4 ms·

Are you forgetting who invaded whom here? What did the US have to do with any of that?

by amanaplanacanal 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
Also who fired the nuclear-class missile…
- ImJamal 2y ago
  Why does it matter if it is "nuclear-class"? Were there any actual nukes? No. Then who cares?
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Why does it matter if it is "nuclear-class"? Were there any actual nukes? No. Then who cares? Because you don’t know it’s not nuclear tipped until it lands. A nuclear-capable missile streaking West out of Russia looks identical to a first strike on early warning radars.
    - ImJamal 2y ago
      Russia could bring a tactical nuke and use that with no warning. If they want to nuke Ukraine they can do it without "nuclear class" missiles.
- roenxi 2y ago
  If they didn't, people would be talking about how their red lines are bluffs. The Russians are being given two options by the US - surrender or escalate. They aren't going to surrender. I'm not sure what people expect to happen but given the strategic madness out of the west we're probably doing well if we get all the way through this without London being targeted. Whoever thought it was a good idea to try and turn Iraq 2 into WW3 really should be relieved of their power to make decisions. Russia was behaving well within international norms established by the US's actions until the west got involved in Ukraine. Now we've seen orders of magnitude more casualties for nothing, and the risk of nuclear war are off the hitherto plotted charts.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    > we're probably doing well if we get all the way through this without London being targeted. Putin might be stupid, but you think too lowly of him. You attack population centers after mutually assured destruction. There is no reason to escalate by creating a humanitarian crisis if you're not already prepared to deal with the consequences (a-la Nagasaki/Hiroshima). The first attacks are tactical and therefore negligible in civilian damage and controversial to discuss. They will certainly be condemned globally, but no one smart enough to stockpile tactical nukes is going to use it somewhere with reprehensible civilian harm. It is both more valuable, smarter, and less costly to deploy it tactically against enemy installations or materiel. If London is "targeted" then Russia is going to find out just how fucking bad Europe hates them. The nuclear dance is about riding the threshold of plausible escalation without revealing desperation and giving your enemies casus belli.
    - roenxi 2y ago
      The Russians have figured out that the Europeans hate them, that is why we're all on day >1,000 of the current war and they're firming up relations with Asian powers in a way that is a net loss to the rest of us. > You attack population centers after mutually assured destruction. There have already been what are basically missiles targeting Moscow, any compunction about targeting Russia itself have been overcome and those storm shadows the other day were a pretty inflammatory gambit. It isn't there yet, but extrapolate forward 12 months and I think some sort of strike on the UK is on the cards. May as well be London. The British aren't going to stop until something stops them, if they don't see a red line at hitting Russia proper then they probably don't see any at all anywhere. And Russia has been pretty clear through their targeting in Ukraine that they are happy to go for civilian infrastructure. Fingers crossed they run out of money or steam before the situation gets much worse, I suppose.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > British aren't going to stop until something stops them Yup. That’s why London folded after Hitler’s blitz. Putin is a weak man. His hold on power depends on this war. He’s smarter than this comment because he knows a strike on London of any kind would result in Europe arming Ukraine for a kill versus the current strategy of keeping a low summer.
aphantastic 2y ago
Nothing, if you assume Putins decisions are made in a vacuum. If on the other hand you grant that he might observe the leaders of world super powers, you’ll notice a striking connection between the change of power in America and the launch of his invasion of Ukraine. And of course you can assume all of Netenyahoo’s decisions are made in a vacuum too, or you can open your eyes.

Are you forgetting who invaded whom here? What did the US have to do with any of that?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

Also who fired the nuclear-class missile…

ImJamal 2y ago
Why does it matter if it is "nuclear-class"? Were there any actual nukes? No. Then who cares?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Why does it matter if it is "nuclear-class"? Were there any actual nukes? No. Then who cares? Because you don’t know it’s not nuclear tipped until it lands. A nuclear-capable missile streaking West out of Russia looks identical to a first strike on early warning radars.
  - ImJamal 2y ago
    Russia could bring a tactical nuke and use that with no warning. If they want to nuke Ukraine they can do it without "nuclear class" missiles.
roenxi 2y ago
If they didn't, people would be talking about how their red lines are bluffs. The Russians are being given two options by the US - surrender or escalate. They aren't going to surrender. I'm not sure what people expect to happen but given the strategic madness out of the west we're probably doing well if we get all the way through this without London being targeted. Whoever thought it was a good idea to try and turn Iraq 2 into WW3 really should be relieved of their power to make decisions. Russia was behaving well within international norms established by the US's actions until the west got involved in Ukraine. Now we've seen orders of magnitude more casualties for nothing, and the risk of nuclear war are off the hitherto plotted charts.
- talldayo 2y ago
  > we're probably doing well if we get all the way through this without London being targeted. Putin might be stupid, but you think too lowly of him. You attack population centers after mutually assured destruction. There is no reason to escalate by creating a humanitarian crisis if you're not already prepared to deal with the consequences (a-la Nagasaki/Hiroshima). The first attacks are tactical and therefore negligible in civilian damage and controversial to discuss. They will certainly be condemned globally, but no one smart enough to stockpile tactical nukes is going to use it somewhere with reprehensible civilian harm. It is both more valuable, smarter, and less costly to deploy it tactically against enemy installations or materiel. If London is "targeted" then Russia is going to find out just how fucking bad Europe hates them. The nuclear dance is about riding the threshold of plausible escalation without revealing desperation and giving your enemies casus belli.
  - roenxi 2y ago
    The Russians have figured out that the Europeans hate them, that is why we're all on day >1,000 of the current war and they're firming up relations with Asian powers in a way that is a net loss to the rest of us. > You attack population centers after mutually assured destruction. There have already been what are basically missiles targeting Moscow, any compunction about targeting Russia itself have been overcome and those storm shadows the other day were a pretty inflammatory gambit. It isn't there yet, but extrapolate forward 12 months and I think some sort of strike on the UK is on the cards. May as well be London. The British aren't going to stop until something stops them, if they don't see a red line at hitting Russia proper then they probably don't see any at all anywhere. And Russia has been pretty clear through their targeting in Ukraine that they are happy to go for civilian infrastructure. Fingers crossed they run out of money or steam before the situation gets much worse, I suppose.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > British aren't going to stop until something stops them Yup. That’s why London folded after Hitler’s blitz. Putin is a weak man. His hold on power depends on this war. He’s smarter than this comment because he knows a strike on London of any kind would result in Europe arming Ukraine for a kill versus the current strategy of keeping a low summer.

aphantastic 2y ago

Nothing, if you assume Putins decisions are made in a vacuum. If on the other hand you grant that he might observe the leaders of world super powers, you’ll notice a striking connection between the change of power in America and the launch of his invasion of Ukraine. And of course you can assume all of Netenyahoo’s decisions are made in a vacuum too, or you can open your eyes.