Russia using their nukes isn't going to help them at all and would only make their situation worse.
They love to talk about it all the time as there are people in the west who repeat their BS and it creates anxiety for people who can't see past it.
They have turned up the volume on this due to Ukraine now being able to blow up their stuff over the border that they thought was safe and these threats are just a reflection on how effective those attacks have been.
right? It's kinda dellusional to think the Wests willforce will crumble just by seeing a nuclear explosion or being the subjects of it, it would just be like throwing stones to a wasps nest to "scare" them
Like, you just need \*any\* psychologist to tell you that's not how the human mind works
Maybe they think that seeking peace instead of conquering other territories is signaling the weak personality of the West? I just don't really understand it
They genuinely believe that Westerners are pathetic cowards who understand only language of strength, and will back down if Russia shows it is willing to use nukes to win. Common Russians in social media cheer for nuking Ukraine and West. It is not just an opinion of few politicians.
Just take a look at Putin, and how far he sits from any other human during his addresses. Does this look like a man who’s not afraid of dying? The dwarf is terrified of it. At this point it’s just boring hearing the same old saber rattling.
Also, obligatory:
“days since Russian threat of nuclear war: 0️⃣”
The only way it would help them is by maintaining the fear that they will use them. Without the fear that Russia will preemptively use nuclear weapons, they've lost one of the few pieces of leverage Russia has.
Exactly that. The threat has value for them as the West generally will prefer to avoid confrontation at all costs. Using them would most likely cause NATO to become actively involved which would seriously spoil their war very quickly.
Which is why they really really don't want to use nuclear weapons, but we shouldn't assume that means they never would, because if people learn a bully won't do x, the bully loses all of their power. There is nothing the ruling class of Russia won't sacrifice to maintain that power.
We can never be sure they will never use them but we can be sure that neither tactical or strategic use will gain them an advantage.
Tactical use, gets NATO involved. Strategic use, turns the world to a cinder.
It would be far easier, more rational and have a higher chance of a better outcome for them, to them to claim that their operation in Ukraine was sucessful and to GTFO.
The fear that Russia will use nuclear weapons does give them an advantage right now. NATO would have gotten much more involved if that wasn't the case.
If NATO no longer fears that Russia will use nuclear weapons, Russia basically loses every advantage it has over NATO.
>It would be far easier, more rational and have a higher chance of a better outcome for them, to them to claim that their operation in Ukraine was sucessful and to GTFO.
If Russia is losing in Ukraine and Moscow feels that the regime is threatened, doing this will not help them. Russia's only advantage is that they claim to be a bully that will use nuclear weapons if they feel they need to. Without that fear, Russia has no advantage over NATO.
You keep upping the ante until they call your counter bluff. Then what ? You strike back and they eliminate humanity?
There is a blood price to be paid .. once that happens, will there be enough blood?
There is no threat to Russia except for Russia itself.
Using their nukes will gaurantee that they lose much faster. I would expect that the use of a tactical nuke would cause NATO to get involved. Strategic strikes could bring about a large retaliation which is why no sane person would do it. Putin, although stupid and greedy, isn't insane, however much he wants us to think he is.
Letting Russia have what they want when they threaten nukes is why they do it and there comes a point where it's obviously just hollow rhetoric and they know that it would be a stupid and fruitless move.
There are enough nukes to wipe out humanity. We have heard endless lies and seem about a million people slaughtered and all we get is more endless rhetoric and lies and absolutely no facts.
How can you have democracy when we are denied facts? And stop pretending to know what’s best for Russia or what Russia will do next .. you don’t know jack shit. All you do is parrot the main stream bullshit. Come up with an original thought and we can discuss ..
Otherwise it’s your endless prattle until we wake up and realize you have caused the death of our families because you are a bloody fool.
Whose propaganda.. we are awash in propaganda.. the so called official news .. which for two years now did nothing but try to dehumanize a people, lie and extol murder and violence.
I have no access to any other news .. what I have is my brain and my logic and a solid understanding of history and economics and geography and my own two eyes to draw intelligent conclusions and speak up.
Childish retorts like yours are what propaganda produces.. coz you cannot hold an argument.. you just have tidbits of misinformation fed to you. And you cannot think clearly to see the consequences, even after two years of what are clearly lies.
The funniest thing is that even if russia uses a nuke, there would still be russian supporters who would defend it, blaming the collective West for not stopping support for Ukraine with arms and for leading the world to such conditions.
I remember a quote by one of the former heads of the US strategic air command (who is in charge of the US nuclear arsenal) who said something along the lines of
“The term ‘nuclear war’ isn’t quite accurate, because it implies that there would be a mutual exchange of nuclear weapons between two nations, and we have no intention of letting that happen.’ “
He can have all the "intention" he wants with his bullshit Yankee tough talk, but from january 2017 to January 2021, they allowed a literal criminal, pedophile, traitor, rapist, conspiracy theorist, pathologically lying kremlin puppet and mentally ill narcissist with dementia and aphasia control the literal American nuclear arsenal. If you know how the NCA works, nobody contradicts the president. The Secretary of Defense can't stop the President if the President wants to nuke Iran, for example. The SecDef is expected to identify that the President is indeed the President and is then legally obliged to execute the order.
They're going to do it again. They're going to elect Trump and the Russians won't fire a shot. The Russians control the average dumbass American mind, from BLM activists to conspiracy theorist to gun nut. They allowed Ukraine to be extorted by Trump and he wasn't even convicted for it, just impeached, which is merely symbolic.
This American rah rah rah tough talk is grating after they just let Ukrainians die en masse again while they delayed weapons for political games.
Nobody in Ukraine gives a flying fuck about "but but but there was a rider attached to the bill" or "but it was the Republicans" ...
So, if you want to convince the world you can handle a Russian mass ICBM launch, start by dealing with Russia's highly successful infiltration of American society, social media, corporate world and political system.
Lock up Trump. Lock him up. Anything less and no, I'm not convinced you can "handle" Russia.
The thing is, they genuinely believe that Westerners are pathetic cowards who understand only language of strength, and will back down if Russia shows it is willing to use nukes to win. Common Russians in social media cheer for nuking Ukraine and West. It is not just an opinion of few politicians.
"Europe can be forced to its knees by a nuclear strike on the Netherlands" lol, lmao even.
I mean even the domestic copium market can't think this would really work, right? It sounds like some shitpost on a bizarro version of r/NonCredibleDefense, "just kill millions in one of Europe's smallest countries, that'll show them"
Russians think they can fire nukes at us without us firing any back but in reality we WOULD fire back and i bet even then Russia is gonna cry about it being unfair that they can't fire missiles at an enemy without them retaliating just like how they cried about Ukraine being allowed to hit targets in Russia
That section of the article (I scanned it with google translate, I don't speak or read Russian) says it's because the Netherlands concentrates 60% of Europe's capacity for hydrocarbon supplies. I assume he's talking about refineries specifically, of which there are a lot around Rotterdam. So it's mainly a strategic strike in his view.
I personally don't think it matter if it's bluff or not bluff. We cannot simply bow and give up our freedom to any nation just because they have nuclear weapons.
Give one nuke to a man that has zero hesitation to launch it anywhere if that anywhere threatens global peace even slightly. Take the doomsday clock straight to the point of no return and leave it to there for the whole eternity. Practically the only way to unify humans to a single goal is real and tangible existential terror right on our doorsteps.
One nuke is worthless, eventually someone is going to cross the threshold that person set for themselves. He is out of nukes now, now what?
This would incentivise a bad actor to fund proxy groups to stir up shit and get nuked, thus disarming the impetus for more direct action by the bad actor.
Thing about nukes in the mad era is that when one is detonated, all of them are. Some slower than others. Bad actor risking lottery detonation with proxy groups just started the relatively very short countdown to detonate all of them. Philosophy of mad demands will to act, even it means end to us all, with very limited information. Otherwise, there is no mad and you’re free to nuke away. Leading to same end conclusion as mad would.
> We cannot simply bow and give up our freedom to any nation just because they have nuclear weapons.
That is easy to say.
But I do not see many young people willing to go to the front and defend their freedom.
> I do not see many young people willing to go to the front and defend their freedom.
I do, I speak to them. They showed me pictures from the trenches.
Edit: come to think of it, yesterday evening I heard a Russian boy who fled Russia loudly condemn the Putin regime in English. He was going on and on about how backwards the Russian countryside is and how that helps enable Putin's agenda.
There is a "chorus of contrived cowardice" on Reddit, which specializes in showing up in threads like these and pretending we're all too scared to fight.
You get comments such as "why don't you sign up first, warmonger" or " it'll be your children dying at the front, not mine".
This is textbook Russian propaganda, because it explicitly never asks these questions of the Russians, yet we see them writing "letters to the czar" in the form of selfie videos begging to be taken home often.
Some of us, me included, already know death intimately and we will gladly die on the battlefield.
It's important to contrast this experience with the scrawny, pockmarked incels in St. Petersburg writing these things, who typically have no life experience whatsoever, and their far-right, Putin-worshiping loser friends like that Swedish SD bot network who think they're clever but got infiltrated and exposed.
It's important for Russians to know and fully understand that ultimately, this war hasn't even started and they've already lost half their equipment and half a million people. We are not intimidated by their pathetic, grovelling bullies. Once we *really* get involved, the Russian imperialist will see a resolve and a destruction on a scale they have never known, and they will know and feel what they did to Ukraine and they will either come to their senses or die.
Yes, the free people of Europe will defend liberty with their lives, and we also have nuclear weapons capable of wiping out half of the Russian population, that is, all population centers West of the Urals, with the press of a button. That would be merciful option. Should the American nuclear arsenal get involved, [Russia is looking at total annihilation](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1beob93/simulation_of_a_retaliatory_strike_against_russia/).
