5 ms·

It's time to disarm Russia. Edit: to be more clear: I can't believe that after 4 fucking years, a hostile nation is still permitted to wage war against a sover

It's time to disarm Russia. Edit: to be more clear: I can't believe that after 4 fucking years, a hostile nation is still permitted to wage war against a sovereign country.

kwanbix 9mo ago
How do you disarm a bully with the nuclear capacity to blow half of the world if not more?
- colechristensen 9mo ago
  Have the CIA turn enough insiders that one of them succeeds in assassinating Putin after a propaganda campaign raising up an opposition party ready to take over in an election/coup (mixture of both really). Have a weak and friendly leader installed that exchanges nukes for population support and possibly brakes up Russia into several smaller states. When the USSR broke up, Ukraine gave up its nukes in exchange for security guarantees (lot of good that has done them)
  - vablings 9mo ago
    You act like this is a stroll in the park. I would be willing to bet that this is essentially impossible
    - colechristensen 9mo ago
      Tell me you honestly think what is happening in America right now isn't the outcome of long planning by Russian intelligence (and likely other intelligence services). Their plan was to install a leader they had chosen and influenced. Also Epstein was probably also a spy, but more likely for Mossad. BIG COINCIDENCE he was so close with dear leader? Then tell me you think that doing things in Russia isn't possible.
      - vablings 9mo ago
        I also don't think it's working very well. Trump is an idiot and is set to be crushed in the midterms
  - wrqvrwvq 9mo ago
    Ukraine gave up more than nukes, it forfeited future membership in russian federation and nato. All the ridiculous bush-era bluster about nato membership for ukraine was in itself a (minor) violation of budapest memo. Reasonable observers don't think ukraine could have kept russia's nukes, firstly because they were russia's and not ukraine's, and secondly because a country with less than $100B economy (in shambles at the end of the ussr) can't afford to maintain nuclear surety. Additionally, it's very unclear whether any nukes would have been employed by now. Any nuclear attack on russia would result in total annihilation, and if ukraine could only strike a few high-value targets in exchange, it's not a winning weapon or even a deterrent. Finally the rest of the thesis above is likely to result in a wave of assassinations and sabotage across europe and a wider war that almost all parties have sought to avoid. It's a fever dream shared by angry dummies who are completely incapable of rational thought.
    - colechristensen 9mo ago
      >Reasonable observers don't think ukraine could have kept russia's nukes, firstly because they were russia's and not ukraine's, and secondly because a country with less than $100B economy (in shambles at the end of the ussr) can't afford to maintain nuclear surety. Additionally, it's very unclear whether any nukes would have been employed by now. Any nuclear attack on russia would result in total annihilation, and if ukraine could only strike a few high-value targets in exchange, it's not a winning weapon or even a deterrent. I'm not saying that at the time it wasn't the best course of action. Something other than what happened may have been possible and may have been an improvement, but it certainly would give any future nations considering giving up their nukes a significant pause. >Finally the rest of the thesis above is likely to result in a wave of assassinations and sabotage across europe and a wider war that almost all parties have sought to avoid. It's a fever dream shared by angry dummies who are completely incapable of rational thought. Again, this is the method that you would use to do it. If it were a good idea it would likely already be done. I'm not saying it's a good consequence-free course of action, that wasn't the question.
- toast0 9mo ago
  At the fall of the USSR, Coca-Cola should have bartered soda with Russia for the nukes. After all, the Cola Wars were heating up even as the Cold War looked to be ending, and Pepsi had a superior navy, bartered from the USSR with soda, and Coke could have used a nuclear deterent.
  - iberator 9mo ago
    Russia had originally licensed Coca Cola (or Pepsi) like a decade before the fall of the Soviet union! Stripping nation from nuclear deterrence is suicide: Ukraine did this in 1993. Both missiles, payloads and strategic bombers :/ They had it all... (Reverse engineering some command codes would be trivial as Ukrainians had top tier engineers in the entire Soviet Union).
transdev12 9mo ago
[dead]
non- 9mo ago
Permitted? What’s your plan to stop them without triggering Armageddon?
- tim333 9mo ago
  Back in the day Biden could have said we're protecting Ukraine - invading troops will be bombed by the USAF, rather than the actual - well if you only invade a little bit we won't do much. Now the west is mostly trying to bankrupt Russia which isn't going too badly. Oil's being kind of blocked and they've sold 71% of their gold to keep things going but that'll run out. https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-liquidates-71-of-its-gold-reserves-to-finance-war-effort-and-the-sell-off-isnt-over-15190 https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-liquidates-71-o...
trentnix 9mo ago
"permitted" What exactly do you think their response to attempted forcible disarmament would be?
- Barrin92 9mo ago
  frankly I think much less than people assume. Obviously nuclear weapons need to be taken seriously but we should have taken a much more muscular posture ages ago. There's this mental cold war image of these people grinding it out to the Armageddon but in reality the entire Russian leadership has their children living in the cities they're threatening. Putin has a daughter that manages an art gallery in Paris. Bullies back down when you punch back and that's the much better framing of modern day rogue actors.
colechristensen 9mo ago
>I can't believe that after 4 fucking years, a hostile nation is still permitted to wage war against a sovereign country. Then you're not paying attention. They have nukes, europe needs their gas, and the other major powers don't care about what they're doing to Ukraine. America doesn't have hegemony any longer and its leaders and people have been subjugated by foreign powers intelligence actions.
- ben_w 9mo ago
  > europe needs their gas Needed, past tense. The hold-outs today want it, they do not need it. There's still concern about the nukes though.
  - colechristensen 9mo ago
    ... European gas+LNG consumption has gone down by 2/3 and has largely been replaced by Americans and our president has openly threatened to steal territory from a NATO ally through force. It's not exactly like Europe is in a comfortable place energy-wise nor can it say it doesn't need energy from any current supplier.
quickthrowman 9mo ago
They haven’t been disarmed because they have nuclear weapons.
Veen 9mo ago
How do envision we might disarm an adversary with thousands of nuclear missiles, other than by preemptively nuking them and hoping they don't respond in time. Not really a plausible plan.
- option 9mo ago
  Russia can be collapsed just like USSR did. This time around we must demand that it fully gives up WMDs before any help or humanitarian aid reaches it.
dragonwriter 9mo ago
The Russo-Ukrainian war started with an invasion 12 years ago at the end of next month, not 4.
- chinathrow 9mo ago
  Absolutely right.
- pyuser583 9mo ago
  People go back and forth on this. When they are trying to sound "very smart", they'll insist "well actually, the Russians invaded in 2014!" But something fundamentally different happened in 2022. Remember, Zelensky was elected on a platform of negotiating with Russia for the dispossessed territory. That was acceptable 2014 - but certainly not now.
  - dragonwriter 9mo ago
    > People go back and forth on this. No, I think what you have is mostly different people saying different things, not people going back and forth. > But something fundamentally different happened in 2022. Yes, an escalation in the level of conflict from the Russian side intended to bring a rapid conclusion of the war happened in 2022.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

