https://x.com/annvandersteel/status/1801209638341271781
The death of the dollar is eminent
— Ann Vandersteel (@annvandersteel) June 13, 2024
Moscow Stock exchange halts trading in US dollars.
Russian warships and nuclear subs are right off the coast of Florida and Harvard in Cuba. This makes the Cuban missile crisis look like a tea party.
Interesting on the timing of this, as itβ¦
Petroguzzlers I don't feel so good:
Russia is groping America's gock:
Putler coming for those f16bussies:
!schizomaxxxers speculate wildly.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Russian
simps don't understand what a nuclear 
triad is and why mid range missiles in Cuba were important to them in 1962 but not now.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
it was only there
to remove missiles from turkey and prevent bay of pigs 2. russian 
can anyday launch 
nukes from submarines
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No they werent. Medium-range missiles in turkey were nearly irrelevant for the strategic picture, they didnt significantly alter the situation. Removing them was a fig-leaf for khrushchev who overplayed his hand and realized he had gone too far.
At the time of the cuban missile crisis, there was an asymetric balance between the blocs. The soviets had absolute conventional superiority in europe, and knew for sure they would win a conventional conflict. But the US had absolute nuclear supremacy, both tactical and strategic. The US was able to hit every important location in russia with nuclear weapons, while the soviets had no weapon to credibly threaten CONUS.
The US kept the red army in check by strategically threatening the USSR without fear of retaliation.
MRBM in cuba upended that balance. Now thr soviets were able to threaten CONUS. With it, they could "check" the american strategic nuclear forces. The US couldnt atomically retaliate to a red army attack on western europe, because CONUS would be hit with nukes in return. Thus there was nothing keeping the red army's conventional superiority in europe in check anymore.
Thats also why Nato shifted to a much bigger focus on conventionally repelling a soviet attack after the soviets established their own credible strategic nuclear forces.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read it. May God have mercy on your soul.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
if those turkish
trash 
were so irrelevant, why was US hesitant and even tried to hush it. just admit you grew up huffing 
uncle 
sam slop
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Yeah, Khrushchev made this sudden extremely risky move to put Soviet troops with nuclear weapons just off the coast of America because... he wanted a few dozen missiles to be retired in 1963 instead of 1964.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
one power
move that involves US stakes, and suddenly it's a risky maneuver. US pilot 
died, US citizen shat pants, Nikita was the one making demand terms. plus russia 
had much warheads than what US knew about
keeping soying
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
The submarine is only nuclear powered, AFAIK the zicron missile it can hold is only hypothetically nuclear capable at a future date, and it would be a small munition which wouldn't change any strategic dynamic
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Russia does this constantly it isnt even news lol.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Why you so smart
and don't understand is all about projection ? Main goal is to have an influence in Latin 
America 
and cover Venezuela and co. Is Triad going 
to protect Venezuela if U.S. decide to turn it into Libya ?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
A nuke sub off the american coast doesnt mean anything for deterrence against LatAm shenanigans lmao.
Also
The slaviggers dont even claim to span a nuclear umbrella over anyone else.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Wouldn't those nukes be a good deterrence from attacking Russian
bases in Cuba and Latin 
America 
so it will be also deterrence from trying to kick out pro Russian 
gov in those countries. Just like U.S. can't get rid of Assad ?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
If only the US actually
did some regime change in Venezuela and Nicaragua
!neolibs
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If only the US actually
did some regime change in Syria
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Whats that even supposed to mean lmfao
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If US wanted moon would
been green 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Venezuela is not a country
fractured in a bunch of religious 
and ethnic groups like Syria. Change the government along with the upper echelons of the military 
and it's done, it would 
be more akin to the occupation of Germany 
or Japan.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Change the government along with the upper echelons of the military
and it's done, it would 
Assad must go ?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context