Holy shit you _murdered_ them. Mind if I save this to copy and shove in the face of the next vatnik that asks "When are _you_ signing up to go to the front lines?"
You are wrong. The fear of a Russian conquered Europe is much greater than the fear of fighting Russia, many of the Eastern European countries work like that. People did not forgot or forgive Russia in those parts of Europe. They were worse than the nazis.
The freedom to not be able to afford a house, to live on misery wages, to not be able to start a family.
Why dont the rich go fight? Why must we work to keep them rich while we can't even have a proper life, and then go die for their country when shit hits the fan?
My country? Their country. What exactly is mine about this oligarchy? What am I betraying? I dont remember promising anything to anyone. Im not owed a damn thing, that's what capitalists tell us. Everything I want to have, I must earn. So why should I fight for free? Wasn't greed supposed to be good? Or does that only apply to the ruling oligarchy?
Would you rather be ruled by Western Oligarchy, who are still subject to law, and can be removed by voting if they become too obnoxious ... or Russian Oligarchy (well, FSB/Putin/Mafia) who are above the law, cannot be removed peacefully, and who actively assassinate/jail anyone who does not agree with them, while robbing the population blind?
If you live in the West, you should understand that the Russian Oligarchy wants to conquer you - either by force, or by propaganda, making you believe you should side with them, siding with their minions.
I honestly couldn't give a damn. The day the sons of the rich are in the trench with me, I might consider it. Until then, no equal rights, no duties. Sorry, not sorry.
And bound by the law is a big lol when they are the ones who finance the parties that they want to win. Who do you think has been giving money to the far right to allow so much fascist propaganda?
Russia. It is well known that Russia has been funding both far right, and far left parties in the West, just to sow discord, to weaken the West.
Every idiocy and controversy in the west in the past 10 years has been abundantly funded by Russia. Like antivaxxers, wokeism, nazism, health-at-every-size, BLM, MAGA, you name it. Anything which divides and conquers has been funded by Russia. Even online fights about movies.
Russia wants to either kill you or make you a serf (*). In the West, however, we still have a chance of making things right, if we stop believing the bullshit Russia is spreading.
(*) Of course ... your position here kind of makes me think, that spreading confusion and division is actually your day job ... in Saint Petersburg, maybe?
The russians presumably also want to take away the properties of the owners of the means of production. Am I going to see them and their kids in the trenches? Yes or no, easy question. We both know the answer, its the same as in russia, ukraine, israel or any other place in the world.
Being far left is a perfectly allowable political stance, or are you claiming that the west does not have democracy and should treat leftists as adversaries? Aren't we free to express our ideas? Even basic common sense ones such as if the poor must fight, so too must the rich? Funny how you had to bump BLM, a fight against the police treating black citizens like the russian police treats most of its citizens together with a series of hate movements, some of which are provably funded by Russia.
If people with money are fleeing, I'm fleeing as well. Aren't they supposed to have money because they are smart, productive geniuses?
We are free to express our ideas. We have the ability to decide what we want. We should stand for the right of self determination for humans. There are lots of problems, which might be solvable, if we can come to an agreement.
Russians do not have that freedom. Russia is an imperialistic and militaristic dictatorship, which wants to destroy us. If we allow them to win, humanity is doomed. And it won't be fun for any of us.
Yes, we have social inequality, rich people having too much power. But we currently have power to fix that in our countries, because we live in democracies.
Putin is the richest person in the world -- he has stolen so much from Russians that there is no comparison ... and Russians do not have the power to fix that, they do not even seem to have a desire to fix that. (Well, Nemzov and Navalnyi had that desire, but Putin killed them).
It is GOOD that you oppose people with too much money, it shows you have principles! But I can't understand how you seem to be supporting the Russian kleptocracy, which is an order of magnitude worse than what we have here.
Let's solve problems one at a time, currently the number one problem is Russian jingoism and imperialism. Get rid of them, then get rid of global warming, parasitic capitalists, etc. Putin is not an answer or salvation, he is our number one enemy at this moment.
I am afraid of war too, but I know my friends will be there and you can be sure I am not fleeing or staying at home, while my mates are being shot at because I would not be able to live with myself after that....
I'm pretty confident that the only purpose of having these vodka-guzzling, Russian political 'geniuses' blather on about nuclear escalation is to make Putin look reasonable or moderate. It is often forgotten that nuclear escalation means the end of both factions, except that the West has neither its children nor its assets in Russia.
I am tired of being threatened by a petrol station with nuclear weapons and, to be honest, I am now deaf to such threats. If at some point it's no longer a bluff, it would be bad luck, but I'd rather go up in a mushroom cloud than leave the world to these fascist imperialists.
These other replies are false, naively take Russian propagandist Gurulyov's bullshit at face value and misunderstand what you actually appear to be asking.
Putin's military forces in Ukraine murdered 196 Dutch citizens when they shot down passenger flight MH17 near Hrabove, East Ukraine, on 17 July 2014.
The Ukrainian separatists and Russians mocked the victims, robbed their bodies and left them to rot to frustrate the investigation. They tampered with the evidence. They deliberately spread false conspiracy theories. Ultimately, two Russians and a Ukrainian were convicted, in absentia, of murder, in a Dutch court.
Very shortly after MH17, the Dutch commenced cyberwarfare against Russia. They were one of the sources of the Mueller investigation and prosecutions regarding the DNC and DCCC hacks. They literally hacked the Russian hackers' machines and filmed and recorded them on their own security cameras, and subsequently passed this information to the Americans. The Americans used this information to charge the hackers whom the Dutch had previously identified on their own security cameras, reportedly in some nondescript building near the Red Square.
After the Russians helped Assad conduct chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian Civil War, the Russians sent a team of hackers with a car full of equipment to the Netherlands to attempt to hack the OPCW. They failed, were apprehended by Dutch intelligence and deported. Their license plate was subsequently used, I believe, by Bellingcat to expose hundreds of GRU agents by linking the license plates to other license plates registered at the same GRU address. Putin might have had the head of the GRU killed as a result.
Fast forward to 2022, the Dutch haven't forgotten all these things, nor the many attacks by the Russians on other European countries, so they have been exceptionally hawkish when it comes to supplying weapons to Ukraine.
They have delivered all sorts of things, but among the most prominent were self-propelled artillery (PzH2000), Patriots and F16s. The Dutch have authorized those F16s to fire on or be used against Russian territory.
The Russians are furious about this and decided to threaten the Netherlands with a nuclear attack. The highest value target is Rotterdam Port, the biggest port in Europe, so that's why they selected Rotterdam. To justify this choice they come up with this narrative about oil and chokepoints, but while probably true, ***that wasn't the reason why The Netherlands was specifically highlighted***. More likely, it was the F16s. In fact, Solovyov even explicitly mentions it while interrupting Gurulyov.
Look at betting odds. Biden is much more likely. Trump will get killed in the polls by moderates who dont want to hear his name everyday for another 4 years
No, he's asking why. Rotterdam is not a reason.
Dutch weapon deliveries (Patriot, PzH2000, F16, naval drones, etc) and generally anti-Russian positions after MH17 are.
Now that formerly pro-Russian far-right extremist Geert Wilders won the election, the Russians have estimated this is the ideal timing for such a threat.
Rotterdam is just a HVT, no more, no less. Going back to the cold war, Russia has several targets in the Netherlands. They are already known, and it's not just Rotterdam, although they could pick and choose.
That section of the article (I scanned it with google translate, I don't speak or read Russian) says it's because the Netherlands concentrates 60% of Europe's capacity for hydrocarbon supplies. I assume he's talking about refineries specifically, of which there are indeed a lot around Rotterdam. So it's mainly a strategic strike in his view. I'm not saying there isn't a retaliatory aspect behind it due to those Dutch weapon deliveries, but in his words hydrocarbons are the justification.
I'm not saying there is no reasoning behind selecting Rotterdam as a HVT. I know what Rotterdam is and does.
I'm saying the reason this threat is made *now* is not because Rotterdam suddenly made Putin angry. I explained the reason for the threat in the previous comment.
You literally are disagreeing with me. You assert:
> So it's mainly a strategic strike in his view. I'm not saying there isn't a retaliatory aspect behind it due to those Dutch weapon deliveries, but in his words hydrocarbons are the justification.
What he says what his justification is, is irrelevant. Andrey Gurulyov is literally a paid professional propagandist on Russian state television. You don't simply naively believe him when he lies to you what the reason is he brings it up. The narrative he's going with is that he suddenly discovered or remembers that he once discovered that Rotterdam is an important chokepoint.
This is of course false. It's a lie. He always knew this and he didn't suddenly discover it nor did he suddenly recently remember that he discovered it.
He is acting out a stage play, a script. I'm a bit astonished that I have to explain the basics of Russian state TV propaganda to you, actually.
In the version of the script, 9 days ago, Gurulyov is even interrupted by Solovyov literally saying: **"Let me remind you, this is the country that authorized F16s striking on Russian territory"**
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPGdRr_uEPc
Now, I don't want to be repeating myself over and over, but one more time then:
> Rotterdam is not a reason.
> Dutch weapon deliveries (Patriot, PzH2000, F16, naval drones, etc) and generally anti-Russian positions after MH17 are.
> Now that formerly pro-Russian far-right extremist Geert Wilders won the election, the Russians have estimated this is the ideal timing for such a threat.
Look and listen carefully at the clip I've linked above.
It's your job, obviously, to interpret hostile and extremely aggressive Russian propaganda which is highly scripted with *extreme care*.
You don't just parrot what they *claim to be their motivations*, you must combine what you see and hear with plausible geopolitical context.
