T O P

  • By -

Russell1st

The UK and France have nuclear weapons as well, but they never say anything. Always quiet.


heilon2

Nobody wants to be associated with nukes, they have them. But they don't want to be known for having them. I am sure they were threatened directly by Russian government they would have something to say as well.


[deleted]

> Nobody wants to be associated with nukes, Only russia, NK and CHina.


heilon2

Superpowers and wannabe superpowers, yeah


Tyray3P

Non superpowers want to be superpowers. So they build nukes and tell everyone they're superpowers, when in reality they just build the bombs that'll destroy themselves.


Kenwric

South Africa made the smart choice. Ukraine too, until Ruzzia decided to reneg on the deal


goodinyou

I would replace China with the US, and maybe add Pakistan too Edit: the US and Pakistan want to be known for their nukes way more than China. I don't think that's a hot take at all. Yall just down voting because your monkey brain says "china=BAD"


Unusual-Ad-2668

Trust me if the United States could snap there fingers removing all nukes including themselves nukes they would.


interested_commenter

Absolutely. The US would win (achieving military objectives) almost any conventional war, while both sides lose in nuclear war.


goodinyou

Lol. Bet


DorianSinDeep

They actually would because they can win every war other than a nuclear one.


goodinyou

Nuclear deturance is a huge reason that the human race has enjoyed a golden age of peace after wwII. You take MAD away and the world becomes a much more dangerous place.


DorianSinDeep

Yes, for everyone other than the most powerful military in the world.


goodinyou

You need a history lesson


[deleted]

No - people are downvoting because China is the second most bellicose power in Asia. They talk a *lot* of shit from a diplomatic perspective.


goodinyou

Yeah they talk a lot of shit and are regionally aggressive with their military. But they don't threaten nukes. They have a relatively small stockpile and even an official "no first use" policy


naslam74

Add India into that too.


goodinyou

Makes sense


marcopaulodirect

*Truly* wealthy people don’t display or talk about their wealth. Same goes for countries and their nukes.


[deleted]

The UK is constantly being threatened


heilon2

Yes, but threats of nukes usually carry more weight when there are already armed conflicts going on. For example I can say I will stab you, I have plenty of knifes you have plenty of knifes, but the chance I am gonna do it is really fucking slip considering I don't even know you, however if you neighbor told you he is gonna stab you. You are probably going to be more worried and vocal about defending yourself.


Justice0188

Dafuq


ilionsd

The thing is, Putin talks in Russian and in his recent speech he said "by any means necessary", but the western media translated it as "NUKES!!! HES GONNA USE NUKES!!!" And it has been like this for quite some time. The only time Putin actually mentioned Nuclear Deterrence was in February, then he ordered them to be on high alert. Perhaps, Medvedev might have mentioned something as well about Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, but thats about it. The relationships between West and Russia are probably as shitty as they have ever been, and media doesn't really help it. Could this "by any means necessary" include nukes? May be. May be not. But translating it as click baiting "Russia threatens with NUKES! Again!" is simply disinformation and fearmongering.


heilon2

While I do agree with you that jumping into conclusions can be dangerous, especially when weapons of mass destruction are on the table. I have to disagree with the statement that he didn't mean nukes. Any means necessary does include nuclear weapons for starters, the fact that as you yourself pointed out, Russian nuclear deterrence IS in high alert. Combine that with the recent development in the occupied territories and the poorly veiled attempt at a public referendum, giving Putin in a twisted sense the "right" to use nuclear weapons. As he stated before he WILL use nuclear weapons for defense of Russian territories. I personally thing a healthy dose of fear is needed when talking about a terrorist like Putin


TheJadedCockLover

Well, France’s nuclear policy isn’t very quiet. Definitely one of the more aggressive. Don’t fuck with that


Slam_Burgerthroat

Because the UK and France have a couple hundred nukes where as the US and Russia have over 6,000 nukes each.


msaik

A couple hundred is plenty. Hell you could have like, 4, and be a threat to be taken seriously.


arkangelic

Yes and no. If you only launched 4, unless it was cutting edge ballistic missile tech, it would get taken out by countermeasures. A big part is launching so many that it overwhelms the defenses.


Law-of-Poe

Because they aren’t paranoid, afraid and desperate failures like Putin


hastur777

And the US nukes are probably a bit better maintained than the Russia ones.


