Posts: 1,937 +2,022
If by "Bradly", you mean the M2 Bradley, this forty-year old vehicle is hardly a shining example of the advanced weaponry you claim we're withholding. Nor would it even be terribly useful to Ukraine in the type of urban-defense warfare they're conducting. The conflict in Ukraine has validated the long-held assumption that the role of MBTs and IFVs in modern warfare is essentially over. Abrams and Bradleys were terrific in the deserts of Iraq a few decades ago ... but this isn't then.Wrong again? You should read up more on advanced weaponry. Including Bradly's and better aircraft, etc
You fail to understand the situation. There is a clear demarcation between tactical and strategic weapons. Tactical nukes kill troops -- strategic ones kill millions of civilians. If Russia detonates a couple low-yield tactical nukes in Ukraine, do you honestly believe the US is going to commit mass suicide by a mass launch of ICBMs into the Russian heartland?... Tactical or not the US/Nato have plenty of Nukes to deal with Russia.