That plausible geopolitical context is Dutch weapon deliveries (Patriot, PzH2000, F16, naval drones, etc) and generally anti-Russian positions in the wake of MH17.
Plus, Geert Wilders is an absolute traitor to his country who photographed himself standing behind the lectern in Russian Parliament, 4 years after Putin's forces murdered 196 Dutch citizens.
The Russians aim to exploit Wilders' treachery, his weakness and his mediocre intellect. They've decided that this is the moment to expose the Netherlands to a nuclear threat in response to Dutch weapon supplies to Ukraine.
This is **very deliberately timed and highly calculated** and **formulated in response to Dutch weapon supplies to Ukraine, in particular the F16s, and the decision by the Dutch to allow Ukraine to strike Russian territory with those F16s**.
**Gurulyov's "justification" is total horse shit. It's a lie. It's a narrative device wrapped around the threat that he is instructed to deliver in response to these weapons deliveries.**
I hope this helps.
You have something to learn here. In particular, learn not to be a Russian propaganda amplifier by taking Russian state television stageplays at face value and promoting their claims as fact.
> Have a nice day.
You too.
Russia is tired. It's begging to be put down like the sick dog it is.
If Russia use a nuke on another country they will seize to exist within a few days, if not hours.
The key Russian propagandist Margarita Simonyan once stated that if they undermine a nuclear bomb over Siberia, then there would be no consequences except the electronics disabled and this is good, because they return to the times of her youth.
It should be understood that the key positions there are loyal, not smart people (this is noticeable in their faces). And they (as well as many Russians who watch them on TV) would very much like to deliver nuclear strikes on the countries that they hated, but they cannot, because they also have nuclear weapons. They will not beat NATO, because they understand the consequences for themselves, because speaking is one thing, and falling under a response nuclear blow is completely different.
However, there is another point. If Russia's aggression is not punished, if Russia is not stopped, a number of countries will think about the production of nuclear weapons in order to protect itself.
>if Russia is not stopped, a number of countries will think about the production of nuclear weapons in order to protect itself
I sure wish my government had the balls to have an underground project like that, just in case some allies get spaghetti legs
Russian here.
The keys question is if it is working. And the answer is yes, it is actually working and very effective. It’s rhetoric and sabre rattling aimed at the West, and it’s accomplishing quite a lot.
No NATO troops in Ukraine. No closed sky in Ukraine. Countries delaying their supplies of weapons on and on, and not supplying some types of weapons all (like Taurus). Even the decisions to supply Ukraine with certain weapons like ATACAMS or F-16 come almost a year later than they should have happened.
It isn't the russian sabre rattling that contributed to the delay in supply military aid to Ukraine: it's russia interfering with politics.
[russian propagandists are lamenting that the US is not threatening Russia with nukes because it makes Russia look like a fool when it responds to non-nuclear escalation with promises to annihilate Europ](https://x.com/NatalkaKyiv/status/1801129276651028764)
Have you ever asked yourself why not a single nuclear power has replied to the 1.908.989 daily nuclear threats made by your regime?
“Have you ever asked yourself why not a single nuclear power has replied to the 1.908.989 daily nuclear threats made by your regime?”
Indeed, that’s precisely my point. They are staying away from the conflict because of how much sabre rattling Russia has done. Rather unfortunately, because of Ukraine got supplied with the F-16, Leopard Tanks and ATACAMS a year earlier, the conflict would not be going as good for Russia as it currently is.
Nope: Nobody is taking russia's nuclear threats seriously, that is why no government has yet replied accordingly to those.
On the contrary, the more russia is sabre rattling, the more it is signalling that something has hurt it.
The delays in supplying military aid to Ukraine are caused by russia's interferences.
>the conflict would not be going as good for Russia as it currently is.
The conflict is. going good for russia? Really? I guess russia should notify that to Ukraine...
Never thought I would be defending russian in political discussion on the subject of Ukraine, but hear me out.
This whole "escalation management" doctrine USA uses and pushes on the rest of the world is a result of fear of nuclear weapons, and this is the best strategy they came up with.
And this strategy already costed a whole lot - giving tanks to Ukraine in 2022 would allow to push russians out of southern areas. Tanks were given a year later, like as if it some sort of RPG game with slow progression. And enemy had 1 year to build tripple-fucking-trenchlines and minefields of enormous size.
And this will happen with each "promotion" - russia already knows what each next level of escalation is, and they are searching for countermeasures before they even land. Not saying that they would be successfull, mind you, as they still didn't find countermeasures to HIMARS, but this surely doesn't help.
Like, what stops the West to allow ATACMS strikes on russian weapon factories and airfields? What are we waiting for? Another horrid warcrime to justify the measures?
> Nope: Nobody is taking russia's nuclear threats seriously
[Biden says threat of Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is 'real'](https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-threat-putin-using-tactical-nuclear-weapons-is-real-2023-06-20/)
It is going good. Russia has a 4x advantage in manpower and artillery, and last I checked there is 15% of Ukraine territory under occupation. Granted, Russia is advancing rather slowly, but it is advancing still, while Ukraine hasn’t been on the offensive for almost a year.I don’t see how Ukraine will be able to get those territories back.
Also consider that on the Zelenskiy peace summit, only 3 out of 10 propositions will remain, and [the resolution falls short of mentioning the withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine and the restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240611_06/) :
Diplomatic sources say that the withdrawal of Russian troops and other things that Ukraine have been calling for were dropped from the draft because it took into consideration some emerging nations in Asia and Middle East that maintain ties with Russia.
Metallicat's got a point, the more Russia rattles the more the West considers that Russia needs a punch to the face instead of being left alone. These threats are only contributing to the old saying of "when the dog is shot, rabies is no more"
1. russia is in full counter attack mode since April and I would like to remind you that russia is the second Army in the World.
2. From the article you posted: *Ukraine’s demands regarding the withdrawal of Russian troops and other provisions were excluded from the draft statement “considering the positions of some Asian and Middle Eastern countries with rapidly growing economies that maintain ties with russia,*” Again, as I told you multiple times, it's russia's interferences: see finally you agree with me.
3. Scholz: "*There will be* ***no peace negotiations*** *there. We are still a long way from that as long as Russia believes it can achieve its goals on the battlefield"* [Ukraine-Russia peace talks far off – Scholz](https://english.nv.ua/nation/peace-talks-with-russia-still-far-off-says-german-chancellor-50425007.html)
1. Well of course Russia is doing far worse than anyone expected. The point is it still occupies Ukrainian territory, and the war is in its favour as it has artillery and manpower advantage - the latter Ukraine unfortunately cannot counter. I don’t see any way Ukraine could take those territories back
2. That’s not interference, that’s just politics. Russia is strengthening ties with Middle East and China, and that has an effect on EU/US that again are not supporting Ukraine enough.
3. Perhaps, but they will happen sooner or later. Again, Russia has a manpower and weapons advantage. How will Ukraine get those territories back, considering it doesn’t have the military resources for them?
1. *I don’t see any way Ukraine could take those territories back:* you're an armchair general as I am, and i see different outcomes;
2. Your regime is interfering since the dawn of times into foreign politics, and that is in full display right now;
3. Of course there will be peace talks and negotiations: this is how a war ends.
4. *How will Ukraine get those territories back, considering it doesn’t have the military resources for them?* As a russian, you should be more worried on how russia will be able to keep the illegally occupied territories. And again, you and me are just armchair generals and can say everything: what matters are the results.
1. Nice try evading the points, but unless you can answer how Ukraine that has around 4-5 times less population and fires almost 5 times fewer artillery shells a day, it’s not getting its territories back by force. And at this point, most war experts concur on that.
2. You do realise the difference between interference in politics and politics? Interference is affecting other countries’ internal politics (which Russia is also doing). Politics is forging closer their with China and Middle East.
3/4: and the results are: no counter offensive from Ukraine in almost a year, manpower shortages, and prospects of taking its territories back with prospects of losing more.
I don’t worry how Russia will keep its occupied territories because I don’t care much for the current Russian state and would be happy to see it gone. The point is, Russia will keep them just as it kept Crimea, and I don’t see how they could me taken back militarily
1. russia, after 10 years of invasion, managed to occupy 15% of Ukraine's territory: how is this fact evading your point?
2. russia is interfering with what it deems 'enemy' foreign politics: moscow Johnson, Orban and Fico are an example of that. And no, russia is not forging ties with China, my man: russia has become China's vassal.
>*and I don’t see how they could me taken back militarily*
Again, for the last time I hope: you and me are fat armchair generals.
quantity of ww2 tanks wont match the western quality!
The people question... russia might have more people, but you really cant think it for real that they can afford to put all people into the war, you cant think its real scenario:D
On the other hand, ukraine can and will throw all people into the war, because they are defenders and can do that. In russia there are already serious shortages of workforce and you want to bury more, you have already so many casualties, its mind bogling, if you have at least some common sense, you can do the math, you cant lost 50 milions people to conquer ukraine, you really cannot and if you think you can, go for it, after the war, there will be no russia, because all russia will be swallowed by all other nations
Oh really, Ukraine can throw all people into the war? I guess that’s why their mobilization age is still 25, [labour shortages all over the country](https://au.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-running-short-people-040000974.html) are happening, [mass draft dodges](https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-faces-an-acute-manpower-shortage-with-young-men-dodging-the-draft/), their [frontline units report acute lack of manpower](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/08/ukraine-soldiers-shortage-infantry-russia/), and so on.
oh yes, they can, because of defensive war, that is completely opposite to what russians have - war of aggression and they even cant call it war, much worse situation in terms of availalbe pops for conscription... AND they have support of west (100x wealthier partner than russia)
do the math, really, stop discussing and go count:p
The first two were (are?) impossible. Local soldiers dying in Ukraine is a big political no-no, most electorates wouldn't accept it. Also closed skies are impossible if you cannot enforce it, you would have to shoot down Russian planes and it would mean direct conflict.
