>>508103572 (OP) Depends. If the nuclear fallout is limited to Fordow, and it's a legitimate military target other countries might not give a shit but we just nuked Iran and China and Russia and North Korea are gonna be on their periods for a week or two.
>>508103572 (OP) >political fallout If the world doesn't isolate the US then I fully expect Russia and probably China to use them this will mean tatical nuclear weapons will all but kill any talk of preparing to uparm conventional armies
Whats stopping the reds from nuking Kiev or the chinks from nuking the twaiin for the lulz?
AnonymousID: 2tFtM6Cc
6/20/2025, 6:32:16 PM No.508104189
>>508103954 The world needs the US to maintain the status quo. The Anglosphere and the Eurobloc are lazy and unwilling, and the Russian/Chinese/Iranian/NK/Pakistan bloc are happy to exploit that.
Nukes are fake n gay. Kikes desperately need large scale aerial bombardmant combined with large scale boots on ground in Iran. Like they did with Iraq.
>>508104047 China wants Taiwan for itself. But Russia just might decide to use tac nukes on Ukraine. Our government might collapse if Trump uses a nuke. At the least it will guarantee complete D victory in 26
>>508104047 Yeah if they want to trigger an arms race. Taiwan, SK, Japan will have nukes and be far more willing to retaliate with them in a conflict. The best way to use nukes is not at all, but the second best way to use them is to take out a legitimate military target. Nuking a population center is suicidal.
>>508103572 (OP) Being inside a mountain tends to protect you from most nukes, tactical or not. You would need special "bunker buster" nukes which, as far as I know, don't exist yet. They've been "working" on them for a while, but not being able to test them, especially ABOVE GROUND, has hampered development.
It's a shame, because that is the exact kind of nuke one would need to break up an asteroid / comet coming towards earth.
AnonymousID: NlWt+0OD
6/20/2025, 6:35:58 PM No.508104487
>>508104360 I can’t imagine a scenario where the USA doesn’t do a limited nuclear strike and another country does it to flex back.
>>508103572 (OP) No he won’t. One because if he does he would lose far more than he gains. Two it isn’t even necessary. Iran has no functional way to stop an overwhelming military strike and insertion of commandoes to enter and destroy fordow from within.
And the ayatollah wants one thing above all else, the continuation of his regime.
Here’s what the nobody prophesied back in January. Now Trump hates the nobody so if he does fulfill this prophecy it’s because it was always the plan and there really is no other alternative.
>>508106839 IF the US nukes Fordow, the casualties will be minimal. They would be no more severe than a successful bunker-buster attack—it would simply wipe out whoever is staffing the base.
Why must the use of a tactical nuke in this case suddenly change the rules of warfare elsewhere?
>>508107450 Oh don't worry, they would only be dropping on top on Zelensky's bunker, the causalities would be minimal. And the Ukrainian people would rejoice to be freed from their dictator!
Stupid mutt, if you change the rules of the game, everybody else will do it. Do you really think you are that special?