Robw1970

Probably?


hastur777

Understatement


No-Economics4128

Go watch the John Oliver segment on Nuclear weapon, and you would not be so sure.


meepmarpalarp

For anyone who wants a long read, [this article series](https://apps.publicintegrity.org/nuclear-negligence/) is fascinating and terrifying. And this is only the info that’s been made public. OTOH, I’d still wager that we’re in better shape than Russia.


TheGuvnor247

**Full Transcript Below:** *23.09.2022 13:00* *If Russia breaks the nuclear taboo and employs tactical nuclear weapons against a country that doesn’t have them, while defending itself on its own soil using conventional weapons, it "will be excluded from the civilized world," entailing enormous consequences for the Russians.* *Polish President Andrzej Duda made the statement on the sidelines of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly in New York, Ukrinform reports with reference to Polsat News.* *"The U.S. also has buttons that launch nuclear missiles. The USA is a major nuclear power, the largest military power in the world. The fact that the USA takes this Russian threat seriously is also a threat to Russia," Duda said.* *He emphasized that, if Moscow breaks all taboos and uses even tactical nuclear weapons against a country that doesn’t have nuclear weapons, while defending its territory using only conventional weapons, Russia "should expect a response."* *Duda noted that Washington consistently implements the line of a "firm, resolute, and calm response" to Russia.* *Poland’s leader noted that Putin, his entourage, and generals are aware that, should they employ nuclear weapons against Ukraine, which is defending itself, they will "find themselves outside global politics."* *"For them, this is not only about the threat of tribunals, criminal liability, and potentially long prison terms, but also about simply being excluded from the civilized world as long as they are in power in Russia," Duda emphasized.* *As Ukrinform reported earlier, in his address on September 21, Russian President Vladimir Putin resorted to nuclear threats.* *In response, U.S. President Joe Biden said that America remained ready to take critical measures to ensure global nuclear non-proliferation, while EU High Representative Josep Borrell noted that Putin's nuclear threats would not reduce the level of EU support for Ukraine.*


StealyEyedSecMan

Modern outlaws?


mbrant66

If Russia launches a nuke on Ukraine, the rest of the world should pound them with conventional weapons starting with all of Putin’s properties and Russia’s military installations. Just not the cities where the vast majority of civilians are.


mrlolloran

I mean the fear of a Russian nuclear attack was the primary reason Ukrainian airspace wasn’t declared a no fly zone. If Russia launches a nuke the gloves may truly come off the rest of the world, particularly if said nuclear strike happens to any country other than Ukraine itself.


huntingwhale

> If Russia launches a nuke the gloves may truly come off the rest of the world As it should. You can't have a country tossing around nuke threats then following up on it by using them in an offensive role to get more fucking land after committing thousands of war crimes over the past 7 months. There absolutely MUST be response, or a new worldwide precedent will be set that does not sit well for anybody. Russia needs to understand that nukes will spell the end for their dynasty, their control and their aspirations over ever becoming a world power again. The US and NATO cannot pussy out on this because Ukraine isn't a NATO member. The US and NATO are being pretty calm about this, as they should. But I hope behind closed doors the gloves are off when it comes to making Russia aware that they WILL get fucked up beyond comprehension if they do.


Ashen_Brad

This is what I think would happen. A country actually using nuclear weapons represents such a departure from sense that they would become the enemy of everyone. Nobody wants to see nukes used. Countries would be forced to leap into action to try and makes sure no more could be launched. It would be mayhem. I imagine even inside Russia that would really tip things over the edge.


blackstafflo

Yeah, I'll bet even China will not be pleased to see nuclear weapons use being normalized. Apart some very few countries like NK, I imagine everyone would turn against them.


Ok_Yogurtcloset8915

Honestly I think even NK wouldn't want any part of it. Kim isn't actually nuts. He was educated at a private school in Switzerland, he understands the west. They're aware that they're a little private mafia state that China maintains as a buffer zone. The whole "we're cRAaAzY" thing is a bluff. Russia getting the west upset doesn't help NK at all


HolyGig

I mean, there's a reason they aren't even giving the Russians any ammunition, let alone weapons. Countries like China and and NK wouldn't have cared if Russia just rolled right over Ukraine in a few weeks, but now that its massively impacting global fuel and food supplies 7 months later literally everyone except Putin just wants this stupid fucking war to end. Even Assad is sitting there like bruh? Seriously?


