The use of nukes against Ukraine is still incredibly unlikely to lead to a strategic nuclear exchange with NATO. — boethius
However, if Ukrainians do "win" and push the Russians back to their borders then certainly everyone would agree that's failure, and nukes would be the only thing left at that point. — boethius
Untrue.
Lot's of conventional military options still available.
The use of nukes against Ukraine is still incredibly unlikely to lead to a strategic nuclear exchange with NATO. — boethius
They may not see it that way, nor care. US used Nukes against Japan and Russia could use the exact same reasoning of needing nukes to save the lives of their soldiers. — boethius
Unclear. As has been discussed at length, only the West is angry with Russia and no one else seems to care about it. If anything the large majority of the world feels satisfactory schadenfreude that the reckless and cynical warring ways of the West is coming home to roost (regardless of "who started it"). — boethius
141 of the 193 member states voted for the resolution, 35 abstained and five voted against
and he is not the suicidal type. — Olivier5
In other news:
Ukrainian Astronomers Discover ‘Exocomets’ around Another Star
By Briley Lewis on April 14, 2022
Astronomers from the Main Astronomical Observatory (MAO) of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv recently published a discovery of five new exocomets—comets orbiting a star other than the sun—in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, using data from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS). They also independently confirmed a handful of exocomets that were previously detected by other researchers. — Olivier5
this isn't true, the majority is against Russia's invasion, as seen through UN's votes.
141 of the 193 member states voted for the resolution, 35 abstained and five voted against — Christoffer
By population that amounts to just over half the world abstaining. Funny how readily you forget the grossly disproportionate power Western countries have in the UN. — Isaac
and he is not the suicidal type.
— Olivier5
That's up for debate though... never doubt a lunatic. — Christoffer
We shall see... IMO, this talk about nukes is just blah, designed to scare opponents and placate supporters. — Olivier5
I see little opening for Russia to be anything other than a new North Korea, even if the war ends. — Christoffer
A North Korea with vast oil reserves, though. It makes an important difference. It's also a much larger country than NK, and can't be isolated the same way as small NK. My take is that Russia will remain an important country in this world no matter what happens. — Olivier5
the world can demand them to remove their stupid leaders, dismantle nukes, and only then they will give them transactions for their minerals — Christoffer
Russian nuclear weapons will basically halt any incursions into Russia proper by Ukraine. Putin doesn't have to keep large formations on his side of the border. What he does have to do is to keep his Air Defence on alert and security at a heightened level to prevent sabotage. Ukraine can and has used already tactical artillery missiles to attack targets inside Russia.If Russia is "being the bully" and has no legitimate grievances in Ukraine that justify, at least from some arguably Western (aka. the truth) normative perspective, then the reason for using nuclear weapons to intimidate other neighbour's to maintain bully credibility is so high that the use of nuclear weapons by Russia is essentially inevitable at this point if the premises of the rhetoric are true. — boethius
A tactical nuke would however put them in a position where they have nothing left in terms of diplomacy with the west. — Christoffer
Russia would solidify its existence as a criminal nation and they would probably not be able to heal any diplomatic ties for a very very long time. — Christoffer
It's basically the nail in the coffin for Russia as a nation, slowly disintegrating down into a nation that's falling behind on any front. In 20 years, the world will have moved past them in every way, probably putting up defensive systems around the nation to block any attempts of nukes going out of it while the technological advancements outside of Russia will make them look like the stone age. — Christoffer
Many here argue for each nation to be responsible for their own development, that it's each and every independent nation's right to develop however they want. That also means that actions stretching outside of a nation can have consequences; that becoming an isolated nation is part of the internal development each independent nation is responsible for. No one is to blame for Russia's failures and how they're now treated. The rest of the world can choose however they want to interact with Russia and if they don't want to interact with them, then Russia has no right to demand anything. — Christoffer
Ukraine might continue to fight as long as there's material support from the west. They had massive morale going into defending their country and being able to push back the big bear Russia this much would seriously have boosted their morale even further, combined with the anger of the war crimes.
I don't think Ukraine will settle easily, they want justice for Russia's crimes and they might fight until every single Russian in Ukraine is killed, captured, or sent home. — Christoffer
Russia's reasoning doesn't matter, only their actions do. And if they use nukes, they can sit there and think that they're on top of the world, but their nation will become an isolated cesspool of decades-old technology in a nation just living through survival of national food supply and rusting cars with no actual progress. — Christoffer
Tactical nukes won't be the same as regular nuclear weapons. — Christoffer
They continue to fail because they're stupid. Only stupid armies dig trenches in the Red forest. — Christoffer
The consequences of the nukes in Japan should not be understated. It wasn't trivial, it was world-defining and there weren't any political or existential consequences imagined before the bombings as there were after the bombings. Historical context is very important here. — Christoffer
But this isn't true, the majority is against Russia's invasion, as seen through UN's votes. — Christoffer
Russian nuclear weapons will basically halt any incursions into Russia proper by Ukraine. Putin doesn't have to keep large formations on his side of the border. — ssu
And Russian nuclear weapons have already done what they were supposed to do: have Joe Biden declare that under no circumstances US troops won't be deployed to Ukraine and NATO aircraft won't create a no-fly zone over Ukraine. — ssu
Greece is different. But one should note that it was the Greek leaders that opted eagerly to follow the advice of Wall Street bankers to create the problems at the first place. And this just underlines that every country actually has it's set of problems and possibilities. There's of course similarities, but you cannot bunch the states together. — ssu
I'm not so sure this conflict will end in a few days. Too much is put on some date.It's gonna be interesting to see what the post-war status of Russia would be. Let's say they make some bullshit up, withdraw their troops and present a "victory" on May 9th. — Christoffer
Which just tells the obvious to any sane person: nobody will attack Russia. NATO won't attack Russia, the US won't attack Russia. It's just all a lie Putin has invented to give a reason for his totalitarian dictatorship and why any political opposition is violently opposed.Exactly, in terms of military logic, it makes enormous amounts of sense, not only vis-a-vis Ukraine if they ever did successfully counter attack, but of any other bordering country to Russia ... would obviously think twice. — boethius
It's a possibility. Of course the whole argument for Zelensky's victory was to oppose that. At least it was a better option than Americans voting for... Trump. And if Ukraine wants to join the EU, it has to change.The combination of debt and corruption is one that will leave a country floundering in debt for decades. Which is my prediction for Ukraine irrespective of the outcome of this war. — Benkei
Right now, this could be mere barking. But there's no way to see this conflict without putting nuclear weapons very high in the list of concerns. If this was a war between two non-nuclear countries, it would be hard to imagine it would get nearly a 5th of the coverage it currently gets. — Manuel
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.