132
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
132 points (94.6% liked)
politics
19089 readers
3992 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I still don't think this is gonna be a nuclear conflict. Maybe I am too much of an optimistic (I dunno how, the world is fucking burning), but I still think the Russian officers that would actually push the button wouldn't do it. A smoking husk of Ukraine doesn't get them much imo.
Ukraine's big enough you could drop several nukes on it and there'd still be plenty of Ukraine left.
I mean, so is Japan.
Don't take my word for it. See a map.
And what do you know, there's plenty of Japan left.
Oh. You're speaking literally.
My point was that Japan surrendered.
But come to think of it, the nuclear landscape was very different back then.
Cold War ICMBs can't hit Ukraine. They were designed to reach the US and some of them Western Europe, not what was at the time Soviet Union.
It's one of the reasons Ukraine gave up its nuclear missiles, they were useless as a deterrent against Russia.
Oh really? Have any sources? That is fascinating. I always wondered why anyone would sign the Budapest agreement. Or whatever it was called.
I think most of it is on Wikipedia. Ukraine really tried to hang on to the nukes but iirc after several years they couldn't make them work because they didn't have the command codes.
Even if they had been able to break the codes they'd have had their work cut out for them putting them back into working order, performing maintenance, aiming and launching them etc.
And after they managed all they'd have to deal with the fact these are ICMBs, they have a minimum range of 5000km. The only part of Russia they could've hit was Siberia.
Eventually they figured it's worth trading a bunch of useless weapons for a good deal with the West – who were the most interested in decomissioning those weapons because like I said they were aimed at them not at Russia.
Very interesting thank you. I'll go read the wiki on it
I share your optimism but not because I put my faith in the guys (not) pushing the button. Putin at his core and in terms of where he's coming from is a small time FSB thug who made it too big for his own good. Perpetualizing corruption to keep himself in power and amassing enormous wealth at the cost of his people was fun for about one and a half decades. What does a kid do when it gets bored of its newest toy? It demands more of course. There is no nuclear option because little Vladimir knows at that point his days of demanding more will be counted. No more backing from big brother Xi. And all the reason for NATO to actually step in.
Some draw the analogy that you never know what a cornered Pitbull is gonna do but I don't see that being applicable. His recent job reassignments show that he does not feel safe in his position as de-facto dictator anymore. He is much more worried for his domestic survival right now than anything going down on the international stage. He can't nuke his own mutineers thus he needs to keep everyone in rotation so their levels of influence don't get out of hand.
I can't tell you what endgame there is left for Vladolf Putler. The only way onward is to keep the war going, which probably will require a full transition to a wartime economy sooner than later, but he probably doesn't want that toll on the Russian people. Nuclear weapons would mean the opposite of keeping the war of attrition going and he knows that.