The rest is spot-on.
I agree, a full on war with direct conflict is definitely a no.
My point is that the West on the scale of “no helping Ukraine whatsoever” to “nuclear war” was playing too cautions for the fear of escalation - and Russian sabre rattling played a big part in this. The issue is that of the West avoids escalation and Ukraine falls, the escalation will still happen in the future, so it’s going to happen anyway and it’s better to supply Ukraine now, until it’s too late.
> No NATO troops in Ukraine.
There are special forces in Ukraine. You could say there are not directly fighting Russia on the front lines, but they are training and advising a lot.
No one wonders why Nato troops didn't intervene in Afghanistan to fight off Russians there, and didn't close its sky. Or during uprisings in Hungary and Chezhoslovakia. No one doubted that Soviets would use nukes to avoid defeat in WW3. Yet modern Russia would not?
There are two scenarios in which a nuclear escalation would be considered. In retaliation to a nuclear strike from an enemy and when you are badly losing a conventional war and the existence of your nation is about to end. It's a "We die but we will take you with us!"-scenario.
Given NATO has no interest in starting a nuclear war, because they currently aren't even in a war, much less losing one, the fact that Russia is constantly threatening with nukes seems to be a clear sign of weakness. It looks like Russia is in panic mode and expects to lose badly in the war against Ukraine they have started. In any case, it looks very weak.
The problem about the latter argument is that Russia has threatened nuclear escalation even before and even more intense starting with the beginning of the invasion.
In my opinion, this is pure blackmail. They use the threat of nuclear escalation to pressure and unsettle the west. We should finally stop giving Russia credibility for their escalatory rhetoric and call their bluff. Russia will gain nothing and lose everything if they would use nuclear weapons.
Edit typo
I still think it's a bluff that makes themself look very weak and in a state of panic.
They are threatening with a desperate last resort measure that would ensure their own destruction. Even if Russia was so mad to commit a nuclear first strike without being on their last breath, they would be annihilated by the retaliation strike of NATO.
There must be things Russia can use as a threat that doesn't involve them stupidly committing suicide.
> There are two scenarios in which a nuclear escalation would be considered. In retaliation to a nuclear strike from an enemy and when you are badly losing a conventional war and the existence of your nation is about to end. It's a "We die but we will take you with us!"-scenario.
That's the logical approach but logic has no home in Russia.
It's all ass-kissing and kindergarten levels of power play politics.
They often say one thing then end up doing the complete opposite.
The best thing we can do is to be prepared for anything while also continuing to support Ukraine.
>The best thing we can do is to be prepared for anything while also continuing to support Ukraine.
I fully agree. The best way to prevent a scenario in which a nuclear escalation is not as unlikely as it is today, is to support Ukraine and enable them to liberate all areas Russia is currently occupying.
There is no reason to assume that Russia would stop its war of conquest if they are allowed to win against Ukraine and fully or in parts annex it into their Empire. Putin would just rebuild his army and then attack the next neighbor. Most likely Moldova first, but after that there is a real risk that he would try to attack a NATO member. (Most likely the Baltics.) And that direct confrontation could lead to a scenario were a nuclear escalation could indeed happen. For example when the Russian army is beaten back and NATO forces closing in on Moscow, with a weeping Putin sitting in his Führerbunker with the red bottom on his desk.
> Putin would just rebuild his army and then attack the next neighbor.
We'd be stupid to ignore the fact that this has happened before. Remember Georgia? Remember Afghanistan? [The list goes on.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion)
Russia routinely invades smaller less powerful countries as a power play display towards its own citizens and the West yet these invasions are rarely discussed now as if they never happened.
"Give them an inch and they'll take a mile"
It's either abandon Ukraine and then some, or we also become steadfast and ready our nuclear arsenals -- hoping that the Russians have some sense that they cannot rule over a desolate wasteland, much less have a guaranteed chance to survive.
That, or a gigantic revolution/coup happens.
I just feel nothing but sadness over Russia, what they could have become. A future of guaranteed prosperity, ruined by a council of corrupt "strongmen" who lusts after power.
Nuclear weapon is an option that Russia knows too well should not use. Because if they do, it would be gloves off and even their partners would abandon them.
The most depressing thing about this whole cafuffle is that literally nobody is threatening Russia. Not one western country wants to attack Russia. There's no reason to. Putin knows this, we know this. This is war theatre for domestic consumption only. Do ordinary Russians know that they are in literally no danger from "the West"?
Let them do it! Assuming how great russian science is novadays I would expect that they will demonstrate this nuclear explosion in the middle of Moscov xD
We should stop letting them just say this shit. They're treatening nuclear genocide, so take their threat at face value. Take any foreign assets they might still have, put out a global warrant for their arrest, anyone that's helping them is aiding and abedding would-be terrorists. Threaten to kill one person and you get arrested, threaten millions and suddenly we're supposed to ignore it?
I'm somewhat surprised they haven't done a nuclear test.
My best guess - as in 51% certain - is they're no longer able. Nukes need a lot keep ready, the expenses are a non-auditable state secret in a country as corrupt as Russia, and **_if_** the moment ever comes that they should function than the ""crime"" of hiding the money no longer matters.
It's funny how they think that a nuclear strike on the Netherlands could force Europe its knees, with all the different countries, cities and center of power we have, when we on the other side would have just one single target (or maybe two) to cripple the whole country.
I think he imagines that if they hit the port of Rotterdam Europe will fold immediately due to losing one of the key transport hubs from which energy supplies (and potential US army reinforcements) are flowing in. Russian propaganda is obsessed with oil and gas because that's really the main thing Russia can offer to the rest of the world.
When we see daily videos of untrained Russian soldiers driving across open fields on motorcycles and golf carts and then dying. Rinse and repeat. We see their Navy being sunk by a (smaller) nation without a navy. Their airforce shot down by a nation with almost no airforce. Equipment being used that is 60 years old, who takes their stupid, constant nuclear threats seriously? At this stage, I wish they would just do it and then Russia would be no more.
sobosednik supposed to be an independent newspaper, opposing the current russian government. so, isn't is weird a newspaper with pro-west tendencies is publishing an article like this?
>Sobesednik has been one of the last remaining independent media outlets in Russia that is critical of the government. It has published articles and opinions that are highly critical of the Kremlin and Russian authorities.
>In 2012, the opposition Coordinating Council held a meeting in Sobesednik's office, indicating the newspaper's ties to the political opposition in Russia.
>Sobesednik has faced significant pressure from the Russian government, including having its print runs seized, its website blocked multiple times, and its channel on the Dzen platform shut down by Roskomnadzor (the federal communications watchdog).
>Sobesednik has been one of the last remaining independent media outlets in Russia that is critical of the government. It has published articles and opinions that are highly critical of the Kremlin and Russian authorities.
>The newspaper's editor-in-chief, Oleg Roldugin, has stated that Sobesednik is not breaking any laws, but the authorities can "always find fault with anything they like" when it comes to critical media outlets.
>Roldugin has said that independent journalism like Sobesednik's serves as a "conscience" that points out deficiencies in the government, unlike pro-Kremlin propaganda.
Look: russia nuclear threats are void. I am freightened by the dog that never barks and not by the one who barks behind a fence. France has its own nuclear doctrine and has a very clear stand on it in regard of russia nuking Ukraine, regardless if Ukraine is a member of NATO or not.
I dont know if people realize that while some of these people say things because they have to, some actually are delusional enough to mean it. Thats one of the tricky parts of leaving russian crazy folks to get close to the nuclear buttons.
Russia using their nukes isn't going to help them at all and would only make their situation worse. They love to talk about it all the time as there are people in the west who repeat their BS and it creates anxiety for people who can't see past it. They have turned up the volume on this due to Ukraine now being able to blow up their stuff over the border that they thought was safe and these threats are just a reflection on how effective those attacks have been.
right? It's kinda dellusional to think the Wests willforce will crumble just by seeing a nuclear explosion or being the subjects of it, it would just be like throwing stones to a wasps nest to "scare" them Like, you just need \*any\* psychologist to tell you that's not how the human mind works Maybe they think that seeking peace instead of conquering other territories is signaling the weak personality of the West? I just don't really understand it
They genuinely believe that Westerners are pathetic cowards who understand only language of strength, and will back down if Russia shows it is willing to use nukes to win. Common Russians in social media cheer for nuking Ukraine and West. It is not just an opinion of few politicians.
Just take a look at Putin, and how far he sits from any other human during his addresses. Does this look like a man who’s not afraid of dying? The dwarf is terrified of it. At this point it’s just boring hearing the same old saber rattling. Also, obligatory: “days since Russian threat of nuclear war: 0️⃣”
The only way it would help them is by maintaining the fear that they will use them. Without the fear that Russia will preemptively use nuclear weapons, they've lost one of the few pieces of leverage Russia has.
Exactly that. The threat has value for them as the West generally will prefer to avoid confrontation at all costs. Using them would most likely cause NATO to become actively involved which would seriously spoil their war very quickly.
Which is why they really really don't want to use nuclear weapons, but we shouldn't assume that means they never would, because if people learn a bully won't do x, the bully loses all of their power. There is nothing the ruling class of Russia won't sacrifice to maintain that power.
We can never be sure they will never use them but we can be sure that neither tactical or strategic use will gain them an advantage. Tactical use, gets NATO involved. Strategic use, turns the world to a cinder. It would be far easier, more rational and have a higher chance of a better outcome for them, to them to claim that their operation in Ukraine was sucessful and to GTFO.