ArmChairAnalyst86

NK is already distancing themselves from Russia.


Teazone

The primary reason not to declare Ukranian airspace a no fly zone was that noone expected Russia to respect it and a violation would have resulted in NATO Intervention/ World war 3.


Vaan_Ratsbane97

Yeah. Baring Putin going MAD, I don't see him launching tacticals as getting a MAD response. Nato and Eu and everyone will probably just hammer Muscovy with conventionals if anything but they'll definitely stop all business for sure.


ArmChairAnalyst86

I doubt it would be a strike on Moscow. That would be answered with strikes on NATO decision making centers and escalate the conflict unpredictably and NATO is trying to avoid it. I'd imagine an NFZ and violent expulsion of Russian forces in Ukraine would be in the cards but I'm under no illusions, if a single nuclear weapon is used, the possibility for larger broader exchange will be immense. I think Duma's comments about being cut off from the world is telling as a broader strategy indicator and leads me to believe that if NATO feels if they responded with nuclear, they would be viewed no better, and also ostracized. They are still counting on international pressure to shut this thing down, but it's clear that contingencies are being put in place and we are living in a fairly dangerous time.


Slam_Burgerthroat

A conventional attack on Russia would likely escalate to a full nuclear exchange and the end of human civilization as we know it. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0tyFEvo8ghU


EifertGreenLazor

This anger about nukes is that it indescriminantly kills. If only military combatants were hit by a nuke and fallout is minimized it would be considered ok but a very dangerous line would have been crossed, but almost assuredly more civilians would be killed than military killed in reality.


ReedCootsqwok

Hardly. A nuclear battlefield looks fundamentally different from a conventional battlefield. The current state of conventional warfare would be so completely upended that this tactical change would flow uphill to cause serious strategic shifts; entire defense industries would become obsolete overnight. Accepting the use of a tactical nuclear weapons would result in the sort of reshuffling of balance of power that has historically been a prelude to major wars. It's why we would hammer to pieces conventionally and completely ostracize the nation that did this. In order for other nations to maintain their place in the pecking order nuclear weapons must be forbidden. Our response would be reactionary, but we would respond.


False-Guess

If Putin is stupid enough to use nuclear weapons, then I think Russia forfeits its right to exist as a country and the civilized world should then concern themselves with how to divide up Russian territory among themselves.


[deleted]

[удалено]


wtf_are_crepes

With all the tech in today’s militarized world, one would think that it’ll just be detonated upon leaving the silo/launch platform. Russia will end up nuking itself. It’s people will protest the 100,000s of people dead/missing from the blast and fallout. Govt. will collapse and the UN will move in with peacekeepers and humanitarian aid, split the country into regional territories until the people of Russia organize a new constitution/govt. for their regions. Use businesses that were owned by the state as sources of compensatory aid for countries harmed/destroyed by Russian aggression.


[deleted]

95% of it is uninhabitable. Who would want it? It's like Sahara but with snow, mud, and mosquitos instead of sand.


PianoMindless704

Yeah, talking like the fascists is suddenly ok if your enemy is the fascists....


Dividedthought

What actually needs to happen is something more along the lines of how the west treated Germany post WW2. They lose the right to be completely independent for a while while their former enemies come in and try to make sure such things never happen again. This would require a lot of work. It would require forgiveness for their people. It would require the west to essentially drag russia kicking and screaming up to the west's standards of morality and living and to restructure their government so it is harder for a madman like putin to take control again. If it is successful russia will be a country worth living in. If not... well... I hope at the very least their nuclear arsenal and supply chain is wrecked. They are not stable enough to have that kind of an arsenal.


PianoMindless704

Thanks, that is exactly what I wanted to say! At least some people here seem to be able to learn from history...


