Where do I say use,? I said give them the capability, just as The US, U.K. China, or indeed Russia etc have the capability, just because they have the capability to destroy those area, none of those would use them unless used against them first.
You simply do not know if giving Ukraine back the capability of nuclear weapons would have an effect on Russias ambitions
And Western supplied Weapons against Russia are the none nuclear weaponry they have, HIMARS, Storm / Scalp etc. hence the "And".
originally Posted by NutLoose
I was not suggesting they use them, but the threat that they would may be enough to deter his ambitions, we gave them promises to get rid of their Nukes on the grounds that we would protect them...... How is that going by the way? There are mutterings in Ukraine that they should develop their own, and given they were one of the biggest nuclear powers once they will probably have the know how to do it.
If you are going to quote me, please have the common courtesy to quote me in full on the subject instead of cherry picking to suit your narrative.
I said at the start of all of this the UN should have moved peacekeepers into the front lines when Russia was building up their invasion forces.
The one thing the UN needs to do is remove the "every country agrees before action is taken", simply have a large majority vote. The Russian veto has screwed the UN up.
..