Russia Has 'Every Right' to Attack NATO Targets Now: Retired US Colonel (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago

And once Russia hits a NATO country trolls like you will start crying how Russia started a completely unprovoked war against a peaceful defensive alliance.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[+] erin@social.sidh.bzh -11 points 3 weeks ago

I will not cry because when it will happen, their are only 2 outcomes:

Russia is demilitarize so fast by NATO countries that the country will not be able to do much (that outcome has even been told by Putin himself in 2023 as the reason Russia has no chance against NATO)
Both countries use their nuke and we will be all dead in a beautiful bang :)

in both outcome Russia loose

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 4 child comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 weeks ago

The actual outcome is going to be that the US will leave Europe to hang, and NATO will collapse. The fact that you don't get that is absolutely hilarious. If you think that the Oligarchs in US are going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Europe you should really get your head checked.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[+] erin@social.sidh.bzh -9 points 3 weeks ago

you forget that France and UK both have Nuke too... For France 1 launch from a submarine lead to 160 nuke warhead on Russia in case of war...

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 weeks ago

What France and UK don't have is a delivery system that Russia has. Meanwhile, if France or UK tried to lob a nuke at Russia then they'd simply cease to exist within 20 minutes.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[+] erin@social.sidh.bzh -6 points 3 weeks ago

delivery system? France can send Nuke from ICBM, submarine (from all over the world) and Rafale (which can take off from French aircraft carrier which also mean nuke can be send from all over the world...). De Gaulle built the France defense without US because he though that the next French war would be against US not Russia and all president after him kept that strategic independence from US for the same reason... Russia-French friendship and French distrust in US was still strong until Russia invaded Crimea leading to the cancellation of Mistral ships and the beginning of tension between both countries.

So Yes, if a Nuclear War start between Russia and France, as a said, both countries would be vitrified and we will be all dead...

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago

A delivery system that cannot be intercepted. ICBMs are old tech, and Russia has repeatedly demonstrated the ability to intercept missiles. France or UK simply lack the arsenal wipe out all of Russia, while Russia very much could complete wipe out either country in case of a nuclear war.

However, my original point was that Russia can use a non nuclear Oreshnik system to hit UK or France, and if the US fails to intervene then it will be the end of NATO. It's that simple.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[+] erin@social.sidh.bzh -6 points 3 weeks ago

you know that EU has an equivalent of NATO article 5:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/sede/dv/sede200612mutualdefsolidarityclauses_/sede200612mutualdefsolidarityclauses_en.pdf

and which countries are about to join EU? Ukraine and Moldova. So even without US, nuke have a good chance to rain all over the old continent...

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You know that EU has no actual military to speak of?

Russia outproduces all of the west militarily, and EU is only a small fraction of NATO spending https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html

Here's what FT had to say about the UK military:

Starmer has commissioned a strategic defence review, calling in a host of experts led by Lord George Robertson, the former Nato secretary-general. It’s a necessary start, but an inadequate one. The hallowed tradition of such reviews is that they pretend to reconcile grandiose ambitions with economic austerity. The result is that Britain has a Potemkin village military retaining the emblems of a pocket superpower, but without the necessary hard capabilities. The present disordered world does not leave room for such tricks.

Similarly, no part of German military is ready for war https://brusselssignal.eu/2024/03/no-part-of-german-military-ready-for-war-armed-forces-official-warns/

Europe is absolutely nothing without the US. It's just a bunch of chihuahuas yapping.

Also, It's funny that you should mention Ukraine since it is the biggest and most experienced army in Europe right now. This army is now collapsing trying to fight Russia according to BBC.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[+] erin@social.sidh.bzh -7 points 3 weeks ago

in 2023 Russia military spending was $84bn, even without US, EU spending is bigger (even French+UK alone is bigger)... and because of EU article, as I said it has a big chance to be a nuclear war and on nuclear war the important part is Air Defense saturation... As I said each submarine can send 160 nuke... Even if Russia can intercept 159 warhead (which is discutable since Russia was not even capable of intercepting an old URSS drone that hitted a building at Moscow), if those 160 warhead target moscow, 1 nuke succeeding is enough to deal huge damage on the city. Russia will replicate and it's over for EU...

But that's only submarines nuclear capability. France is a big country, not as big as Russia, but big nonetheless. France kept a lot of it's historic territories from when the country was a colonial empire: Guyana and in south america, Caraibes in central america, Saint-Pierre de Miquelon in North America (both very close to USA, very dangerous to send nuke there), Mayotte and Reunion in Africa, Wallis and Futuna and French Polynesia in the Pacific (not that far away from China, sending nuke there from Russia can be dangerous too...).

thos territories also have nuclear capabilities.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 13 points 3 weeks ago

Russia has a state owned military industry, and as all the western media now openly admits, Russia is outproducing all of NATO militarily. These are just basic facts of the situation. If an all out nuclear war happens, then we likely all die. So, the question for the geniuses living in Europe is if they'll want to all die in response to a conventional strike by Russia. Clearly you haven't thought this through.

permalink
fedilink
source
parent
hideshow 2 child comments

[+] erin@social.sidh.bzh -8 points 3 weeks ago

Have you heard Macron speech? No more red line after the IRBM use on Ukraine... France has fought and won more war in History than any other country on the planet. It's a country of Warmonger :). Don't underestimate French aggressive soul, Even after Hitler won, he failed to break the country war eager needs :). The French nuclear doctrine reflect that. It's the only warning shot doctrine: Even if France is not threaten, but it feels threaten, the nuclear doctrine says to use a small nuke on the country France think is a threaten to ask it to calm down before bigger nuke are used.

So to answer your question, yes is very well prepare to be the one that will enter the History as the one who triggered the nuclear war...