Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE
(Video Credit: Fox News)
With rumors of Russian President Vladimir Putin leaving even the nuclear option on the table, Fox News correspondent Joey Jones laid out the three strategies the United States can take against a potential nuclear war in Ukraine.
The retired U.S. Marine bomb technician explained on “America’s Newsroom” on Friday that the options to combat such a potential nuclear crisis include “Prepare, prevent, or preempt.”
In the event of a very small tactical nuke, sometimes called a briefcase nuke, or other nuclear threats Jones said American officials can prepare by trying to “utilize intelligence to say this is where it will probably happen and this is how we prepare for it to survive it.”
Individuals are panic prepping for a potential nuclear attack by stocking up on potassium iodide tablets – an agent that protects against radioactive iodine – driving the prices through the roof on eBay.
Nuclear war panic causes potassium iodide tablets to sell out; running $149 on ebay https://t.co/h9z63XF1ge
— American Wire News (@americanwire_) March 15, 2022
Although Jones conceded that it’s still unclear if a nuclear bomb is a real threat yet or not, he noted that the second option is to “prevent” a nuclear attack.
“Prevent, really looks like you get a decisive victory, you surrender if you’re Ukraine,” Jones explained. “Or you use diplomacy, or you threat, you posture.”
The final option according to Jones is to “preempt” a nuclear attack which he likens to a President George Bush or President Donald Trump-era doctrine.
To “preempt,” he explained that you have to have the mindset, “We think you’re going to do this, we’re going to do something bigger before you get a chance.”
Amidst experts like Jones outlining real strategies to stand up against nuclear threats from Putin, last week The Atlantic took time to express its writer Robinson Meyer’s dire concern over the impact nuclear war would have on climate change.
“I mean this quite literally,” staff writer Meyer wrote. “If you are worried about rapid, catastrophic changes to the planet’s climate, then you must be worried about nuclear war. That is because, on top of killing tens of millions of people, even a relatively ‘minor’ exchange of nuclear weapons would wreck the planet’s climate in enormous and long-lasting ways.”
The Atlantic bemoans that nuclear war would ‘prove disastrous for climate change’ https://t.co/3n52Mt6KiZ
— Conservative News (@BIZPACReview) March 13, 2022
But he also lamented that a full-blown nuclear conflict would not even be enough to reverse “human-caused” climate change.
“And even though the world would get cooler, the nuclear winter resulting from a full-blown global conflict (or even ‘nuclear fall,’ as some researchers prefer) would not reverse the effect of what we might morbidly call ‘traditional’ human-caused climate change,” he added.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Watch: Suspect hits unsuspecting NYC man in back of the head with a baseball bat – in broad daylight - December 4, 2022
- Uber-hawk John Bolton says Trump’s ‘act is old and tired now,’ calls for ‘next generation’ of Republicans - November 27, 2022
- ‘Big yikes!’ SNL cold open mocking Biden and Dems over midterms painfully unfunny - November 6, 2022
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.