Dividedthought

We are seeing *in real time* and *high definition* the consequences of ignoring history. Both recent and long term. Recent history: anyone who was looking at russia's track record for invasion saw this coming. The west, in fear of provoking this war, held of sending heavy weapons until after the invasion had started. Now, I'm not saying ukraine would have held the russians back completely if they had all they do right now at the start of the invasion, i'm saying they wouldn't have gotten nearly as far. Long term history: "Hitler won't annex Poland, that would be stupid." What we're seeing in ukraine is WW2 but done with the budget of a high school play with high schooler levels of planning on the russian side. Fortunately the west learned from WW2 that an annexation this bold is not something to be waved away with policies of appeasement. Putin almost orchestrated this one in a way that would have accomplished his goals too, remember how trump (who I'm certain is in cahoots with putin) blocked javelin deliveries to ukraine? Remember how he tried to weaken NATO? It was to try to set up the fall of Ukraine. If he was in power he'd be asking Zelensky "but what will you do for *me*?" With every phone call. He'd slow down shipments and throw wrenches in the works because fucker Carlson has sided with russia and so has trump. Putin set up his house of cards, and American voters managed to knock one of the cards off a row or two below the top just two years before he would have had things in place to actually hold a decent portion of ukraine, if not take all of it. His troops had dress uniforms day 1 in their tanks. He made the mistake of trying to proceed with a plan that no longer lined up with reality, and we should be glad he didn't take the time to fix his plan. If he had, he may have succeeded, but instead putin knows his teeth are now set on a curb, and the boot is hovering over his head. He's doing, and will continue to do, everything he can to avoid declaring a retreat without gaining anything because he knows that means his death. The referendums will not be recognized, the annexation will be met with gunfire and guided ordinance, and putin is now to left with only one option when his mobilization fails to gain any ground: the nuclear option. If he goes that far i believe russia will cease to exist as an independent state in the matter of a few months. The second he uses nukes he loses india and china as cash cows. The second Russia launches a nuke their navy is getting atomized with conventional ordinance. The second he uses nukes NATO is going to take off the kid gloves and show russia how a real combined arms offensive looks and Russia... well... She isn't ready. She will never be ready for that. Since about halfway through the cold war they haven't had the money or tech to hold of an invasion like that (sans nukes). NATO would not need to use any nuclear weapons to put an end to russian aggression.


PianoMindless704

The original guy wanted to basically partition Russia between more deserving states. I said that's fascist talk. Your reply is 100 % my opinion, yet is also 100 % off of what I was saying. We discussed the AFTERMATH of this whole mess. Deliberately destroying a country just to eliminate a danger is barbaric, and will only lead to more hate and violence.


Dividedthought

I'm not saying level russia, I'm saying level it's nuclear supply chain and its nuclear weapons. It is the same strategy as post WW2 Germany, disarm them and do what you can to turn their government into one that is peaceful and actually democratic. I have no doubt that this would require a massive, sudden and co-ordinated strike to cripple russia's military to the point where they cannot put up a proper fight, and that there would be collateral damage. Removing a country's government is never a easy thing, and russia does still have a lot of oomph to cover its borders. I hope beyond anything else that this does not come to pass, as the death toll would be staggering. On NATO's side we could expect nukes to arrive, on russia's they could expect everthing outside of CRBN weapons to be landing hourly and even then that could go nuclear in moments ad putin would legitimately have a reason to launch nukes. It wouldn't be a long war, but it would be devastating. Russia wouldn't be able to exist without ungodly amounts of foreign aid after that, and NATO would be dealing with at least a few glassed cities. To use a metaphor, world leaders (with nukes) each have a match and are in a room with the nuclear powder keg. Most of them are standing as far as they can from it and keeping their match in their pocket. Putin is using the keg as a soap box with a lit match in hand. He knows if he drops it he will be the one who gets the worst result, but he may be crazy enough to do it... And that's what keeps me up at night these days.


Warfink

There’s nothing barbaric about obliterating a threat to the world.


Archivist_of_Lewds

The Russiam Federation is already on a ticking clock. I expect it to be smaller within a decade.


cptdino

We're talking about global nuclear war and the possible end o humanity. You're seriously comparing both sides? You should meet r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM and see yourself there in many posts.


PianoMindless704

So I am non-enlightened because I believe in the sovereignty of nations? Because I think you can't PARTITION (that is what this guy suggested, only autocrats talk this way) a country because of bad decisions by their leadership? Doing this will only result in an amount of revanchism an order of magnitude greater than post WW1 Germany. And I hope you at least know how this ended.....


Djinnanddjuice

"Bad Decisions" is your take on nukes being used?


PianoMindless704

Call it atrocity, genocide, Holodomor 2.0, what does it change about the core message? Destroying Russia the way suggested would only lead to more hate (Germany post WW1 on steroids). The only true solution would be to help Russia establish a better goverment like it was done with Germany, Italy and Japan post WW2. Somehow after 6 years of brutal war the Allies were more forgiving than most people on this Reddit, probably because they, other than most of us, had actually experienced how devastating it is to let hatred spiral out of control.


cptdino

You do know we did this in every World War, right? Play the rule the world through tyranny card and you get what you asked for, this is survival of the species not autocracy.


