this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
23 points (92.6% liked)
World News
32519 readers
585 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't understand if you are brain damaged. Destroying a nuclear power plant - releasing a cloud of radioactive debris - is in no way comparable to using depleted uranium shells.
Seriously, your argument is like saying "Well it's OK for us to use chemical weapons because they used bleach for cleaning". It's beyond ridiculous.
anything on 'the use of any tactical nuclear weapon' or 'the destruction of a nuclear facility', what with that being what the conversation is about and all
yes, what with it not being one of the conditions for an "immediate response", and actually just being elaboration on the actual conditions
thats why it says "or their proxies, or the destruction of a nuclear facility, dispersing radioactive contaminates into NATO territory"
as opposed to "or their proxies, or the destruction of a nuclear facility, or dispersing radioactive contaminates into NATO territory"
so sure, on purpose, that purpose being treating the text as if it says what it actually says