

'An arm of Lebanese militant group Hezbollah issued a statement' - wot' a talking arm?
Ok, jokes aside; a newspaper edited by a person most consider a right-wing puppet reports on 'a statement' vaguely linked to a 'dodgy' group supposedly made by an unidentified person - flippin heck, you couldn't make it up - but then again, . . . you could. . . . how about;

American president Donald Trump and British PM Theresa May said Russian military intervention against Al kid-u-on was a "violation of international law" in telephone talks.

A leg of Leggyknees militant group Leggit issued a statement it claimed was on behalf of America, UK and its allies, vowing to "reply with force" to any future Russian aggression "in a variety of ways".
#20
Putin is a bigger menace than anyone else on the planet. Someone needs to take him out the closet and that will be the end of him in Russia. I believe he is the worlds richest man and a nuclear war would nullify his stolen fortune - so no chance of him or Trump going down that route - they are too greedy!
1 Like #21
STEWIEG
I believe he is the worlds richest man !
Rothchild is the worlds richest man, Putin is no where near.
4 Likes #22
Cool fallout 5 coming soon! VR not needed!
1 Like #23
shauneco
point is Russia are full of hot air and nothing to worry about, They won't retaliate with weapons of mass destruction, it's just a bit of willy waving.


http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Screen-Shot-2015-11-24-at-5.13.02-AM-e1448371513474.jpg

Edited By: jaybizzle on Apr 10, 2017 14:59
2 Likes #24
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.

100% right mate Russia wouldn't even get its nukes off the ground with out america and its allied forces imploding the silos Russia is 100% surrounded. Years ago there used to be a thing called MAD which was mutually assured destruction meaning if one nuke went off then they all did, It hasn't existed since the late 90s America would wipe any nation off the face of the earth who even tried it they invested billions in counter nuke measures. Trump has nothing to worry about. Also Russian subs are tracked and followed just like Russia tracks and follows everybody else Assured destruction doesn't exist anymore and hasn't for many years. America is at the top by a long shot.

Edited By: larrylightweight on Apr 10, 2017 16:10
1 Like #25
The thing that gets me with this whole situation is both America and Russia have been bombing the hell out of Syria for at least the last 3 years maybe more so what actually made this any different. Is it the fact it was the USA hitting a Syrian army airbase and not down town civilian population of Damascus because an army battering an army is surely more better than an army battering the civilian population.

Edited By: larrylightweight on Apr 10, 2017 17:06: b
#26
"Iran and Hezbollah are certainly mentally deranged enough to escalate things further."

The mentally deranged were the people who started the current Middle East/ North Africa mess off (Bush *2, Blair......................................................and now Trump), failed to resolve any of the problems they caused, and now seem intent on making a bad situation worse. Pity they don't have the same level of concern for the poor sods on the ground as they (supposedly) do for their own citizens.
4 Likes #27
Shauneco are you going to counter Error with a credible source or are you constantly going to reply with "but the USA will win" every time?

From what I briefly touched upon at Uni about MAD (mutually assured destruction) since the massive retaliation then flexible retalitation days of Eisenhower and JFK it seems Error is pretty much bang on the button (excuse the pun).

It's not surprising to see shauneco make claims he probably read in the Sun. It's a common trait of his.



Edited By: dtovey89 on Apr 10, 2017 16:32
#28
It's the end of the world as we know it...and I feel fine :D
1 Like #29
dtovey89
Shauneco are you going to counter Error with a credible source or are you constantly going to reply with "but the USA will win" every time?
From what I briefly touched upon at Uni about MAD (mutually assured destruction) since the massive retaliation then flexible retalitation days of Eisenhower and JFK it seems Error is pretty much bang on the button (excuse the pun).
It's not surprising to see shauneco make claims he probably read in the Sun. It's a common trait of his.


But the US would win. Russia, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah lol v US, NATO. It would be ugly and will not happen, but the US and it's allies would win. Russia (Putin) cannot accept the Soviet Union is no more. After all, the UK is more than capable of flattening every major city in Russia.

Conventional war, the Russians would not stand a chance
#30
dtovey89
Shauneco are you going to counter Error with a credible source or are you constantly going to reply with "but the USA will win" every time?
From what I briefly touched upon at Uni about MAD (mutually assured destruction) since the massive retaliation then flexible retalitation days of Eisenhower and JFK it seems Error is pretty much bang on the button (excuse the pun).
It's not surprising to see shauneco make claims he probably read in the Sun. It's a common trait of his.

