this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2024
74 points (93.0% liked)

World News

38978 readers
2909 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
 

Russian officials have threatened that a possible decision by the West to allow Kyiv to use donated weapons to strike deeper into Russian territory would result in a major escalation of its war against Ukraine that could include the use of nuclear weapons.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, warned on September 14 that Kyiv could be turned into a "gray melted spot" if restrictions against Ukraine's use of Western weapons were loosened.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Medvedev found keys for the booze cabinet again? They seem to happily forget the fact that Moscow is well within reach of multiple Nato countries by now. Obviously a ton of things need to change before anyone with a gun is standing on a red square, but Finland, Sweden, Estonia and Poland (among others) are quite capable of hitting the Kreml (in theory, and in practise if needed) with fighter jets in less than 30 minutes. Additionally their ports opening to gulf of Finland are in reach of both Finns and Estonians with traditional artillely, and at least we in Finland are pretty capable and accurate with our hardware.

So, even if they find some old soviet relic still functional, Nato has multiple options to level multiple cities at Russia before their missile hits the ground. Nuclear attack against Ukraine would of course be a humongous tragedy with terrible price on civil casualties, but I'm pretty confident that it would be the last thing the Russia we currently know would do as a country.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Armchair speculation here, I do not think NATO would respond with nukes, but instead coordinated surgical strikes and special ops leadership decapitation.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I agree with you, nuclear response would make things very difficult with China and their allies, but there's plenty of traditional firepower available directed to Russia if things escalate to that point and should Russia attack with nukes I don't think they'll have a lot of support for their actions from the east. And triggering nuclear response would likely end up in a MAD scenario which is something I think (and hope) no one really wants to see trough.

But that still leaves a pretty big field to work with traditional ammunition and a skilled pilot from Sweden could still reach Moscow in 20 minutes or so to turn multiple military targets within the city into a rubble. And there's plenty of airfields closer than Stockholm with equally capable fighter jets. For the ground force, Finns and Estonians could at least in theory reach Moscow in 10-12 hours since majority of troops defending it are already down on some field in Ukraine and our artillery forces move pretty damn fast.

The amount of destruction Russia could cause is of course still an enormous humanitarian crisis, but even if they could turn Kiyv to wasteland (and kill millions while doing it), it still wouldn't change the outcome of full Nato response without any bullshit politics limiting on actions if anyone is allowed to strike on the Russian soil.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Agree. Interesting points.

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

Agreed. Not a big fan of military in general, but NATO probably won't go straight to nuclear genocide, as much as some people around here seem to want that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Don't get me wrong, I'm pro NATO in so much as it means "don't fuck with us". I just don't see the need, Russia is paper mache with their cold war bench depth of gear and routines.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

ie. Bunker Busting Nukes, not an airburst over a city.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Perhaps one or two as a treat.

Jk but actually I think they wouldn't, just to say they didn't.

I don't think NATO needs them

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think single launch from russia would mean it's sure annihilation. So medvedev, I don't think so. Go and suck putin's dick.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think NATO wouldn't right away respond with their own nuclear attacks but Russia would suffer complete condemnation and ostracism on international stage and even their closest allies, including China would renounce them.

[–] Reverendender 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It wouldn’t have to be a nuclear retaliation. Once Putin opens the nuke door though, then NATO is all out of reasons to not mobilize all conventional resources and unleash hell.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

If they open that particular box, the only option would be to strike against each nuclear site in Russia. Because once that started there is no reason the Russian threshold for usage would not just lower over time.

At the same time Ukraine would start striking nuclear power plants in Russia. Russia has a lot to lose here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Additionally, with the firepower at just the US' disposal, we could level almost every major pop center in Russia. Waves of Tomahawks, ICBMs and bombers could do it without the US putting boots on the ground. We nearly did this with Baghdad back in 02.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 6 points 1 month ago

Unconstrained conventional warfare by NATO against all Russian forces in Ukraine, plus any staging or launch sites in Russia, plus destruction of any Russian military assets acting with hostile intent outside of the European theater would be the strategy, and it wouldn’t take long to fully crush their conventional military might. It would be an actual 3-day campaign.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

This is quite reassuring - if medvedev said it you know there's no chance it could possibly happen.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

He is a drunk that does this a lot. It doesn't deserve an article.

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

if anyone could he could. oh wait gray. theres an r. oh then im not sure.

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

Dmitty gets a little angry when he drinks

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Dimwitty Medvedev

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

All Medvedev can do is try to find a gray spot in his trousers.