this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
202 points (98.6% liked)

World News

39161 readers
1786 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Aurenkin 112 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Absolute strategic genius from Russia here. They achieved some pretty impressive goals

  • massive losses (as usual)
  • minor tactical gains which are currently being wiped out.

And the big one

  • changing US policy to now allow Ukraine to strike Russian territory.

I'm truly in awe.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You see by making the US allow Ukraine to strike more targets they will use more munitions. It's a war of attrition, there are clearly more potential targets than weapons that the west can build./s

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The scary thing is, I could imagine someone writing this text, but unironic...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

As I was writing it I was sure it was so outrageous that nobody could take it seriously, then after I read it I decided it needed a tag, because some people are that deranged.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Trading space and lives for time is an established Russian tactic

[–] PrincessLeiasCat 9 points 5 months ago

They’re the gift that keeps on giving.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Don’t forget that they have also been repurposing much of their navy as their new immobile submarine fleet.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (5 children)

The only real question left in this war is: if Putin orders a nuclear strike, will he be obeyed?

[–] Scubus 21 points 5 months ago (2 children)

He won't and probably not. The only way he will order a nuclear strike is if Russia is about to be dissolved or if he is about to be overthrown. Unless Russians financial situation gets a LOT worse, there is no risk of Russia dissolving, as Ukraine is not seeking to invade. Putin will not be overthrown unless he dramatically steps up conscription and starts targeting oligarchs families as conscription possibilities. He knows that to do so would be suicide.

In either scenario, once it has reached that point Putin will have pissed off literally every single person that matters and they would have no reason to listen to him.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Regarding Ukraine not seeking to invade Russia. Almost NOBODY seeks to invade Russia, because Russia has nothing that anyone wants that can't be obtained much more easily and cheaply by simply buying it. Furthermore, were one to invade Russia, you then become responsible for what happens in the epitome of shithole state.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Plus, the more the world bends to that threat, the more every other country will pursue nuclear weapons. Giving too wide a berth to Russia is more dangerous for nuclear proliferation than bowing to their threats.

[–] RidgeDweller 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

One follow up question would be: are Russia's nukes maintained well enough to be functional?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago

Sadly even if they're not, it's quantity over quality....just like the rest of the whole military there.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Unlikely. There's kind of only two hard-and-fast rules for nuclear war:

  • Never strike first.
  • Never strike a non-nuclear enemy.
[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (2 children)

If Russia were to strike Ukraine with a nuclear bomb, first and foremost that puts every nation on a knife's edge globally... someone else with an itchy trigger finger could launch against Russia in the confusing hours afterwards. Next up, the PRC and India would likely abandoned Russia as waves of condemnation would flood the global media. Finally, the whole goal of the war is to take Ukraine, not to make it uninhabitable... why nuke what you want to own?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

"if I can't have it, no one can!"

smashes all the toys before going home

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nukes don't have to leave behind radiation and make an area uninhabitable anymore. Those were the "Dirty" fission bombs. Fusion bombs are considered more clean.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Yeah, more clean but not completely... this is not to mention the amount of damage caused by the bomb. Striking Kiev or another city would effectively decimate Ukraine's infrastructure and economy for decades. If the goal of the war is to subjugate, you don't want to be in the hook for all those repairs. A nuke on any of Ukraine's cities would make that dam break last year look like nothing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

FYI the United States has always maintained a first-strike policy as official nuclear doctrine. There is no language restricting nuclear weapons to just nuclear retaliation.

https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Spotlight/2022/NDS/NUCLEAR%20STRATEGY%20AND%20POLICY%20-%20NPR%20Factsheet.pdf

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

There's a lot of wealthy oligarchs living in luxury who wouldn't want their lifestyles threatened/ended by nuclear war. Similarly, Putins chain of command can't be poor and dumb. They also have comparable luxury and lifestyles, and are smart enough to understand that nuclear war most probably would end everything they have. Putin himself is an umpteen billionaire.

Just sayin', these people that control the nukes have the most to lose if they use 'em.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

As much as Putin is self-centered, he does have grandchildren and he probably cares about a legacy, which makes me a little more assured that he won't do something that insane.