The fear that Russia will use nuclear weapons does give them an advantage right now. NATO would have gotten much more involved if that wasn't the case. If NATO no longer fears that Russia will use nuclear weapons, Russia basically loses every advantage it has over NATO. >It would be far easier, more rational and have a higher chance of a better outcome for them, to them to claim that their operation in Ukraine was sucessful and to GTFO. If Russia is losing in Ukraine and Moscow feels that the regime is threatened, doing this will not help them. Russia's only advantage is that they claim to be a bully that will use nuclear weapons if they feel they need to. Without that fear, Russia has no advantage over NATO.
You keep upping the ante until they call your counter bluff. Then what ? You strike back and they eliminate humanity? There is a blood price to be paid .. once that happens, will there be enough blood?
There is no threat to Russia except for Russia itself. Using their nukes will gaurantee that they lose much faster. I would expect that the use of a tactical nuke would cause NATO to get involved. Strategic strikes could bring about a large retaliation which is why no sane person would do it. Putin, although stupid and greedy, isn't insane, however much he wants us to think he is. Letting Russia have what they want when they threaten nukes is why they do it and there comes a point where it's obviously just hollow rhetoric and they know that it would be a stupid and fruitless move.
There are enough nukes to wipe out humanity. We have heard endless lies and seem about a million people slaughtered and all we get is more endless rhetoric and lies and absolutely no facts. How can you have democracy when we are denied facts? And stop pretending to know what’s best for Russia or what Russia will do next .. you don’t know jack shit. All you do is parrot the main stream bullshit. Come up with an original thought and we can discuss .. Otherwise it’s your endless prattle until we wake up and realize you have caused the death of our families because you are a bloody fool.
That propaganda’s got you in a chokehold, huh?
Whose propaganda.. we are awash in propaganda.. the so called official news .. which for two years now did nothing but try to dehumanize a people, lie and extol murder and violence. I have no access to any other news .. what I have is my brain and my logic and a solid understanding of history and economics and geography and my own two eyes to draw intelligent conclusions and speak up. Childish retorts like yours are what propaganda produces.. coz you cannot hold an argument.. you just have tidbits of misinformation fed to you. And you cannot think clearly to see the consequences, even after two years of what are clearly lies.
The funniest thing is that even if russia uses a nuke, there would still be russian supporters who would defend it, blaming the collective West for not stopping support for Ukraine with arms and for leading the world to such conditions.
I remember a quote by one of the former heads of the US strategic air command (who is in charge of the US nuclear arsenal) who said something along the lines of “The term ‘nuclear war’ isn’t quite accurate, because it implies that there would be a mutual exchange of nuclear weapons between two nations, and we have no intention of letting that happen.’ “
He can have all the "intention" he wants with his bullshit Yankee tough talk, but from january 2017 to January 2021, they allowed a literal criminal, pedophile, traitor, rapist, conspiracy theorist, pathologically lying kremlin puppet and mentally ill narcissist with dementia and aphasia control the literal American nuclear arsenal. If you know how the NCA works, nobody contradicts the president. The Secretary of Defense can't stop the President if the President wants to nuke Iran, for example. The SecDef is expected to identify that the President is indeed the President and is then legally obliged to execute the order. They're going to do it again. They're going to elect Trump and the Russians won't fire a shot. The Russians control the average dumbass American mind, from BLM activists to conspiracy theorist to gun nut. They allowed Ukraine to be extorted by Trump and he wasn't even convicted for it, just impeached, which is merely symbolic. This American rah rah rah tough talk is grating after they just let Ukrainians die en masse again while they delayed weapons for political games. Nobody in Ukraine gives a flying fuck about "but but but there was a rider attached to the bill" or "but it was the Republicans" ... So, if you want to convince the world you can handle a Russian mass ICBM launch, start by dealing with Russia's highly successful infiltration of American society, social media, corporate world and political system. Lock up Trump. Lock him up. Anything less and no, I'm not convinced you can "handle" Russia.
The thing is, they genuinely believe that Westerners are pathetic cowards who understand only language of strength, and will back down if Russia shows it is willing to use nukes to win. Common Russians in social media cheer for nuking Ukraine and West. It is not just an opinion of few politicians.
"Europe can be forced to its knees by a nuclear strike on the Netherlands" lol, lmao even. I mean even the domestic copium market can't think this would really work, right? It sounds like some shitpost on a bizarro version of r/NonCredibleDefense, "just kill millions in one of Europe's smallest countries, that'll show them"
Especially bold coming from a country that has its wealth and power overwhelmingly centralized within one city.
Russians think they can fire nukes at us without us firing any back but in reality we WOULD fire back and i bet even then Russia is gonna cry about it being unfair that they can't fire missiles at an enemy without them retaliating just like how they cried about Ukraine being allowed to hit targets in Russia
If Russia fired nukes there wouldnt be many of them left to do the crying
That section of the article (I scanned it with google translate, I don't speak or read Russian) says it's because the Netherlands concentrates 60% of Europe's capacity for hydrocarbon supplies. I assume he's talking about refineries specifically, of which there are a lot around Rotterdam. So it's mainly a strategic strike in his view.
I personally don't think it matter if it's bluff or not bluff. We cannot simply bow and give up our freedom to any nation just because they have nuclear weapons.
Threatening MAD isn't exactly productive, but people become irrational upon the fear of ceasing to exist.
Give one nuke to a man that has zero hesitation to launch it anywhere if that anywhere threatens global peace even slightly. Take the doomsday clock straight to the point of no return and leave it to there for the whole eternity. Practically the only way to unify humans to a single goal is real and tangible existential terror right on our doorsteps.
One nuke is worthless, eventually someone is going to cross the threshold that person set for themselves. He is out of nukes now, now what? This would incentivise a bad actor to fund proxy groups to stir up shit and get nuked, thus disarming the impetus for more direct action by the bad actor.
Thing about nukes in the mad era is that when one is detonated, all of them are. Some slower than others. Bad actor risking lottery detonation with proxy groups just started the relatively very short countdown to detonate all of them. Philosophy of mad demands will to act, even it means end to us all, with very limited information. Otherwise, there is no mad and you’re free to nuke away. Leading to same end conclusion as mad would.
I was ready for the mushroom in 2022, so... Russia... keep bluffing. we keep doing our stuff.
> We cannot simply bow and give up our freedom to any nation just because they have nuclear weapons. That is easy to say. But I do not see many young people willing to go to the front and defend their freedom.
> I do not see many young people willing to go to the front and defend their freedom. I do, I speak to them. They showed me pictures from the trenches. Edit: come to think of it, yesterday evening I heard a Russian boy who fled Russia loudly condemn the Putin regime in English. He was going on and on about how backwards the Russian countryside is and how that helps enable Putin's agenda. There is a "chorus of contrived cowardice" on Reddit, which specializes in showing up in threads like these and pretending we're all too scared to fight. You get comments such as "why don't you sign up first, warmonger" or " it'll be your children dying at the front, not mine". This is textbook Russian propaganda, because it explicitly never asks these questions of the Russians, yet we see them writing "letters to the czar" in the form of selfie videos begging to be taken home often. Some of us, me included, already know death intimately and we will gladly die on the battlefield. It's important to contrast this experience with the scrawny, pockmarked incels in St. Petersburg writing these things, who typically have no life experience whatsoever, and their far-right, Putin-worshiping loser friends like that Swedish SD bot network who think they're clever but got infiltrated and exposed. It's important for Russians to know and fully understand that ultimately, this war hasn't even started and they've already lost half their equipment and half a million people. We are not intimidated by their pathetic, grovelling bullies. Once we *really* get involved, the Russian imperialist will see a resolve and a destruction on a scale they have never known, and they will know and feel what they did to Ukraine and they will either come to their senses or die. Yes, the free people of Europe will defend liberty with their lives, and we also have nuclear weapons capable of wiping out half of the Russian population, that is, all population centers West of the Urals, with the press of a button. That would be merciful option. Should the American nuclear arsenal get involved, [Russia is looking at total annihilation](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1beob93/simulation_of_a_retaliatory_strike_against_russia/).
Holy shit you _murdered_ them. Mind if I save this to copy and shove in the face of the next vatnik that asks "When are _you_ signing up to go to the front lines?"
You are wrong. The fear of a Russian conquered Europe is much greater than the fear of fighting Russia, many of the Eastern European countries work like that. People did not forgot or forgive Russia in those parts of Europe. They were worse than the nazis.
The freedom to not be able to afford a house, to live on misery wages, to not be able to start a family. Why dont the rich go fight? Why must we work to keep them rich while we can't even have a proper life, and then go die for their country when shit hits the fan?
oh no life is tough so I am going to betray my country and my countrymen !
Yes.
My country? Their country. What exactly is mine about this oligarchy? What am I betraying? I dont remember promising anything to anyone. Im not owed a damn thing, that's what capitalists tell us. Everything I want to have, I must earn. So why should I fight for free? Wasn't greed supposed to be good? Or does that only apply to the ruling oligarchy?
Would you rather be ruled by Western Oligarchy, who are still subject to law, and can be removed by voting if they become too obnoxious ... or Russian Oligarchy (well, FSB/Putin/Mafia) who are above the law, cannot be removed peacefully, and who actively assassinate/jail anyone who does not agree with them, while robbing the population blind? If you live in the West, you should understand that the Russian Oligarchy wants to conquer you - either by force, or by propaganda, making you believe you should side with them, siding with their minions.
I honestly couldn't give a damn. The day the sons of the rich are in the trench with me, I might consider it. Until then, no equal rights, no duties. Sorry, not sorry. And bound by the law is a big lol when they are the ones who finance the parties that they want to win. Who do you think has been giving money to the far right to allow so much fascist propaganda?
