|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 25, 2022 5:28:02 GMT
Yeah, I couldn't remember how that had played out (if it was because of communication issues or over-zealous Captains) so I skipped mentioning it. The other two were fresher as I'd just reread accounts of them within the last five years. Basically, yes, if certain events occur (one of which is occurring*), the Russian military can use tactical nukes (ie, non-strategic, doesn't require the President to sign off on - because he's already signed off on it)... just like our military can. Barring a Jack D. Ripper scenario, I don't think that a random Russian general is going to fire a tacnuke off. But the "escalate to deescalate" doctrine championed by Putin back in the 90s is sort-of official; it's hard to know what the culture and expectations are around this amongst Russian brass. Russian action has probably kiboshed nuclear non-proliferation for the foreseeable future, and Ukraine is surely regretting its choices. And I imagine South Africa is now thinking maybe disarming was a bad idea, after all. |
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 25, 2022 11:10:44 GMT
I doubt Ukraine is regretting anything really. They are if not winning the war, they're actively making life hell for the Russians and making active fools of them, which is a kind of win. Which considering the army size difference? Is amazing. I read one report where Ukraine now has more tanks than at the start of the war because they keep on capturing Russian tanks! Not to mention, Ukraine keeps on killing Russian generals. That's gotta hurt Russia.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 25, 2022 16:08:13 GMT
I doubt Ukraine is regretting anything really. They are if not winning the war, they're actively making life hell for the Russians and making active fools of them, which is a kind of win. Which considering the army size difference? Is amazing. I read one report where Ukraine now has more tanks than at the start of the war because they keep on capturing Russian tanks! Not to mention, Ukraine keeps on killing Russian generals. That's gotta hurt Russia. I guarantee that they regret Russia invading them, because of all the death, destruction and displacement of innocent Ukrainians that have happened. |
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on Mar 25, 2022 17:20:40 GMT
I doubt Ukraine is regretting anything really. They are if not winning the war, they're actively making life hell for the Russians and making active fools of them, which is a kind of win. Which considering the army size difference? Is amazing. I read one report where Ukraine now has more tanks than at the start of the war because they keep on capturing Russian tanks! Not to mention, Ukraine keeps on killing Russian generals. That's gotta hurt Russia. I guarantee that they regret Russia invading them, because of all the death, destruction and displacement of innocent Ukrainians that have happened. And I suspect that they regret getting rid of their own nukes. |
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 26, 2022 1:07:01 GMT
Who wouldn't regret an invasion, but they're stopping Russia and making them hurt more.
|
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 26, 2022 9:34:38 GMT
Just pathetic.  |
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 26, 2022 11:03:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 26, 2022 19:23:39 GMT
Who wouldn't regret an invasion, but they're stopping Russia and making them hurt more. No. The rest of the world is making Russia hurt more. Otherwise Ukraine hurts a lot more, since Ukraine is losing civilian men, women and children AND losing tons and tons of infrastructure, while Russia is just losing men and war equipment. Yes they are stopping Russia, but at a huge cost. |
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Mar 27, 2022 0:01:43 GMT
Yes they are stopping Russia, but at a huge cost. Nitpick, the Ukrainian's are slowing Russia. But unless a larger country steps up to the plate, the Ukraine will eventually be taken. Then it's just down to how much Russia wants to hold it, and far Putin is willing to go to make sure it's isn't another Afghanistan for them. |
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 28, 2022 23:40:44 GMT
Well, it looks like it's costing Russia enough that they're in peace talks, which given the situation is pretty bizarre (good for Ukraine) for a country (Russia) who thought they could just roll in and take over after a couple of days.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 29, 2022 1:32:20 GMT
Well, it looks like it's costing Russia enough that they're in peace talks, which given the situation is pretty bizarre (good for Ukraine) for a country (Russia) who thought they could just roll in and take over after a couple of days. I bet those peace talks still include those ridiculous demands Russia made earlier in the war. |
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 29, 2022 5:17:27 GMT
Zelenskyy is playing it smart. He has said that any deal needs to be ratified by the Ukrainian people in a referendum, and will require a guarantor for Ukraine's safety - presumably this would be NATO or the EU.
I hope that, long-term, the EU formalizes its own defense force and NATO is dissolved; the EU is a more-than adequate counterbalance to the Russian Federation. France has 300 operational nukes, which is enough of deterrent; the UK would have a couple of hundred more if it were folded in as a defense partner (non-EU member).
From a European perspective, post-Trump, the commitment of US Presidents to NATO is too fickle and unreliable.
|
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 29, 2022 23:06:45 GMT
Another thing we can blame Trump for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 30, 2022 2:06:37 GMT
Zelenskyy is playing it smart. He has said that any deal needs to be ratified by the Ukrainian people in a referendum, and will require a guarantor for Ukraine's safety - presumably this would be NATO or the EU. I hope that, long-term, the EU formalizes its own defense force and NATO is dissolved; the EU is a more-than adequate counterbalance to the Russian Federation. France has 300 operational nukes, which is enough of deterrent; the UK would have a couple of hundred more if it were folded in as a defense partner (non-EU member). From a European perspective, post-Trump, the commitment of US Presidents to NATO is too fickle and unreliable. We can only hope. One of the few things Trump was right on was NATO. The other members weren't carrying their weight in the organization and were letting the US foot everything. |
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 30, 2022 5:58:10 GMT
Another thing we can blame Trump for. Why blame? NATO was an organization looking for a purpose after the fall of the Soviet Union, and was already defunct. It should have been dissolved in the 90s; had it been, and had Russia been given a path to EU membership, all of the current bullshit could have been avoided. As could the Afghanistan War, and probably the Iraq war. The tragedy/irony is that Putin has just injected NATO with a fresh reason to exist, and now it will take another generation to get rid of it. |
|
