Peace and Security, Great Tribulation, Armageddon

[New World Explorer]

I woke up to the news about attempted drones attack on Kremlin. 
Thus we see, that history of the last days can be written in a way we do not expect. (Although I am not surprised to see this on the news 🗞) 

Ukraine denies involvement. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65471904

Edited May 3, 2023 by New World Explorer

[dove]

39 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

I read a lot of Science Fiction back in the 60's and it feels like a lot of those stories are starting to come true. 

I always remember Dick Tracy talking into his 2way smartwatch,  while fighting crime, way before Apple. He's still using it in the comic strip today

[Doug]

4 minutes ago, Dove said:

I always remember Dick Tracy talking into his 2way smartwatch,  while fighting crime, way before Apple. He's still using it in the comic strip today

 

As a parody of Dick Tracy , Agent 86 aka: Maxwell Smart had his big 'ol shoe phone   LOL

 

By sliding the sole out of the way, the rotary dial was under the ball of the foot and the speaker was at the heel.

 

I guess he hopped on one foot while he was using it   

[Ross Au]

2 hours ago, Doug said:

 

As a parody of Dick Tracy , Agent 86 aka: Maxwell Smart had his big 'ol shoe phone   LOL

 

By sliding the sole out of the way, the rotary dial was under the ball of the foot and the speaker was at the heel.

 

I guess he hopped on one foot while he was using it   

The fantasy with those items is that the battery never went flat and they always had coverage. 🤔😂

[Ysaias]

On 5/3/2023 at 9:39 AM, Hotteok said:

We are about to watch the very climax of this movie yay! 
End quickly please I need to go to a bathroom.

Feel the same.

We have teasers and trailers in so many Bible books... Psalms, Daniel, Joel, the Gospels, Revelation. And we also know how it ends! 

The problem is when we want to push the FWD button or click the SKIP banner we may get too anxious. But the remote is on BEST and BIGGER hands. We're just the audience.

[zoebarry]

On 5/3/2023 at 11:23 AM, Loyal said:

A tactical nuclear weapon (TNW) or non-strategic nuclear weapon (NSNW)^[1] is a nuclear weapon that is designed to be used on a battlefield in military situations, mostly with friendly forces in proximity and perhaps even on contested friendly territory. Generally smaller in explosive power, they are defined in contrast to strategic nuclear weapons, which are designed mostly to be targeted at the enemy interior far away from the war front against military bases, cities, towns, arms industries, and other hardened or larger-area targets to damage the enemy's ability to wage war. As of 2023, no tactical nuclear weapon has ever been used in a combat situation.

You all are missing the point! I don’t care what Wikipedia says is the definition of tactical nuclear weapon. Russia has been very clear that if even ONE nuclear weapon is used against them , they will release ALL OF their nuclear weapons ALL AT ONCE! So at that point, there will be no survivors, hence the term mutually assured destruction. ... So there really is no use of tactical for tactical nuclear weapons, it will mean the end of mankind.

 

The definition even says tactical nuclear weapons have never been used, and I am saying they never will be.... so I stand by my original statement that there is no such thing as tactical nuclear weapons.... 

Edited May 4, 2023 by zoebarry

[Michał]

22 minutes ago, zoebarry said:

You all are missing the point! I don’t care what Wikipedia says is the definition of tactical nuclear weapon. Russia has been very clear that if even ONE nuclear weapon is used against them , they will release ALL OF their nuclear weapons ALL AT ONCE! So at that point, there will be no survivors, hence the term mutually assured destruction. ... So there really is no use of tactical for tactical nuclear weapons, it will mean the end of mankind.

 

The definition even says tactical nuclear weapons have never been used, and I am saying they never will be.... so I stand by my original statement that there is no such thing as tactical nuclear weapons.... 

 

I doubt the Wrst would go nuclear at this point, i assume Russia is more inclined to do it. If Russia does it NATO could retaliate with nuclear weapons but they know it would end badly. So, in theory Russia could detonate it but it wouldn’t automatically lead to wwiii. I’m not saying it me side is better than another, just that KOTN likes to use brute force and KOTS more like to use back door (not always of course). 

[Tortuga]

58 minutes ago, zoebarry said:

The definition even says tactical nuclear weapons have never been used, and I am saying they never will be.... so I stand by my original statement that there is no such thing as tactical nuclear weapons

Apparently tactical nuclear weapons have been developed and are available, they just haven't been used yet. The fact that they exist is one step closer to them being used. It wouldn't surprise me if they are used in one way or another before the leaders say there is peace and security.

[Tortuga]

1 hour ago, zoebarry said:

the term mutually assured destruction.

