9 Comments
User's avatar
LudwigF's avatar

It’s not entirely clear to me what the ‘sharing’ of nuclear weapons by Britain and France with Germany and Poland respectively would mean in practice.

I doubt that any such arrangement, however meaningless it might be in practical terms, would garner much support with the British or French publics.

Paul Jurczak's avatar

Sharing nukes with Poland, where many government officials are rattling their sabers and dream about a march on Moscow, would be hugely irresponsible.

galen's avatar

You never know. The warmongers of the West have long experience in twisting the minds of the peoples of these countries like pretzels.

Walter DuBlanica's avatar

Spreading nukes to Poland & Germany will put all of Europe in great danger. If something critical happens in Europe the USA will not be excluded. The Burevastnik can and will easily reach America. Trump goes in and out of all sorts of possible actions. One can not know what he really neans or what he is just spewing out to see what reactions he gets. There is no doubt that he is unstable. The world is at risk. All the people of the world need to get together and assure that nothing CRAZY will or can happen.

Deplorable Commissar's avatar

" The Burevastnik can and will easily reach America. Trump goes in and out of all sorts of possible actions. "

So can the thousands of other nuke capable missiles Russia has. That hasnt stopped NATO has it ?

Berta Nelson's avatar

Having nuclear weapons isn't as easy as parking a car in a garage. The idea of France "giving" some of theirs to anyone is problematic in many ways, therefore extremely unlikely. I also wonder at USA'S capacity to actually test any of its old nuclear arsenal. Lots of big easy talk, difficult to actually materialize, just like bringing back industrial capacity or "getting" rare earth products. Huffing & puffing doesn't blow any house down.

Bob Henry Baber's avatar

How can we assure nothing crazy will happen?

James Schwartz's avatar

Andrew….Really????!!