Putin Urged To Deploy Nukes To Cut Off Ukraine's NATO Aid

[EndtheMadnessNow]

...

Putin Urged To Deploy Nukes To Cut Off Ukraine's NATO Aid

Whoa! The headline said "deploy", but the body of the article said "strike" - big difference between those two! Nations "deploy" nukes to create fear and uncertainty in order to scare an opponent into submission. They STRIKE to kill folks and blow shit up. A deployment just makes folks jittery, a strike invites retaliation.

If Putin is going to just deploy nukes, he'll wait until after the US election so he knows if he's going to have to deal with a weak, meaningless response from the third Obama term, or if he's going to have to sleep with one eye open with a second Trump term.

If, on the other hand, he's going to strike with nukes, he'll do that BEFORE the US elections, to be assured of a weak, ineffective US response.

A "deployment" is long term, crosses regime changes, and invites the deployer to take a risk of having to eat shit if a regime comes to power that might stand up to him. A strike, though, is lighting-fast, and once done is done. No one can make the striker un-do it regardless of their stance on the matter after the fact. It's fast, winner takes all, and cannot be undone after a regime change.

I wonder if Russia has the same exotic nuclear weapons technology as the US? That being a Hydrogen bomb which is claimed to be 99.9% Clean. Authorized, developed & tested under JFK in 1962. This gives the frightening connotation that nuclear war could be won. 60 years later and I'm sure they have it down to tactical size.

No such critter as a "clean" nuke. Instead, radioactive spread is determined by "burst height" - how high above the ground the bomb is exploded. If the fireball touches the ground, it's going to generate masses of fallout that will spread radioactivity downwind of the strike zone. The radioactivity doesn't come from the bomb per se, it comes from condensate coming out of the fireball condensing on vaporized granules of dirt  and vaporized buildings, people, etc from the ground, which then precipitates as it cools and is blown down wind.

Neutron bombs are the most insidious - they kill everything in sight while leaving buildings, infrastructure, and the Earth intact and unradiated. So they can be used to kill everyone in a city, and then immediately move in and take over said city for one's self with no radioactive danger to the invasion forces.

That is what I always use to think about so-called "clean" nukes, until recently. The clean hydrogen nuke technology is apparently real, developed back in the 50s by a Nazi physicist down in Argentina and supposedly perfected by the US during JFK timeframe. That same physicist consulted on some of our H-bomb tests. The US military did 31 nuke tests under "Operation Dominic" in 1962 and the very last one was marked success, 99.9% clean. Ok, what exactly does "clean" mean?

Assuming near zero radiation and if that is true, then it was not just a revolution in nuclear weapons technology but also think cold fusion.

The tech of course is still classified and you will find nothing detailed about it on the Internet. That is until a MIT scholar published a paper on it in 2021. Unfortunately, it's one of those academic papers that you have to purchase. I'm looking for a free copy that may pop up somewhere.

Now of course from 60+ years ago this could all be a ruse to make the Russians think we have the ability to nuke them without all the nasty fallout. If this black tech is real then I'm sure Putin has it by now. Both sides could be bluffing or not. Putin tends not to bluff.

Why is there all this hysteria about people wanting to fight a nuclear war with Russia? Note that the Russians are not saying you're gonna die in a radioactive wasteland so much as they are saying your cities will be blasted off the map. Both sides know...each knows the other has the capability or perhaps a dangerous poker game is being played. The US may doubt, but never zero and Putin is like FAFO...mess with me and find out.

So, that MIT paper may hold some answers and/or give a better idea if such actually exists without leaking classified info. When/if I find a copy I'll post here.

Yea, Neutron bombs may be the worst weapon man has ever invented. Although Carter canceled the neutron bomb program in 1978, we were told that Ronald Reagan reversed that cancellation in 1981.



NY Times