3 ms·
It would be very hard to pull off tho. Seeing as our neighbors would supply intel and equipment, while they have to cross the baltic sea in plain view. I mean t
by INTPenis 4y ago
It would be very hard to pull off tho. Seeing as our neighbors would supply intel and equipment, while they have to cross the baltic sea in plain view. I mean they can barely take southern Ukraine.
- red-iron-pine 4y agoThe only thing that really matters about Kaliningrad is the (very probable) nukes that are there.
- INTPenis 4y agoYeah but then it's game over. I used to worry about nukes, especially with all the suicidal people in the world, but then I realized that it's not worth worrying about because there's no way out. Anyone launches a nuke and it's game over, MAD.
- tpmx 4y agoIt's not game over for the world if e.g. Russia nukes some remote part of Sweden/Gotland with a low yield bomb tomorrow.
- INTPenis 4y agoSo which propaganda should we believe? The Gotland story that all pro-NATO people use today, or the MAD story from the cold war?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tpmx 4y agoPerhaps not the one that the Russians and Swedish extreme leftists are peddling.
- philistine 4y agoRealistically, if Russia were to use nuclear weapons, they would completely lose Indian and Chinese support, the last two nuclear powers currently playing nice with them. So long as something debilitating is the consequence of nuclear weapons, Russia will abstain.
- bee_rider 4y agoOf course, I was just kidding, the buildup would be easily spotted and it would be an, uh, unpleasant environment their boats I think.
- tpmx 4y agoIt would be trivial to send an Iskander missile to Gotland to derail the NATO application.
- mongol 4y agoYou are unfortunately right. But most people don't realize that.