MAD has been a deterrent for the last 60 years but its interesting to see how many people think that it is not a sustainable deterrent. It is based on the assumption that the world leaders are reasonable people that won't risk a world destruction, however some have pointed out that some of the current world leaders are not reasonable and there is no assurance they wouldn't risk an initial strike. MAD is also based on the potential consequences of using strategic nuclear weapons. The development of tactical nuclear weapons may be a game changer. The response to a tactical nuclear weapon could be a political response instead of a nuclear response. Never say never.

[Percy]

2 hours ago, Tortuga said:

MAD has been a deterrent for the last 60 years but its interesting to see how many people think that it is not a sustainable deterrent.

Oh boy! get some popcorn and have a seat.

https://archive.org/details/Popcornarchive-dr.Strangelove1964

[New World Explorer]

3 hours ago, zoebarry said:

You all are missing the point! I don’t care what Wikipedia says is the definition of tactical nuclear weapon. Russia has been very clear that if even ONE nuclear weapon is used against them , they will release ALL OF their nuclear weapons ALL AT ONCE! So at that point, there will be no survivors, hence the term mutually assured destruction. ... So there really is no use of tactical for tactical nuclear weapons, it will mean the end of mankind.

 

The definition even says tactical nuclear weapons have never been used, and I am saying they never will be.... so I stand by my original statement that there is no such thing as tactical nuclear weapons.... 

Russia's President Vladimir Putin has said he's ready to use nuclear weapons to defend Russian territory, raising the fear he might use a small, or "tactical" nuclear weapon in Ukraine.

US President Joe Biden has warned him that doing so would be the most serious military escalation since World War II.

Tactical nuclear weapons are small nuclear warheads and delivery systems intended for use on the battlefield, or for a limited strike.

They are designed to destroy enemy targets in a specific area without causing widespread radioactive fallout.

 

The smallest tactical nuclear weapons can be one kiloton or less (producing the equivalent to a thousand tonnes of the explosive TNT). The largest ones can be as big as 100 kilotons.

Strategic nuclear weapons are larger (up to 1,000 kilotons) and are launched from longer range.

 

By comparison, the atomic bomb the US dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 was 15 kilotons.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-60664169

[Tortuga]

8 minutes ago, New World Explorer said:

Russia's President Vladimir Putin has said he's ready to use nuclear weapons to defend Russian territory, raising the fear he might use a small, or "tactical" nuclear weapon in Ukraine.

Putin appears to be setting the stage for an escalation by accusing Ukraine of attempting to kill him with a drone. 

[Pabo]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:42 AM, Doug said:

I guess he hopped on one foot while he was using it   

 

More like he couldn't make a phone call on the run.

[New World Explorer]

11 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

Putin appears to be setting the stage for an escalation by accusing Ukraine of attempting to kill him with a drone. 

He is desperate. Russian economy is unable to produce military equipment to keep up with demands on the frontline, sanctions on technology are very effective in this regard. On the other hand Western “help” to Ukraine keeps pumping advanced, high precision weapons. Seeing how KOTN has been almost humiliated in that war, I fear that Putin may act out of desperation and use brute force of tactical nukes to make a point. I hope I am wrong, as  even limited tactical nuke will be very damaging. Last days indeed. 

Edited May 4, 2023 by New World Explorer

[Tortuga]

26 minutes ago, New World Explorer said:

I fear that Putin may act out of desperation and use brute force of tactical nukes to make a point. I hope I am wrong, as  even limited tactical nuke will be very damaging. Last days indeed. 

I agree with Michal, it seems that if Putin attacks Ukraine with a tactical nuclear weapon that the rest of the world would hesitate to launch a nuclear counterattack, since they aren't in any immediate danger. However the repercussions would be tremendous. Last Days indeed, there is going to be a tribulation, a great one....

Edited May 4, 2023 by Tortuga

[Sofia]

4 hours ago, Michał said:

I doubt the Wrst would go nuclear at this point, i assume Russia is more inclined to do it. If Russia does it NATO could retaliate with nuclear weapons but they know it would end badly. So, in theory Russia could detonate it but it wouldn’t automatically lead to wwiii. I’m not saying it me side is better than another, just that KOTN likes to use brute force and KOTS more like to use back door (not always of course). 

In my point of view: Daniel´s prophecy and Revelation shows the power relased by KOTS when the 2 Nucs were released in Japan... But no more prophecy about similar/worse demonstration of power after that prophecy. It makes me believe no Nucs will be released ever again in a big scale. In a smaller scale? well... we shall have to patiently wait. Either a pontual attack without retaliation; or not even that.

