Seems like a bit of a waste to launch an intercontinental missile at a country next door, on the same continent. Isn't Russia supposed to have plenty of short and mid range ballistic missiles? I guess they must be running low.

I was under the impression that ICBMs weren't all that great for conventional warheads. Their payload capacity isn't enormous and their accuracy tends to be relatively low- which matters not a jot if you're firing nukes (which do a lot of bang per kilo, and where a few hundred metres either way isn't likely to be critical), but not so great for dropping normal munitions.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 weeks ago (12 children)

I suspect the use of an RS-26 was meant to serve as a provocation/response to the recent ATACMs strikes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (11 children)

I posted elsewhere about the rumour Russia was going to fire an RS26.

I got called a liar and warmonger.

Well, my next prediction remains the same: Russia WILL eventually use nukes. Because there will come a moment of "use it or lose it", and Russia prefers a destroyed world over an intact one without Russia.

[–] Barbarian 9 points 3 weeks ago

Russia prefers a destroyed world over an intact one without Russia.

That much is true, but none of this is existential. If the Russian military packs up and heads home, Russia continues to exist. They don't want to do that ofc, but obviously Russia prefers an intact world with Russia compared to a destroyed world.

load more comments (10 replies)

load more comments (17 replies)