Russia. It is well known that Russia has been funding both far right, and far left parties in the West, just to sow discord, to weaken the West. Every idiocy and controversy in the west in the past 10 years has been abundantly funded by Russia. Like antivaxxers, wokeism, nazism, health-at-every-size, BLM, MAGA, you name it. Anything which divides and conquers has been funded by Russia. Even online fights about movies. Russia wants to either kill you or make you a serf (*). In the West, however, we still have a chance of making things right, if we stop believing the bullshit Russia is spreading. (*) Of course ... your position here kind of makes me think, that spreading confusion and division is actually your day job ... in Saint Petersburg, maybe?
The russians presumably also want to take away the properties of the owners of the means of production. Am I going to see them and their kids in the trenches? Yes or no, easy question. We both know the answer, its the same as in russia, ukraine, israel or any other place in the world. Being far left is a perfectly allowable political stance, or are you claiming that the west does not have democracy and should treat leftists as adversaries? Aren't we free to express our ideas? Even basic common sense ones such as if the poor must fight, so too must the rich? Funny how you had to bump BLM, a fight against the police treating black citizens like the russian police treats most of its citizens together with a series of hate movements, some of which are provably funded by Russia. If people with money are fleeing, I'm fleeing as well. Aren't they supposed to have money because they are smart, productive geniuses?
We are free to express our ideas. We have the ability to decide what we want. We should stand for the right of self determination for humans. There are lots of problems, which might be solvable, if we can come to an agreement. Russians do not have that freedom. Russia is an imperialistic and militaristic dictatorship, which wants to destroy us. If we allow them to win, humanity is doomed. And it won't be fun for any of us. Yes, we have social inequality, rich people having too much power. But we currently have power to fix that in our countries, because we live in democracies. Putin is the richest person in the world -- he has stolen so much from Russians that there is no comparison ... and Russians do not have the power to fix that, they do not even seem to have a desire to fix that. (Well, Nemzov and Navalnyi had that desire, but Putin killed them). It is GOOD that you oppose people with too much money, it shows you have principles! But I can't understand how you seem to be supporting the Russian kleptocracy, which is an order of magnitude worse than what we have here. Let's solve problems one at a time, currently the number one problem is Russian jingoism and imperialism. Get rid of them, then get rid of global warming, parasitic capitalists, etc. Putin is not an answer or salvation, he is our number one enemy at this moment.
[удалено]
I am afraid of war too, but I know my friends will be there and you can be sure I am not fleeing or staying at home, while my mates are being shot at because I would not be able to live with myself after that....
Tit
He is right, people are basically between the hammer and the nail there is not much difference
I'm pretty confident that the only purpose of having these vodka-guzzling, Russian political 'geniuses' blather on about nuclear escalation is to make Putin look reasonable or moderate. It is often forgotten that nuclear escalation means the end of both factions, except that the West has neither its children nor its assets in Russia. I am tired of being threatened by a petrol station with nuclear weapons and, to be honest, I am now deaf to such threats. If at some point it's no longer a bluff, it would be bad luck, but I'd rather go up in a mushroom cloud than leave the world to these fascist imperialists.
“Let’s defend the Russian motherland by starting a nuclear war”
"We did it, Patrick ! The West is no more !" *he says while standing in the middle of a nuclear wasteland*
This eerily sounds fitting for a russian joke…
In Soviet Russia: joke tells you!
You know what else will stop european politicians and their big war? Russia getting the fuck out of Ukraine.
But but... NATO bad/s r/EndlessWar mostly.
what the hell is that sub, like holy hell
Bots. People who hate NATO, the USA, or Europa. And pro russian Peace people.
"Anti-War", but only when the West is involved.
Correct
Why the Netherlands? What’s wrong with them?
These other replies are false, naively take Russian propagandist Gurulyov's bullshit at face value and misunderstand what you actually appear to be asking. Putin's military forces in Ukraine murdered 196 Dutch citizens when they shot down passenger flight MH17 near Hrabove, East Ukraine, on 17 July 2014. The Ukrainian separatists and Russians mocked the victims, robbed their bodies and left them to rot to frustrate the investigation. They tampered with the evidence. They deliberately spread false conspiracy theories. Ultimately, two Russians and a Ukrainian were convicted, in absentia, of murder, in a Dutch court. Very shortly after MH17, the Dutch commenced cyberwarfare against Russia. They were one of the sources of the Mueller investigation and prosecutions regarding the DNC and DCCC hacks. They literally hacked the Russian hackers' machines and filmed and recorded them on their own security cameras, and subsequently passed this information to the Americans. The Americans used this information to charge the hackers whom the Dutch had previously identified on their own security cameras, reportedly in some nondescript building near the Red Square. After the Russians helped Assad conduct chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian Civil War, the Russians sent a team of hackers with a car full of equipment to the Netherlands to attempt to hack the OPCW. They failed, were apprehended by Dutch intelligence and deported. Their license plate was subsequently used, I believe, by Bellingcat to expose hundreds of GRU agents by linking the license plates to other license plates registered at the same GRU address. Putin might have had the head of the GRU killed as a result. Fast forward to 2022, the Dutch haven't forgotten all these things, nor the many attacks by the Russians on other European countries, so they have been exceptionally hawkish when it comes to supplying weapons to Ukraine. They have delivered all sorts of things, but among the most prominent were self-propelled artillery (PzH2000), Patriots and F16s. The Dutch have authorized those F16s to fire on or be used against Russian territory. The Russians are furious about this and decided to threaten the Netherlands with a nuclear attack. The highest value target is Rotterdam Port, the biggest port in Europe, so that's why they selected Rotterdam. To justify this choice they come up with this narrative about oil and chokepoints, but while probably true, ***that wasn't the reason why The Netherlands was specifically highlighted***. More likely, it was the F16s. In fact, Solovyov even explicitly mentions it while interrupting Gurulyov.
The Dutch public service has not forgotten it. You're right. I am however extremely afraid whether the rest of society has not forgotten it though.
I had an argument about it that nearly turned into a bar fight. I go ham on these people when they try their Russian talking points.
It says in article "60% of capacity of hydrocarbons supply comes to Europe..(through Netherlands)"
They don't have nukes and can't strike back .
We host a few from the US tho
This is it. Host. And then trump is back as president (I hope not). He will order them back in the USA.
Look at betting odds. Biden is much more likely. Trump will get killed in the polls by moderates who dont want to hear his name everyday for another 4 years
Didn't Macron say he would defend the EU with the French nuclear arsenal? (I really don't remember, I thought I read an article about it recently.)
That won't happen, either, because the French want to be governed by pro-Russian neo-Nazis, just like the Dutch.
Everybody else is bored with it so they picked someone new.
Port of Rotterdam. He specifically named it as the target.
No, he's asking why. Rotterdam is not a reason. Dutch weapon deliveries (Patriot, PzH2000, F16, naval drones, etc) and generally anti-Russian positions after MH17 are. Now that formerly pro-Russian far-right extremist Geert Wilders won the election, the Russians have estimated this is the ideal timing for such a threat. Rotterdam is just a HVT, no more, no less. Going back to the cold war, Russia has several targets in the Netherlands. They are already known, and it's not just Rotterdam, although they could pick and choose.
That section of the article (I scanned it with google translate, I don't speak or read Russian) says it's because the Netherlands concentrates 60% of Europe's capacity for hydrocarbon supplies. I assume he's talking about refineries specifically, of which there are indeed a lot around Rotterdam. So it's mainly a strategic strike in his view. I'm not saying there isn't a retaliatory aspect behind it due to those Dutch weapon deliveries, but in his words hydrocarbons are the justification.
I'm not saying there is no reasoning behind selecting Rotterdam as a HVT. I know what Rotterdam is and does. I'm saying the reason this threat is made *now* is not because Rotterdam suddenly made Putin angry. I explained the reason for the threat in the previous comment.
I wasn't disagreeing, just adding a bit of context for people who might not know.
You literally are disagreeing with me. You assert: > So it's mainly a strategic strike in his view. I'm not saying there isn't a retaliatory aspect behind it due to those Dutch weapon deliveries, but in his words hydrocarbons are the justification. What he says what his justification is, is irrelevant. Andrey Gurulyov is literally a paid professional propagandist on Russian state television. You don't simply naively believe him when he lies to you what the reason is he brings it up. The narrative he's going with is that he suddenly discovered or remembers that he once discovered that Rotterdam is an important chokepoint. This is of course false. It's a lie. He always knew this and he didn't suddenly discover it nor did he suddenly recently remember that he discovered it. He is acting out a stage play, a script. I'm a bit astonished that I have to explain the basics of Russian state TV propaganda to you, actually. In the version of the script, 9 days ago, Gurulyov is even interrupted by Solovyov literally saying: **"Let me remind you, this is the country that authorized F16s striking on Russian territory"** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPGdRr_uEPc Now, I don't want to be repeating myself over and over, but one more time then: > Rotterdam is not a reason. > Dutch weapon deliveries (Patriot, PzH2000, F16, naval drones, etc) and generally anti-Russian positions after MH17 are. > Now that formerly pro-Russian far-right extremist Geert Wilders won the election, the Russians have estimated this is the ideal timing for such a threat. Look and listen carefully at the clip I've linked above. It's your job, obviously, to interpret hostile and extremely aggressive Russian propaganda which is highly scripted with *extreme care*. You don't just parrot what they *claim to be their motivations*, you must combine what you see and hear with plausible geopolitical context. That plausible geopolitical context is Dutch weapon deliveries (Patriot, PzH2000, F16, naval drones, etc) and generally anti-Russian positions in the wake of MH17. Plus, Geert Wilders is an absolute traitor to his country who photographed himself standing behind the lectern in Russian Parliament, 4 years after Putin's forces murdered 196 Dutch citizens. The Russians aim to exploit Wilders' treachery, his weakness and his mediocre intellect. They've decided that this is the moment to expose the Netherlands to a nuclear threat in response to Dutch weapon supplies to Ukraine. This is **very deliberately timed and highly calculated** and **formulated in response to Dutch weapon supplies to Ukraine, in particular the F16s, and the decision by the Dutch to allow Ukraine to strike Russian territory with those F16s**. **Gurulyov's "justification" is total horse shit. It's a lie. It's a narrative device wrapped around the threat that he is instructed to deliver in response to these weapons deliveries.** I hope this helps.