It's time to disarm Russia. Edit: to be more clear: I can't believe that after 4 fucking years, a hostile nation is still permitted to wage war against a sovereign country.

kwanbix 9mo ago

How do you disarm a bully with the nuclear capacity to blow half of the world if not more?

colechristensen 9mo ago
Have the CIA turn enough insiders that one of them succeeds in assassinating Putin after a propaganda campaign raising up an opposition party ready to take over in an election/coup (mixture of both really). Have a weak and friendly leader installed that exchanges nukes for population support and possibly brakes up Russia into several smaller states. When the USSR broke up, Ukraine gave up its nukes in exchange for security guarantees (lot of good that has done them)
- vablings 9mo ago
  You act like this is a stroll in the park. I would be willing to bet that this is essentially impossible
  - colechristensen 9mo ago
    Tell me you honestly think what is happening in America right now isn't the outcome of long planning by Russian intelligence (and likely other intelligence services). Their plan was to install a leader they had chosen and influenced. Also Epstein was probably also a spy, but more likely for Mossad. BIG COINCIDENCE he was so close with dear leader? Then tell me you think that doing things in Russia isn't possible.
    - vablings 9mo ago
      I also don't think it's working very well. Trump is an idiot and is set to be crushed in the midterms
- wrqvrwvq 9mo ago
  Ukraine gave up more than nukes, it forfeited future membership in russian federation and nato. All the ridiculous bush-era bluster about nato membership for ukraine was in itself a (minor) violation of budapest memo. Reasonable observers don't think ukraine could have kept russia's nukes, firstly because they were russia's and not ukraine's, and secondly because a country with less than $100B economy (in shambles at the end of the ussr) can't afford to maintain nuclear surety. Additionally, it's very unclear whether any nukes would have been employed by now. Any nuclear attack on russia would result in total annihilation, and if ukraine could only strike a few high-value targets in exchange, it's not a winning weapon or even a deterrent. Finally the rest of the thesis above is likely to result in a wave of assassinations and sabotage across europe and a wider war that almost all parties have sought to avoid. It's a fever dream shared by angry dummies who are completely incapable of rational thought.
  - colechristensen 9mo ago
    >Reasonable observers don't think ukraine could have kept russia's nukes, firstly because they were russia's and not ukraine's, and secondly because a country with less than $100B economy (in shambles at the end of the ussr) can't afford to maintain nuclear surety. Additionally, it's very unclear whether any nukes would have been employed by now. Any nuclear attack on russia would result in total annihilation, and if ukraine could only strike a few high-value targets in exchange, it's not a winning weapon or even a deterrent. I'm not saying that at the time it wasn't the best course of action. Something other than what happened may have been possible and may have been an improvement, but it certainly would give any future nations considering giving up their nukes a significant pause. >Finally the rest of the thesis above is likely to result in a wave of assassinations and sabotage across europe and a wider war that almost all parties have sought to avoid. It's a fever dream shared by angry dummies who are completely incapable of rational thought. Again, this is the method that you would use to do it. If it were a good idea it would likely already be done. I'm not saying it's a good consequence-free course of action, that wasn't the question.
toast0 9mo ago
At the fall of the USSR, Coca-Cola should have bartered soda with Russia for the nukes. After all, the Cola Wars were heating up even as the Cold War looked to be ending, and Pepsi had a superior navy, bartered from the USSR with soda, and Coke could have used a nuclear deterent.
- iberator 9mo ago
  Russia had originally licensed Coca Cola (or Pepsi) like a decade before the fall of the Soviet union! Stripping nation from nuclear deterrence is suicide: Ukraine did this in 1993. Both missiles, payloads and strategic bombers :/ They had it all... (Reverse engineering some command codes would be trivial as Ukrainians had top tier engineers in the entire Soviet Union).