The USA use satellite and siesmic monitors amongst other detection systems, Google is your friend. They'll most certainly have more advanced secret weapons and detection systems than the average Joe would know about.
1 Like #31
Why are people missing a bigger part of this picture Trump phoned Putin to tell him he was going to rocket that airbase. If Putin really had the power to stop that then he would of said LIKE HELL YOU ARE. But instead Russia quietly removed all its forces from that base and most likely so did Assad. Anybody after saying its out of order is just willy shaking nothing more nothing less. Its all media hype and scare tricks both Russia and USA have interests in Syria and non really disturb the others interests thats why they update each other every day about airspace and such like. Assad is just a pawn in the game they don't give a crap who he is.
#32
OllieSt
dtovey89
Shauneco are you going to counter Error with a credible source or are you constantly going to reply with "but the USA will win" every time?
From what I briefly touched upon at Uni about MAD (mutually assured destruction) since the massive retaliation then flexible retalitation days of Eisenhower and JFK it seems Error is pretty much bang on the button (excuse the pun).
It's not surprising to see shauneco make claims he probably read in the Sun. It's a common trait of his.
But the US would win. Russia, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah lol v US, NATO. It would be ugly and will not happen, but the US and it's allies would win. Russia (Putin) cannot accept the Soviet Union is no more. After all, the UK is more than capable of flattening every major city in Russia.
Conventional war, the Russians would not stand a chance

Why would the US win?
1 Like #33
shauneco
dtovey89
Shauneco are you going to counter Error with a credible source or are you constantly going to reply with "but the USA will win" every time?
From what I briefly touched upon at Uni about MAD (mutually assured destruction) since the massive retaliation then flexible retalitation days of Eisenhower and JFK it seems Error is pretty much bang on the button (excuse the pun).
It's not surprising to see shauneco make claims he probably read in the Sun. It's a common trait of his.
The USA use satellite and siesmic monitors amongst other detection systems, Google is your friend. They'll most certainly have more advanced secret weapons and detection systems than the average Joe would know about.

Your argument is "advanced secret weapons"?
Lol give it a rest.
#34
dtovey89
shauneco
dtovey89
Shauneco are you going to counter Error with a credible source or are you constantly going to reply with "but the USA will win" every time?
From what I briefly touched upon at Uni about MAD (mutually assured destruction) since the massive retaliation then flexible retalitation days of Eisenhower and JFK it seems Error is pretty much bang on the button (excuse the pun).
It's not surprising to see shauneco make claims he probably read in the Sun. It's a common trait of his.
The USA use satellite and siesmic monitors amongst other detection systems, Google is your friend. They'll most certainly have more advanced secret weapons and detection systems than the average Joe would know about.
Your argument is "advanced secret weapons"?
Lol give it a rest.
They wouldn't even need to use nukes, they've got biological weapons. Nukes are so last year!.
#35
Calm down boys. No one needs to use nukes.
#36
Just an observation.

The most obvious retaliation would not necessarily be nuclear nor from Putin. If the Americans were unable to stop an attack on the a World Trade centre or even the Pentagon, what makes anyone think that there is a competent defence against, say, a biological attack anywhere in the US. They never did find out exactly who the attackers were on 9/11 and Colin Powell scared everyone when he waved a tube of anthrax spores around. Remember, biological weapons are cheap and self propagating.

This business is deadly serious
#37
Error440
shauneco
RonChew
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
If you think some guy with bad hair or hardly any hair has to phone up on a red phone to call a strike from their own country you are very much mistaken.
Both run a automatic retaliation system and both situate warheads outside their own boarders, in the case of Russia they very much favour the same system we do of having their nukes mobile floating about in submarines, but i think they also have the French system too of situating them on islands and bases all over the world, anywhere but on your own doorstep really because in the event of a first strike you don't want your capacity to retaliate destroyed or crippled.
And that my friend is the point of assured annihilation as a deterrent to war between the charlie big potatoes.
And the USA can detect a pin dropped 1000's of miles away, Nobody would want to gamble on a nuclear war but USA would win, 100%.
Do you seriously believe that? Or are you just trolling?
I would not have thought that the threat of millions of deaths was something to get gung-ho about but, then, I suppose if you don't believe that any bombs are likely to be dropped on your part of Northern England, you probably don't care that much.
My point is Russia are full of hot air and nothing to worry about, They won't retaliate with weapons of mass destruction, it's just a bit of willy waving.
I agree with you about Russia they are not stupid they will attack the money not shoot missiles at America, however the USA has Trump and he's a idiot, possibly a mentally unhinged one so you can't be 100% sure.
But hypothetically speaking America would be wiped off the map regardless of who strikes first they wouldn't win because they would no longer exist
I would add that Russia has a psychotic dictator, Assad is deluded, Iran is crackpot alley and North Korea has a child dictator running a starving closed police state - so maybe anything is possible?
1 Like #38
shauneco
Error440
shauneco
At least we're on the right side, The USA would easily wipe Russia off the map.
Stupid comment everyone gets wiped off the map with nuke retaliation, it doesn't matter what tattered flag used to fly above your irradiated dust bowl.
However i believe this is all just postering from both sides for political gain and whom ever suffers the consequences it will be niether anyone on usa or Russian soil.
Russia wouldn't stand a chance, USA would destroy any nukes aimed in there direction, I doubt Russia have the same defense ability.
We might end up as collateral damage though.
I dunno.

The Americans sold and maintain the Trident system for us.

Last test the missiles went the wrong way back towards America...
#39
123thisisme
STEWIEG
I believe he is the worlds richest man !
Rothchild is the worlds richest man, Putin is no where near.
Rothschild is meaningless - it is a very large family not any one individual - everyone knows this. No-one knows how much Putin has hidden away!
2 Likes #40
I can't believe people are so ill informed when it comes to Russians military strength. They are well equipped with some of the most advanced tech and with military personnel that would battle past any of thWests soft defences.
A war with Russia would leave Europe in rubble, and America broken.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!