Mate, you're right and we're on the same side. No need to get worked up, this is not a competition on who's got the better take. Have a nice day.
You have something to learn here. In particular, learn not to be a Russian propaganda amplifier by taking Russian state television stageplays at face value and promoting their claims as fact. > Have a nice day. You too.
Russia is tired. It's begging to be put down like the sick dog it is. If Russia use a nuke on another country they will seize to exist within a few days, if not hours.
Russia is a sick society.
rashism must be stopped
The intensity of nuclear threats is a good measure of how stressed russians are at the very moment. It's actually a good sign.
The key Russian propagandist Margarita Simonyan once stated that if they undermine a nuclear bomb over Siberia, then there would be no consequences except the electronics disabled and this is good, because they return to the times of her youth. It should be understood that the key positions there are loyal, not smart people (this is noticeable in their faces). And they (as well as many Russians who watch them on TV) would very much like to deliver nuclear strikes on the countries that they hated, but they cannot, because they also have nuclear weapons. They will not beat NATO, because they understand the consequences for themselves, because speaking is one thing, and falling under a response nuclear blow is completely different. However, there is another point. If Russia's aggression is not punished, if Russia is not stopped, a number of countries will think about the production of nuclear weapons in order to protect itself.
>if Russia is not stopped, a number of countries will think about the production of nuclear weapons in order to protect itself I sure wish my government had the balls to have an underground project like that, just in case some allies get spaghetti legs
Russian here. The keys question is if it is working. And the answer is yes, it is actually working and very effective. It’s rhetoric and sabre rattling aimed at the West, and it’s accomplishing quite a lot. No NATO troops in Ukraine. No closed sky in Ukraine. Countries delaying their supplies of weapons on and on, and not supplying some types of weapons all (like Taurus). Even the decisions to supply Ukraine with certain weapons like ATACAMS or F-16 come almost a year later than they should have happened.
> And the answer is yes, it is actually working and very effective. having nukes is working, saying things not
It isn't the russian sabre rattling that contributed to the delay in supply military aid to Ukraine: it's russia interfering with politics. [russian propagandists are lamenting that the US is not threatening Russia with nukes because it makes Russia look like a fool when it responds to non-nuclear escalation with promises to annihilate Europ](https://x.com/NatalkaKyiv/status/1801129276651028764) Have you ever asked yourself why not a single nuclear power has replied to the 1.908.989 daily nuclear threats made by your regime?
“Have you ever asked yourself why not a single nuclear power has replied to the 1.908.989 daily nuclear threats made by your regime?” Indeed, that’s precisely my point. They are staying away from the conflict because of how much sabre rattling Russia has done. Rather unfortunately, because of Ukraine got supplied with the F-16, Leopard Tanks and ATACAMS a year earlier, the conflict would not be going as good for Russia as it currently is.
Nope: Nobody is taking russia's nuclear threats seriously, that is why no government has yet replied accordingly to those. On the contrary, the more russia is sabre rattling, the more it is signalling that something has hurt it. The delays in supplying military aid to Ukraine are caused by russia's interferences. >the conflict would not be going as good for Russia as it currently is. The conflict is. going good for russia? Really? I guess russia should notify that to Ukraine...
Never thought I would be defending russian in political discussion on the subject of Ukraine, but hear me out. This whole "escalation management" doctrine USA uses and pushes on the rest of the world is a result of fear of nuclear weapons, and this is the best strategy they came up with. And this strategy already costed a whole lot - giving tanks to Ukraine in 2022 would allow to push russians out of southern areas. Tanks were given a year later, like as if it some sort of RPG game with slow progression. And enemy had 1 year to build tripple-fucking-trenchlines and minefields of enormous size. And this will happen with each "promotion" - russia already knows what each next level of escalation is, and they are searching for countermeasures before they even land. Not saying that they would be successfull, mind you, as they still didn't find countermeasures to HIMARS, but this surely doesn't help. Like, what stops the West to allow ATACMS strikes on russian weapon factories and airfields? What are we waiting for? Another horrid warcrime to justify the measures?
> Nope: Nobody is taking russia's nuclear threats seriously [Biden says threat of Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is 'real'](https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-threat-putin-using-tactical-nuclear-weapons-is-real-2023-06-20/)
It is going good. Russia has a 4x advantage in manpower and artillery, and last I checked there is 15% of Ukraine territory under occupation. Granted, Russia is advancing rather slowly, but it is advancing still, while Ukraine hasn’t been on the offensive for almost a year.I don’t see how Ukraine will be able to get those territories back. Also consider that on the Zelenskiy peace summit, only 3 out of 10 propositions will remain, and [the resolution falls short of mentioning the withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine and the restoration of Ukraine's territorial integrity](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240611_06/) : Diplomatic sources say that the withdrawal of Russian troops and other things that Ukraine have been calling for were dropped from the draft because it took into consideration some emerging nations in Asia and Middle East that maintain ties with Russia.
Metallicat's got a point, the more Russia rattles the more the West considers that Russia needs a punch to the face instead of being left alone. These threats are only contributing to the old saying of "when the dog is shot, rabies is no more"
1. russia is in full counter attack mode since April and I would like to remind you that russia is the second Army in the World. 2. From the article you posted: *Ukraine’s demands regarding the withdrawal of Russian troops and other provisions were excluded from the draft statement “considering the positions of some Asian and Middle Eastern countries with rapidly growing economies that maintain ties with russia,*” Again, as I told you multiple times, it's russia's interferences: see finally you agree with me. 3. Scholz: "*There will be* ***no peace negotiations*** *there. We are still a long way from that as long as Russia believes it can achieve its goals on the battlefield"* [Ukraine-Russia peace talks far off – Scholz](https://english.nv.ua/nation/peace-talks-with-russia-still-far-off-says-german-chancellor-50425007.html)
1. Well of course Russia is doing far worse than anyone expected. The point is it still occupies Ukrainian territory, and the war is in its favour as it has artillery and manpower advantage - the latter Ukraine unfortunately cannot counter. I don’t see any way Ukraine could take those territories back 2. That’s not interference, that’s just politics. Russia is strengthening ties with Middle East and China, and that has an effect on EU/US that again are not supporting Ukraine enough. 3. Perhaps, but they will happen sooner or later. Again, Russia has a manpower and weapons advantage. How will Ukraine get those territories back, considering it doesn’t have the military resources for them?
1. *I don’t see any way Ukraine could take those territories back:* you're an armchair general as I am, and i see different outcomes; 2. Your regime is interfering since the dawn of times into foreign politics, and that is in full display right now; 3. Of course there will be peace talks and negotiations: this is how a war ends. 4. *How will Ukraine get those territories back, considering it doesn’t have the military resources for them?* As a russian, you should be more worried on how russia will be able to keep the illegally occupied territories. And again, you and me are just armchair generals and can say everything: what matters are the results.
1. Nice try evading the points, but unless you can answer how Ukraine that has around 4-5 times less population and fires almost 5 times fewer artillery shells a day, it’s not getting its territories back by force. And at this point, most war experts concur on that. 2. You do realise the difference between interference in politics and politics? Interference is affecting other countries’ internal politics (which Russia is also doing). Politics is forging closer their with China and Middle East. 3/4: and the results are: no counter offensive from Ukraine in almost a year, manpower shortages, and prospects of taking its territories back with prospects of losing more. I don’t worry how Russia will keep its occupied territories because I don’t care much for the current Russian state and would be happy to see it gone. The point is, Russia will keep them just as it kept Crimea, and I don’t see how they could me taken back militarily
1. russia, after 10 years of invasion, managed to occupy 15% of Ukraine's territory: how is this fact evading your point? 2. russia is interfering with what it deems 'enemy' foreign politics: moscow Johnson, Orban and Fico are an example of that. And no, russia is not forging ties with China, my man: russia has become China's vassal. >*and I don’t see how they could me taken back militarily* Again, for the last time I hope: you and me are fat armchair generals.
quantity of ww2 tanks wont match the western quality! The people question... russia might have more people, but you really cant think it for real that they can afford to put all people into the war, you cant think its real scenario:D On the other hand, ukraine can and will throw all people into the war, because they are defenders and can do that. In russia there are already serious shortages of workforce and you want to bury more, you have already so many casualties, its mind bogling, if you have at least some common sense, you can do the math, you cant lost 50 milions people to conquer ukraine, you really cannot and if you think you can, go for it, after the war, there will be no russia, because all russia will be swallowed by all other nations
Oh really, Ukraine can throw all people into the war? I guess that’s why their mobilization age is still 25, [labour shortages all over the country](https://au.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-running-short-people-040000974.html) are happening, [mass draft dodges](https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-faces-an-acute-manpower-shortage-with-young-men-dodging-the-draft/), their [frontline units report acute lack of manpower](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/08/ukraine-soldiers-shortage-infantry-russia/), and so on.
oh yes, they can, because of defensive war, that is completely opposite to what russians have - war of aggression and they even cant call it war, much worse situation in terms of availalbe pops for conscription... AND they have support of west (100x wealthier partner than russia) do the math, really, stop discussing and go count:p
Sorry, I missed that >*15% of Ukraine territory under occupation* Correct and that's since 2014, when the war started: 10 (ten) years.