transdev12 9mo ago

[dead]

non- 9mo ago

Permitted? What’s your plan to stop them without triggering Armageddon?

tim333 9mo ago
Back in the day Biden could have said we're protecting Ukraine - invading troops will be bombed by the USAF, rather than the actual - well if you only invade a little bit we won't do much. Now the west is mostly trying to bankrupt Russia which isn't going too badly. Oil's being kind of blocked and they've sold 71% of their gold to keep things going but that'll run out. https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-liquidates-71-of-its-gold-reserves-to-finance-war-effort-and-the-sell-off-isnt-over-15190 https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-liquidates-71-o...

trentnix 9mo ago

"permitted" What exactly do you think their response to attempted forcible disarmament would be?

Barrin92 9mo ago
frankly I think much less than people assume. Obviously nuclear weapons need to be taken seriously but we should have taken a much more muscular posture ages ago. There's this mental cold war image of these people grinding it out to the Armageddon but in reality the entire Russian leadership has their children living in the cities they're threatening. Putin has a daughter that manages an art gallery in Paris. Bullies back down when you punch back and that's the much better framing of modern day rogue actors.

colechristensen 9mo ago

>I can't believe that after 4 fucking years, a hostile nation is still permitted to wage war against a sovereign country. Then you're not paying attention. They have nukes, europe needs their gas, and the other major powers don't care about what they're doing to Ukraine. America doesn't have hegemony any longer and its leaders and people have been subjugated by foreign powers intelligence actions.

ben_w 9mo ago
> europe needs their gas Needed, past tense. The hold-outs today want it, they do not need it. There's still concern about the nukes though.
- colechristensen 9mo ago
  ... European gas+LNG consumption has gone down by 2/3 and has largely been replaced by Americans and our president has openly threatened to steal territory from a NATO ally through force. It's not exactly like Europe is in a comfortable place energy-wise nor can it say it doesn't need energy from any current supplier.

quickthrowman 9mo ago

They haven’t been disarmed because they have nuclear weapons.

Veen 9mo ago

How do envision we might disarm an adversary with thousands of nuclear missiles, other than by preemptively nuking them and hoping they don't respond in time. Not really a plausible plan.

option 9mo ago
Russia can be collapsed just like USSR did. This time around we must demand that it fully gives up WMDs before any help or humanitarian aid reaches it.

dragonwriter 9mo ago

The Russo-Ukrainian war started with an invasion 12 years ago at the end of next month, not 4.

chinathrow 9mo ago
Absolutely right.
pyuser583 9mo ago
People go back and forth on this. When they are trying to sound "very smart", they'll insist "well actually, the Russians invaded in 2014!" But something fundamentally different happened in 2022. Remember, Zelensky was elected on a platform of negotiating with Russia for the dispossessed territory. That was acceptable 2014 - but certainly not now.
- dragonwriter 9mo ago
  > People go back and forth on this. No, I think what you have is mostly different people saying different things, not people going back and forth. > But something fundamentally different happened in 2022. Yes, an escalation in the level of conflict from the Russian side intended to bring a rapid conclusion of the war happened in 2022.

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]