17 ms·
If they could conquer Ukraine and effectively quell unrest, the Federation could be said to have come out stronger. That is very unlikely though, with the Ukrai
by lolc 4y ago
If they could conquer Ukraine and effectively quell unrest, the Federation could be said to have come out stronger. That is very unlikely though, with the Ukrainian army getting effective support.
If they manage to hold the land bridge to Krim and negotiate a cease-fire, it can be argued that they had limited success in their objectives. But at a huge economic and humanitarian cost.
And in a nuclear war, nobody wins. So stronger could only be used in relative terms.
- farseer 4y agoWould the West intervene in a nuclear war limited to Ukrainian territory?
- tough 4y agoYou know radioactivity residues travel fast, and to any direction right?
- vincnetas 4y agoIn such case i would open NATO armoury for Ukrainians and gift them all the shiny toys they are willing to take.
- lolc 4y agoI wonder what that scenario would bring the Russian army. Tactical nukes against military targets are not that much more effective than a bunch of conventional missiles. Nuking the population would be hard to justify in their narrative. On the other side, I don't know who would intervene. The risk of further escalation might lead to the acceptance of nuclear genocide limited to Ukraine. And Ukrainian capitulation would be swift if Russia demonstrated they were willing to attack the population with nuclear bombs. The whole scenario is difficult to imagine. The last time civilians got nuked is 77 years ago. And the Japanese people had nobody who could have retaliated for them.
- _ph_ 4y agoI would assume so. Probably not with a nuclear answer, but some restricted air strikes against Russian troops inside Ukrainian territory.
- sofixa 4y ago> If they could conquer Ukraine and effectively quell unrest, the Federation could be said to have come out stronger Even that is doubtful. They have lost tens of thousands of their best troops, tons of expensive equipment, and destroyed their economy short (sanctions and blackmail) and long term (nobody would trust them again as a reliable supplier, so their exports of raw materials economy will suffer).
- lolc 4y agoInternational trade keeps going. Just because some economies have curbed trading with Russia does not mean they've run out of trading partners. It is doubtful the sanctions would remain in place for long after a capitulation of Ukraine. Losing troops and military equipment is insignificant in the long term. Both have to be replaced regularly anyway. That is no loss unless one counts the pollution and the humanitarian cost. And we know the Russian government doesn't consider those costs. From my point of view, if they could pull it off, the Russian Federation would be stronger having annexed Ukraine. Not that I want to see that scenario, or think it likely.
- The_Colonel 4y ago> It is doubtful the sanctions would remain in place for long after a capitulation of Ukraine. I doubt that. The sanctions from 2014 have remained in place even during the "quiet" years.
- lolc 4y agoMaybe that was because those sanctions didn't hurt much?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]