Anonymous wrote:doesn't Putin have any friends that will tell him to give it up? that he has absolutely nothing to fear from the west if he will just stop this stupid war? that there is nothing we would like more than to go back to peace? is it his ego? or does he really believe that we are so war like that we will continue this if he stops?
Anonymous wrote:doesn't Putin have any friends that will tell him to give it up? that he has absolutely nothing to fear from the west if he will just stop this stupid war? that there is nothing we would like more than to go back to peace? is it his ego? or does he really believe that we are so war like that we will continue this if he stops?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Still no national address! Was supposed to be morning far eastern time; it’s now 1 pm there
They said between 9 and 10 am, it’s 7 am there now (in Moscow).
Anonymous wrote:Still no national address! Was supposed to be morning far eastern time; it’s now 1 pm there
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is spiraling out of control. Russia is losing and is now pushing for a farcical referendum for 'independence'. If it passes, Putin will then claim that NATO weapons are being used to attack Russia soil directly, which gives him pretexts to unleash the full might of the military, or worse yet, a reason to start using nukes because NATO is 'attacking' Russian soil. It is a joke of course, but if the referendum passes it will lead to extremely dangerous brinkmanship that really could escalate to nukes.
Isn’t unleashing the nukes like the ultimate step? Why does it need a pretext. Nobody will care for it anyway.
He might be bluffing though
Russia would use tactical nukes. It doesn’t have to be a warhead that’d decimate the entire planet.
Ugh. This 1960s fear mongering of nukes.
There have been over 3000 nuclear detonations that we know of since WW2.
Some estimates at 2-3x that many.
1) Russia may have a lot of warheads - very, very detonators that work. They have to be replaced every 3-5 years and are super expensive, precise engineering. Russia did not maintain their tanks; which have a much higher probability of it being used than a nuke. Do the math.
2) nuclear weapons are incendiary bombs. They work very well against wood or things that burn. They do not do much beyond blast radius against modern buildings.
3) Russia knows they will be absolutely, positively erased from the earth by the west who has a very effective and operational nuclear arsenal. The west may use a third of their available nukes and exterminate all Russians slowly and conventionally. Or just let them do it themselves with what is left of their “country”.
What if Putin doesn’t care? He has his bunker… and will stick it to the west??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is spiraling out of control. Russia is losing and is now pushing for a farcical referendum for 'independence'. If it passes, Putin will then claim that NATO weapons are being used to attack Russia soil directly, which gives him pretexts to unleash the full might of the military, or worse yet, a reason to start using nukes because NATO is 'attacking' Russian soil. It is a joke of course, but if the referendum passes it will lead to extremely dangerous brinkmanship that really could escalate to nukes.
Isn’t unleashing the nukes like the ultimate step? Why does it need a pretext. Nobody will care for it anyway.
He might be bluffing though
Russia would use tactical nukes. It doesn’t have to be a warhead that’d decimate the entire planet.
Ugh. This 1960s fear mongering of nukes.
There have been over 3000 nuclear detonations that we know of since WW2.
Some estimates at 2-3x that many.
1) Russia may have a lot of warheads - very, very detonators that work. They have to be replaced every 3-5 years and are super expensive, precise engineering. Russia did not maintain their tanks; which have a much higher probability of it being used than a nuke. Do the math.
2) nuclear weapons are incendiary bombs. They work very well against wood or things that burn. They do not do much beyond blast radius against modern buildings.
3) Russia knows they will be absolutely, positively erased from the earth by the west who has a very effective and operational nuclear arsenal. The west may use a third of their available nukes and exterminate all Russians slowly and conventionally. Or just let them do it themselves with what is left of their “country”.
What if Putin doesn’t care? He has his bunker… and will stick it to the west??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is spiraling out of control. Russia is losing and is now pushing for a farcical referendum for 'independence'. If it passes, Putin will then claim that NATO weapons are being used to attack Russia soil directly, which gives him pretexts to unleash the full might of the military, or worse yet, a reason to start using nukes because NATO is 'attacking' Russian soil. It is a joke of course, but if the referendum passes it will lead to extremely dangerous brinkmanship that really could escalate to nukes.
Isn’t unleashing the nukes like the ultimate step? Why does it need a pretext. Nobody will care for it anyway.
He might be bluffing though
Russia would use tactical nukes. It doesn’t have to be a warhead that’d decimate the entire planet.
Ugh. This 1960s fear mongering of nukes.
There have been over 3000 nuclear detonations that we know of since WW2.
Some estimates at 2-3x that many.
1) Russia may have a lot of warheads - very, very detonators that work. They have to be replaced every 3-5 years and are super expensive, precise engineering. Russia did not maintain their tanks; which have a much higher probability of it being used than a nuke. Do the math.
2) nuclear weapons are incendiary bombs. They work very well against wood or things that burn. They do not do much beyond blast radius against modern buildings.
3) Russia knows they will be absolutely, positively erased from the earth by the west who has a very effective and operational nuclear arsenal. The west may use a third of their available nukes and exterminate all Russians slowly and conventionally. Or just let them do it themselves with what is left of their “country”.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is spiraling out of control. Russia is losing and is now pushing for a farcical referendum for 'independence'. If it passes, Putin will then claim that NATO weapons are being used to attack Russia soil directly, which gives him pretexts to unleash the full might of the military, or worse yet, a reason to start using nukes because NATO is 'attacking' Russian soil. It is a joke of course, but if the referendum passes it will lead to extremely dangerous brinkmanship that really could escalate to nukes.
Isn’t unleashing the nukes like the ultimate step? Why does it need a pretext. Nobody will care for it anyway.
He might be bluffing though
Russia would use tactical nukes. It doesn’t have to be a warhead that’d decimate the entire planet.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is spiraling out of control. Russia is losing and is now pushing for a farcical referendum for 'independence'. If it passes, Putin will then claim that NATO weapons are being used to attack Russia soil directly, which gives him pretexts to unleash the full might of the military, or worse yet, a reason to start using nukes because NATO is 'attacking' Russian soil. It is a joke of course, but if the referendum passes it will lead to extremely dangerous brinkmanship that really could escalate to nukes.
Isn’t unleashing the nukes like the ultimate step? Why does it need a pretext. Nobody will care for it anyway.
He might be bluffing though
Russia would use tactical nukes. It doesn’t have to be a warhead that’d decimate the entire planet.
Still bad for both Russia and Europe because radiation?
Not even mentioning Ukraine - nobody cares unfortunately
Im sure Russia would drop leaflets like we did in Japan giving everybody time to evacuate.
They probably feel like what Harry Truman said. “It’s either us or them to die…I choose them”
Russia is much closer to Europe/Ukraine than Japan is from the US
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is spiraling out of control. Russia is losing and is now pushing for a farcical referendum for 'independence'. If it passes, Putin will then claim that NATO weapons are being used to attack Russia soil directly, which gives him pretexts to unleash the full might of the military, or worse yet, a reason to start using nukes because NATO is 'attacking' Russian soil. It is a joke of course, but if the referendum passes it will lead to extremely dangerous brinkmanship that really could escalate to nukes.
Isn’t unleashing the nukes like the ultimate step? Why does it need a pretext. Nobody will care for it anyway.
He might be bluffing though
Russia would use tactical nukes. It doesn’t have to be a warhead that’d decimate the entire planet.
Still bad for both Russia and Europe because radiation?
Not even mentioning Ukraine - nobody cares unfortunately
Im sure Russia would drop leaflets like we did in Japan giving everybody time to evacuate.
They probably feel like what Harry Truman said. “It’s either us or them to die…I choose them”