The chances of nukes being used in the Ukrainian war are higher than ever in human history. No, this is not a wet dream of some sort. It's based on basic material assessment of the balance of resolve.
Simply speaking - Russia, the country with the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world, considers the outcome of the Ukrainian war to be of existential importance to its own survival. This is just the facts. Anyone who thinks Russia would simply pack-up and fuck-off if it wouldn't achieve its goals using conventional means - needs his head checked. This war is a duel to the death for Moscow. Not many western politicians have understood this yet. For the first time ever nukes are genuinely on the table. The Cuban missile crisis doesn't even come close to this. Take it as you will.
They would be lower if faggot poles and CIA glowies weren't trying their hardest to escalate this entire situation as much as possible. Unelected bureaucrats are going to end us all.
Hasn't Putin been sitting in his bunker for the last weeks like a little pussy ? He definitely knows this shit won't end well.
Matthew Johnson
nukes dont exist anyway
Wyatt Myers
Post banan
Christian Carter
>Not many western politicians have understood this yet. And once you realize the West is the same way and Putin doesnt understand that either, is when you know we're pretty much dead already. This stupid shitshow is where the whole trajectory of history ends. How very gay. I suggest getting your shit in order and having those conversations with people you didnt talk to in years, settling those disputes and all that. The tape is about to run out. Been a pleasure posting with you niggers.
There are only three moments when a nuke of ukraine could happen. A suddenly a massive NATO/EU force enters ukraine as relief force. B somehow ukrainians beat the Russian forces and start a counter offensive. C the war last for 12+months Russian economy suffers and Putin can't pull out, because he knows if he does he will be dead(ain't the case right now), so he nukes it to avoid death.
So like the chance of see any use is ultra low.
Camden Nguyen
would a nuke on Ukraine necessitate nuclear retaliation from NATO?
I'm guessing Pakistan could be used as a non-nato proxy for retaliation. Assuming Pak leadership don't care for its people?
Otherwise MAD still holds, and thus despite Ukraine being an existential issue, using nukes if likely to provoke response would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Henry Hall
>And once you realize the West is the same way and Putin doesnt understand that either, is when you know we're pretty much dead already. This stupid shitshow is where the whole trajectory of history ends. How very gay. I suggest getting your shit in order and having those conversations with people you didnt talk to in years, settling those disputes and all that. The tape is about to run out. Been a pleasure posting with you niggers.
imho there's still a way out.
WW1 basically ended because the troops on both sides were deserting and neither side wanted to end up like the Russians. Wars end when working men refuse to fight them.
The thought of Big Daddy Putin launching a first strike is the only thing getting me out of bed in the morning. Mr Putin, if you are reading this you know what you have to do, go get em tiger!
>Nukes Ukrainian major cities >sends in ground forces to sweep and take over what remains >entire force that enters area within 72 hours dies from radiation poisoning
lol Ukraine is just the beginning Nato 1997 is next I mean it's all in open sources
Noah Gutierrez
no. Heck if Russia suddenly nuked Poland or Lithuanian (although they have no reason to do that) would make UK, France and US go "okey the time of humans has ended, time to avange the Poles , who now no longer exist, and blow the world up"?
And the cost would be minimal too. Sure Russia would be a pariach of the world. West would stop buying oil and gas etc. But China and India wouldn't. So life for the regular folk would be hard, but the head honchos would live as normal. And Russia never cared about the fate of its regular folks.
Christian Cruz
Let's get it on then.
Colton Flores
I've been saying since the beginning of the war Krautanon, there's a reason Putin his nuclear forces on highest alert when the shitshow started. Also, he deployed some tactical warheads in Belarus, ready to be used. So if he doesn't win conventionally, he'll move to the next level. He cannot lose this war, otherwise it'll sign the end of Russia.
Benjamin Ortiz
I've been a bit concerned as well. This is probably the hottest it has been since the Cuban missile crisis and everybody is both reckless and nonchalant about it.
Colton Butler
Dude there have been nukes deployed in belarus in mid 2000s. Somehow this did not cause WW3 nuke bonanza 1.0.
Luis Hall
But he increased the number of them. It'd be either for threatening or for using them.
Colton Carter
Yeah, Putin can't afford to lose and the west can prevent him from winning with sanctions and weapons and insurgency.
Take into account Russia's modernized arsenal with hypersonic and Poseidon and they may believe now is the most advantageous time for them to do it.
Add covid which destabilized everything and the economic fallout they don't want to deal with, add peoples dissatisfaction with government and the suspicions of covid origin which governments are incapable of addressing in any satisfactory way, yet which is causing them to lose legitimacy since they won't address it.
The west has every incentive to push all focus onto this war as a crisis so they can ignore other issues, and they're irresponsible enough to do it. At the same time Russia has every reason to not back down and resort to nuclear war if it looks like they can't win.