The first two were (are?) impossible. Local soldiers dying in Ukraine is a big political no-no, most electorates wouldn't accept it. Also closed skies are impossible if you cannot enforce it, you would have to shoot down Russian planes and it would mean direct conflict. The rest is spot-on.
I agree, a full on war with direct conflict is definitely a no. My point is that the West on the scale of “no helping Ukraine whatsoever” to “nuclear war” was playing too cautions for the fear of escalation - and Russian sabre rattling played a big part in this. The issue is that of the West avoids escalation and Ukraine falls, the escalation will still happen in the future, so it’s going to happen anyway and it’s better to supply Ukraine now, until it’s too late.
> No NATO troops in Ukraine. There are special forces in Ukraine. You could say there are not directly fighting Russia on the front lines, but they are training and advising a lot.
No one wonders why Nato troops didn't intervene in Afghanistan to fight off Russians there, and didn't close its sky. Or during uprisings in Hungary and Chezhoslovakia. No one doubted that Soviets would use nukes to avoid defeat in WW3. Yet modern Russia would not?
More sabre rattling. Great...
There are two scenarios in which a nuclear escalation would be considered. In retaliation to a nuclear strike from an enemy and when you are badly losing a conventional war and the existence of your nation is about to end. It's a "We die but we will take you with us!"-scenario. Given NATO has no interest in starting a nuclear war, because they currently aren't even in a war, much less losing one, the fact that Russia is constantly threatening with nukes seems to be a clear sign of weakness. It looks like Russia is in panic mode and expects to lose badly in the war against Ukraine they have started. In any case, it looks very weak.
The problem about the latter argument is that Russia has threatened nuclear escalation even before and even more intense starting with the beginning of the invasion. In my opinion, this is pure blackmail. They use the threat of nuclear escalation to pressure and unsettle the west. We should finally stop giving Russia credibility for their escalatory rhetoric and call their bluff. Russia will gain nothing and lose everything if they would use nuclear weapons. Edit typo
I still think it's a bluff that makes themself look very weak and in a state of panic. They are threatening with a desperate last resort measure that would ensure their own destruction. Even if Russia was so mad to commit a nuclear first strike without being on their last breath, they would be annihilated by the retaliation strike of NATO. There must be things Russia can use as a threat that doesn't involve them stupidly committing suicide.
> There are two scenarios in which a nuclear escalation would be considered. In retaliation to a nuclear strike from an enemy and when you are badly losing a conventional war and the existence of your nation is about to end. It's a "We die but we will take you with us!"-scenario. That's the logical approach but logic has no home in Russia. It's all ass-kissing and kindergarten levels of power play politics. They often say one thing then end up doing the complete opposite. The best thing we can do is to be prepared for anything while also continuing to support Ukraine.
>The best thing we can do is to be prepared for anything while also continuing to support Ukraine. I fully agree. The best way to prevent a scenario in which a nuclear escalation is not as unlikely as it is today, is to support Ukraine and enable them to liberate all areas Russia is currently occupying. There is no reason to assume that Russia would stop its war of conquest if they are allowed to win against Ukraine and fully or in parts annex it into their Empire. Putin would just rebuild his army and then attack the next neighbor. Most likely Moldova first, but after that there is a real risk that he would try to attack a NATO member. (Most likely the Baltics.) And that direct confrontation could lead to a scenario were a nuclear escalation could indeed happen. For example when the Russian army is beaten back and NATO forces closing in on Moscow, with a weeping Putin sitting in his Führerbunker with the red bottom on his desk.
> Putin would just rebuild his army and then attack the next neighbor. We'd be stupid to ignore the fact that this has happened before. Remember Georgia? Remember Afghanistan? [The list goes on.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion) Russia routinely invades smaller less powerful countries as a power play display towards its own citizens and the West yet these invasions are rarely discussed now as if they never happened.
"Give them an inch and they'll take a mile" It's either abandon Ukraine and then some, or we also become steadfast and ready our nuclear arsenals -- hoping that the Russians have some sense that they cannot rule over a desolate wasteland, much less have a guaranteed chance to survive. That, or a gigantic revolution/coup happens. I just feel nothing but sadness over Russia, what they could have become. A future of guaranteed prosperity, ruined by a council of corrupt "strongmen" who lusts after power.
r/russiawarns
I am always very perplexed when I read that there is a part of Russians who think they will remain immune from a nuclear war.
Is this supposed to be scary or something? It isn’t. They just look dumb and desperate.
The newspaper is basically mocking them
Gurulyov: "Fuck Netherlands especially, no hard feelings".
Let's threaten the west with nuclear war by nuking ourselves. True demonstration of our power.
They could demonstrate it on Moscow..
Nuclear weapon is an option that Russia knows too well should not use. Because if they do, it would be gloves off and even their partners would abandon them.
The most depressing thing about this whole cafuffle is that literally nobody is threatening Russia. Not one western country wants to attack Russia. There's no reason to. Putin knows this, we know this. This is war theatre for domestic consumption only. Do ordinary Russians know that they are in literally no danger from "the West"?
Let them do it! Assuming how great russian science is novadays I would expect that they will demonstrate this nuclear explosion in the middle of Moscov xD
Must be "fun" to live in such a delusional society.
We should stop letting them just say this shit. They're treatening nuclear genocide, so take their threat at face value. Take any foreign assets they might still have, put out a global warrant for their arrest, anyone that's helping them is aiding and abedding would-be terrorists. Threaten to kill one person and you get arrested, threaten millions and suddenly we're supposed to ignore it?
Try that, let's see how ultra urbanized russia survives destruction of all cities.
Russia threatening west with nukes: I sleep European nuclear power threatening to glass Moscow: One ticket to shelter please
they do know using nukes will end them too, right?
Cant Russia just be fucking normal? Who gives a shit about this jingoistic crap anymore it's not 1914.
Russia is weak and embarrassing
Wouldn't it be even more embarrassing losing to them?
Ah yes, i'm sure Russia's political elite will nuke children and vacation homes. Definitely.
10D Chess move right here! I bet "dA DeCaDeNT WeSt" will NEVER see ru Nuking themselves coming from a mile?
So this is not about magic mushrooms :<. They could launch that warning nuke missile anyway, it could look dope on shrooms.
I'm somewhat surprised they haven't done a nuclear test. My best guess - as in 51% certain - is they're no longer able. Nukes need a lot keep ready, the expenses are a non-auditable state secret in a country as corrupt as Russia, and **_if_** the moment ever comes that they should function than the ""crime"" of hiding the money no longer matters.
It's funny how they think that a nuclear strike on the Netherlands could force Europe its knees, with all the different countries, cities and center of power we have, when we on the other side would have just one single target (or maybe two) to cripple the whole country.
I think he imagines that if they hit the port of Rotterdam Europe will fold immediately due to losing one of the key transport hubs from which energy supplies (and potential US army reinforcements) are flowing in. Russian propaganda is obsessed with oil and gas because that's really the main thing Russia can offer to the rest of the world.
just wait until trump starts sending weapons and aid to russia or even calls to nuke the EU if we dont let russia take land
just wait until trump starts sending weapons and aid to russia or even calls to nuke the EU if we dont let russia take land
When we see daily videos of untrained Russian soldiers driving across open fields on motorcycles and golf carts and then dying. Rinse and repeat. We see their Navy being sunk by a (smaller) nation without a navy. Their airforce shot down by a nation with almost no airforce. Equipment being used that is 60 years old, who takes their stupid, constant nuclear threats seriously? At this stage, I wish they would just do it and then Russia would be no more.
sobosednik supposed to be an independent newspaper, opposing the current russian government. so, isn't is weird a newspaper with pro-west tendencies is publishing an article like this? >Sobesednik has been one of the last remaining independent media outlets in Russia that is critical of the government. It has published articles and opinions that are highly critical of the Kremlin and Russian authorities. >In 2012, the opposition Coordinating Council held a meeting in Sobesednik's office, indicating the newspaper's ties to the political opposition in Russia. >Sobesednik has faced significant pressure from the Russian government, including having its print runs seized, its website blocked multiple times, and its channel on the Dzen platform shut down by Roskomnadzor (the federal communications watchdog). >Sobesednik has been one of the last remaining independent media outlets in Russia that is critical of the government. It has published articles and opinions that are highly critical of the Kremlin and Russian authorities. >The newspaper's editor-in-chief, Oleg Roldugin, has stated that Sobesednik is not breaking any laws, but the authorities can "always find fault with anything they like" when it comes to critical media outlets. >Roldugin has said that independent journalism like Sobesednik's serves as a "conscience" that points out deficiencies in the government, unlike pro-Kremlin propaganda.
I swear these people are instructed to say this shit only to make Putin look more moderate.
Собеседник)))) Yes, you can really give out the yellow press for a net worth of money))
I Think he’s planning on nuking Ukraine. What would happen if he does ?
Pietari and moscow will become parking lots.
But is that a certainty? Like they are not in nato
I am well aware that pietari and moscow are not in NATO.
What ? I mean neither is, so it’s a serious question, not a front to you. Like if the the fallout drift into Europe, could there be a nato response?
Look: russia nuclear threats are void. I am freightened by the dog that never barks and not by the one who barks behind a fence. France has its own nuclear doctrine and has a very clear stand on it in regard of russia nuking Ukraine, regardless if Ukraine is a member of NATO or not.
This didn’t answer anything..
I dont know if people realize that while some of these people say things because they have to, some actually are delusional enough to mean it. Thats one of the tricky parts of leaving russian crazy folks to get close to the nuclear buttons.