Conversation

Seriously tho, where is the line? If US doesn't physically intervene on Ukraine, when does it intervene? Sounds like the argument is that as long as nukes are on the table, you can't have a physical confrontation? Is physical worse than economic? What's this mean for Taiwan?

338

122

891

You ready to get wacked with nukes?

Jesse Powell

@jespow

Mar 3

At some point, yes. I'm trying to understand the US position on this. Is it that Russia can take the whole world and we only push back when troops land on US soil? Or, is there some other tipping point where we say that we are willing to risk nukes to push back?

Adam

@akmazz88

Mar 3

At some point you’re ready to get whacked with nukes meaning you/fam. member will be heading to the front line for another country’s sovereignty? If so, props. If not, then you’re no different from the politicians who have sent another’s kids off to fight for them in the past.

Replying to

and

Yes. I'm not saying now is that moment. I'm just saying that there must be a line somewhere. Trying to figure out where people think that is. Some say it's NATO, some say we would never push back against any aggressor with nukes, which seems insane.

3:30 AM · Mar 3, 2022Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

For sure it’s a tough question and a horrible situation that I wish we weren’t/shouldn’t be in.

Replying to

and

Conflict with Russia doesn’t have to mean it goes nuclear. That’s a huge escalation to go to nuke and they have a choice. What’s the point of even having our conventional forces if we’re too afraid to use them. Might as well cut our defense budget to maintain just a few nukes.

3dom (DARK TETRAD) ∞/21m ₿ vs

@03dom

Mar 3

The US has the biggest, best conventional army in the world still with over 800 military bases. It will win a conventional war and it will lose in a nuclear war (with everyone else). They don‘t commit because of a buffer state. But the exact threshold I don’t know either. Chips?

Show more replies