No you. Nukes have a very distinctive signature and leave behind radiation.

I provided the examples of your assumption. You turn around and produce ignorance. Read it. It doesn't make you clever blaming me or turning this debate into how I need to research your claim. I cited 5 examples of detonations you're possibly presuming.

There is a supposed debate on the depleted shells, except a radiation reading was there prior to any detonation, despite of it being there afterwards, and it wasn't a tactical signature. There was two missile hits. If a nuke why double tap. Neither were the distinct blast

The signature of a distinctive flash, the flash being incredibly bright, and then the blast wave, shock wave, travelling outwards. Like at the mall. However there are other munitions that also cause a shock wave. Like vacuum and thermobaric. It was incendiary. Because it hit flammable materials and munitions. Like it did at the railway factory fuel depot.

So where asshole, read that bullshit, so matter of fact. When. Where. How. You claimed. I asked. I didn't ask for nonsense.

If they're using nukes so brazenly why has it been localised to explosions with ignitable compounds. Munition storage, and fuel depots? They leave plumes, and clouds. Incendiary materials do. Check out American disasters this year, railway crash, the milking factory, fertiliser storage. All had mushroom clouds, and plumes.

If you're quoting the hypersonic hits like Lviv, or the recent one somewhere in Donetsk, something something cannot pronounce it, near Bakhmut somewhere. Neither had radiation readings. The mall didn't either. They would be screaming, until he was blue in the face calling for nuclear missiles to reign down on Russia, begging for the nukes.

Again the probability is almost zero, because it would get a huge response. We'd hear no end of it. Our ears would fall off. The press would incite WW3, because Zelenskyy would be screaming for a nuclear football.

No you. Nukes have a very distinctive signature and leave behind radiation.

I provided the examples of your assumption. You turn around and produce ignorance. Read it. It doesn't make you clever blaming me or turning this debate into how I need to research your claim. I cited 5 examples of detonations you're possibly presuming.

There is a supposed debate on the depleted shells, except a radiation reading was there prior to any detonation, despite of it being there afterwards, and it wasn't a tactical signature. There was two missile hits. If a nuke why double tap. Neither were the distinct blast

The signature of a distinctive flash, the flash being incredibly bright, and then the blast wave, shock wave, travelling outwards. Like at the mall. However there are other munitions that also cause a shock wave. Luke vacuum and thermobaric. It was incendiary. Because it hit flammable materials and munitions. Like it did at the railway factory fuel depot.

So where asshole, read that bullshit, so matter of fact. When. Where. How. You claimed. I asked. I didn't ask for nonsense.

If they're using nukes so brazenly why has it been localised to explosions with ignitable compounds. Munition storage, and fuel depots? They leave plumes, and clouds. Incendiary materials do. Check out American disasters this year, railway crash, the milking factory, fertiliser storage. All had mushroom clouds, and plumes.

If you're quoting the hypersonic hits like Lviv, or the recent one somewhere in Donetsk, something something cannot pronounce it, near Bakhmut somewhere. Neither had radiation readings. The mall didn't either. They would be screaming, until he was blue in the face calling for nuclear missiles to reign down on Russia, begging for the nukes.

Again the probability is almost zero, because it would get a huge response. We'd hear no end of it. Our ears would fall off. The press would incite WW3, because Zelenskyy would be screaming for a nuclear football.

No you. Nukes have a very distinctive signature and leave behind radiation.

I provided the examples of your assumption. You turn around and produce ignorance. Read it. It doesn't make you clever blaming me or turning this debate into how I need to research your claim. I cited 5 examples of detonations you're possibly presuming.

There is a supposed debate on the depleted shells, except a radiation reading was there prior to any detonation, despite of it being there afterwards, and it wasn't a tactical signature. There was two missile hits. If a nuke why double tap. Neither were the distinct blast

The signature of a distinctive flash, the flash being incredibly bright, and then the blast wave, shock wave, travelling outwards. Like at the mall. However there are other munitions that also cause a shock wave. Luke vacuum and thermobaric. It was incendiary. Because it hit flammable materials and munitions. Like it did at the railway factory fuel depot.

So where asshole, read that bullshit, so matter of fact. When. Where. How. You claimed. I asked. I didn't ask for nonsense.

If they're using nukes so brazenly why has it been localised to explosions with ignitable compounds. Munition storage, and fuel depots? They leave plumes, and clouds. Incendiary materials do. Check out American disasters this year, railway crash, the milking factory, fertiliser storage. All had mushroom clouds, and plumes.

No you. Nukes have a very distinctive signature and leave behind radiation.

I provided the examples of your assumption. You turn around and produce ignorance. Read it. It doesn't make you clever blaming me or turning this debate into how I need to research your claim. I cited 5 examples of detonations you're possibly presuming.

There is a supposed debate on the depleted shells, except a radiation reading was there prior to any detonation, despite of it being there afterwards, and it wasn't a tactical signature. There was two missile hits. If a nuke why double tap. Neither were the distinct blast

The signature of a distinctive flash, the flash being incredibly bright, and then the blast wave, shock wave, travelling outwards. Like at the mall. However there are other munitions that also cause a shock wave. Luke vaccum and thermobaric. It was incendiary. Because it hit flammable materials and munitions. Like it did at the railway factory fuel depot.

So where asshole, read that bullshit, so matter of fact. When. Where. How. You claimed. I asked. I didn't ask for nonsense.

If they're using nukes so brazenly why has it been localised to explosions with ignitable compounds. Munition storage, and fuel depots? They leave plumes, and clouds. Incendiary materials do. Check out American disasters this year, railway crash, the milking factory, fertiliser storage. All had mushroom clouds, and plumes.

No you. Nukes have a very distinctive signature and leave behind radiation.

I provided the examples of your assumption. You turn around and produce ignorance. Read it. It doesn't make you clever blaming me or turning this debate into how I need to research your claim. I cited 5 examples of detonations you're possibly presuming.

There is a supposed debate on the depleted shells, except a radiation reading was there prior to any detonation, despite of it being there afterwards, and it wasn't a tactical signature. There was two missile hits. If a nuke why double tap. Neither were the distinct blast

The signature of a distinctive flash, the flash being incredibly bright, and then the blast wave, shock wave, travelling outwards. Like at the mall. However there are other munitions that also cause a shock wave. It was incendiary. Because it hit flammable materials and munitions. Like it did at the railway factory fuel depot.

So where asshole, read that bullshit, so matter of fact. When. Where. How. You claimed. I asked. I didn't ask for nonsense.