Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Schwarzwald" data-source="post: 70794" data-attributes="member: 544">I think you’re confusing &#039;not being deleted&#039; with &#039;winning.&#039; NK has the bombs, but they&#039;re a dead node. Russia has the bombs, but they’re fumbling a war with a neighbor and losing their best minds to the West.The reason we don&#039;t &#039;attack&#039; isn&#039;t just the nukes; it&#039;s because no one wants the headache of managing a pile of ash. In 2026, the real &#039;flex&#039; isn&#039;t the Samson Option it&#039;s the bio tech and digital integration that makes your borders irrelevant. If you have to threaten to end the world just to stay something, you’ve already lost the future.Russia isn&#039;t prey, they&#039;re a landlord who set their own building on fire and is now threatening to blow up the block because the neighbors are complaining about the smoke.America doesn&#039;t want to own russia; we want them to stop being a high maintenance bitch in the global circuit(everyone and I mean everyone would rather we had a more stable Russia, Europe needs the energy and we don&#039;t want to deal with he mess). You&#039;re arguing that nukes make them potent, but all they&#039;ve done is allow them to fumble a war with a smaller neighbor while their best scientists flee the country. If the only thing keeping you from being nothing is a suicide switch, you&#039;ve already lost.North Korea, we had 50 years to &quot;prey&quot;&nbsp; on them before they had a single nuke. Why didn&#039;t we?Because they&#039;re a nothing. They have nothing we want, and &#039;winning&#039; would mean we&#039;d have to feed them. America doesn&#039;t want to be in charge of a pile of ash or a starving population.This was all about NK from the start and my statement stands, ain&#039;t no one give a fuck about NK and they fact they are unhinged enough to drop a nuke isn&#039;t a win and btw China would be the first up their ass about it.Closing note, is Russian didn&#039;t have gas, they would be far less relivant then they are now, it&#039;s how Putin became so rich and it&#039;s how Russia has stayed a global power.There isn&#039;t anything to argue about here, just two different opinions.[ATTACH=full]13829[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Schwarzwald, post: 70794, member: 544"] I think you’re confusing 'not being deleted' with 'winning.' NK has the bombs, but they're a dead node. Russia has the bombs, but they’re fumbling a war with a neighbor and losing their best minds to the West. The reason we don't 'attack' isn't just the nukes; it's because no one wants the headache of managing a pile of ash. In 2026, the real 'flex' isn't the Samson Option it's the bio tech and digital integration that makes your borders irrelevant. If you have to threaten to end the world just to stay something, you’ve already lost the future. Russia isn't prey, they're a landlord who set their own building on fire and is now threatening to blow up the block because the neighbors are complaining about the smoke. America doesn't want to own russia; we want them to stop being a high maintenance bitch in the global circuit(everyone and I mean everyone would rather we had a more stable Russia, Europe needs the energy and we don't want to deal with he mess). You're arguing that nukes make them potent, but all they've done is allow them to fumble a war with a smaller neighbor while their best scientists flee the country. If the only thing keeping you from being nothing is a suicide switch, you've already lost. North Korea, we had 50 years to "prey" on them before they had a single nuke. Why didn't we? Because they're a nothing. They have nothing we want, and 'winning' would mean we'd have to feed them. America doesn't want to be in charge of a pile of ash or a starving population. This was all about NK from the start and my statement stands, ain't no one give a fuck about NK and they fact they are unhinged enough to drop a nuke isn't a win and btw China would be the first up their ass about it. Closing note, is Russian didn't have gas, they would be far less relivant then they are now, it's how Putin became so rich and it's how Russia has stayed a global power. There isn't anything to argue about here, just two different opinions. [ATTACH type="full" alt="1772842612271380.gif"]13829[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Layout Options

Color Schemes

Reply to thread