 

If there was a big NUC power attack before GT, Im sure the Bible would mention it, like it mentions the Hiroshima/nagasaki attack in 1945.

 

My opinion only.... 

Edited May 4, 2023 by Sofia

[New World Explorer]

5 minutes ago, Sofia said:

In my point of view: Daniel´s prophecy and Revelation shows the power relased by KOTS when the 2 Nucs were released in Japan... But no more prophecy about similar/worse demonstration of power after that prophecy. It makes me believe no Nucs will be released ever again in a big scale. In a smaller scale? well... we shall have to patiently wait. Either a pontual attack without retaliation; or not even that.

 

If there was a big NUC power attack before GT, Im sure the Bible would mention it, like it mentions the Hiroshima/nagasaki attack in 1945.

 

My opinion only.... 

There is lots of scenarios possible.

1. Russia dispatches low yield tactical nuke in Ukraine - thousands are dead. 

World reacts immediately, including China. 

Everybody says enough is enough.

UN passes resolution to place peace keeping army in Ukraine.

..... etc .... etc.... 

[Golfguy74]

I think that the great tribulation will start when ABBA gets back together and starts a world tour. just my thoughts,

[JennyM]

3 hours ago, New World Explorer said:

He is desperate. Russian economy is unable to produce military equipment to keep up with demands on the frontline, sanctions on technology are very effective in this regard. On the other hand Western “help” to Ukraine keeps pumping advanced, high precision weapons. Seeing how KOTN has been almost humiliated in that war, I fear that Putin may act out of desperation and use brute force of tactical nukes to make a point. I hope I am wrong, as  even limited tactical nuke will be very damaging. Last days indeed. 

Thats what president duterte in the philippines has said  "If putin lost the war, he might use nuclear and China will attack Asia." 

The nations  really want to use nuclear but Jehovah wont allow it. He is in control. 

[Tortuga]

20 minutes ago, JennyM said:

The nations  really want to use nuclear but Jehovah wont allow it.

It seems that many people assume that if anyone uses any nuclear weapon that it means the end of the world. That may be antiquated thinking. We know Jehovah won't allow the earth to be destroyed but we don't know how much damage there will be before he stops it. 

[Shawnster]

4 hours ago, Tortuga said:

Putin appears to be setting the stage for an escalation by accusing Ukraine of attempting to kill him with a drone. 

It's war. Would it really be shocking that one side tried to kill the leader of the other side? Seems kinda silly that people are shocked. 

[JennyM]

32 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

It seems that many people assume that if anyone uses any nuclear weapon that it means the end of the world. That may be antiquated thinking. We know Jehovah won't allow the earth to be destroyed but we don't know how much damage there will be before he stops it. 

It is the end of the world. What happen to nuclear weapons under the hands of stupid people?Tragic. 

[Tortuga]

Its interesting that the GB appear to be open to the possibility of nuclear attacks when they listed it in the 2017 Awake #5

 

[New World Explorer]

1 hour ago, Tortuga said:

It seems that many people assume that if anyone uses any nuclear weapon that it means the end of the world. That may be antiquated thinking.

Exactly.

Low yield nukes up to 15 kilotons can damage area roughly equal to 4 square miles. (plus radiation)

 

The smallest U.S. nuclear weapon ever developed, the W-54, had a minimum yield of “only” 10 tons of TNT equivalent (0.01 kilotons) and could be carried by a single soldier  in an (awkwardly large) backpack.

 

Could Russia strategically or tactically use a “low-yield” nuclear weapon in Ukraine? Russian military doctrine often invokes the concept of “escalate to de-escalate,” the idea that something like a tactical nuclear weapon might be a way to force an enemy to the negotiating table or to capitulate because they would fear continuing down the path to increasing escalation. It is worth noting that none of the arms control treaties that the U.S. and Russia are currently party to regulate the deployment or use of tactical nuclear weapons.

The U.S. and NATO clearly consider this to be something Russia might do and have taken various public (and probably private) measures to signal to Russia that to do so would not be in Russian interests: that there would be harsh consequences above what has already been implemented, that Russia would not get what it might hope for out of such an action, and that the risks of escalation would be very high. Whether Russian leaders find these threats credible or see the world on anywhere near the same terms as the Americans and NATO representatives do, remains to be seen.

https://outrider.org/nuclear-weapons/articles/low-yield-nukes-are-still-dangerously-destructive

 

 

 

[Sofia]

6 hours ago, Tortuga said:

Its interesting that the GB appear to be open to the possibility of nuclear attacks when they listed it in the 2017 Awake #5

 

Nuclear accident

it can happens 

Chernobyl was a mess