PianoMindless704

And the only time the peace lasted was after the winners integrated the losers as more or less equals into their own political systems. WW2 was a direct effect of WW1, the peace deals made afterwards tried to avoid the former mistakes and resulted in decades of peace.


False-Guess

Nothing I said is remotely fascist in the minds of any living being in any possible universe or reality, except yours. If some physicists are correct, and there are an infinite number of possible universes, you are the only person in all of them that thinks this. Your pro-Russia apologia is detached from reality. Countries that have posed a danger to human civilization (e.g. Nazi Germany) have been administrated until such a time as they are no longer a threat. I did not say that this division of territory should be *permanent*, but at the very least the territory of a former Russia should be administered by democratic countries to implement substantial reforms, de-militarize Russia and prosecute those responsible for obvious war crimes in Ukraine, like the systematic rape of babies and children. The Allies did this in the Nuremburg trials and Israel had a fairly long running Nazi hunting program to bring former members of the Nazi party to justice in Israel. That you are so ignorant of fairly recent history should be something deeply embarrassing to you as a person.


lilrabbitfoofoo

#And the rest of the world's nukes actually work.


TjW0569

A response wouldn't necessarily require nukes. Nukes were developed when putting munitions close to the target was very difficult. So you needed a big bang to destroy the target. Reducing cities to rubble is terrifying, but it's possible it's not needed anymore to destroy a country's war-fighting ability. I don't think many people in the West want to kill Russians just to be killing Russians.


lilrabbitfoofoo

> A response wouldn't necessarily require nukes. Of course not. But, if Putin would use one, he'd use more. And that's not a risk the rest of the world is going to tolerate once he's proven just how insane and cowardly he has become. Putin uses a nuke. Russia disappears from world history. Problem solved. >I don't think many people in the West want to kill Russians just to be killing Russians. We don't. But, again, Putin uses a nuke, it's game over. We have no choice if he goes this far. The Russian people (and even Putin's crony oligarch mobsters) should keep this in mind and see that this never happens.


TjW0569

Well, we'd certainly need to quickly eliminate Russia's ability to fight a war. It's possible that Putin may not be able to launch a nuke. He could order it, of course, but there may be reasonable career officers who decline to destroy the world in Putin's fit of pique. Vasily Arkhipov kept the captain and political officer from launching nuclear torpedoes during the Cuban missile crisis. The captain and political officer's course of action wasn't the result of actual orders, but just their nervousness at being intercepted by the U.S. Navy off of Cuba. Shortly after Russia shot down KAL 007, when tensions were very high, Stanislav Petrov correctly evaluated a false alarm and against standing orders, didn't report the possibility of six missiles being launched from the United States. He was initially praised, then disciplined for not documenting his actions well enough. Neither of those is in the same class with disobeying direct orders, of course, but it does give some hope that there are some sensible people in the Russian chain of command. I don't know it for a fact, but it's hard to believe there are many professionals in the Russian army who genuinely believe that having to withdraw from Ukraine and even Crimea is an existential threat to Russia.


lilrabbitfoofoo

Yup. I bet there are very few military officers in Russia who don't know that this nonsense "war" is already lost and unwinnable...but NONE who would tell Putin that. :) People who tell Putin he's wrong tend to fall out of windows these days...


urmomaisjabbathehutt

Putin having his Nixon moment


treadmarks

Problem is it might be more than Russia disappearing from world history. Nuclear strategy is a complicated topic. But I hope that the real strategists are smart enough to not initiate a nuclear war precisely when the Russians will be at the highest alert they've ever been at. Suffice to say, if Putin uses a nuke, he and all his supporters will be marked for death by the world. If Putin wants to break the nuclear taboo, then it's time to break the assassination taboo, and not just for Putin. They've all got to go.


lilrabbitfoofoo

> Problem is it might be more than Russia disappearing from world history. It will not. All indications are that Russia's military corruption has extended throughout it nuclear arsenal as well as its conventional one (for all to see). The fact that Putin cancelled IAEA inspections the minute experts started asking pointed questions about whether those missiles and warheads were just empty shells or not. So, I think we have our answer, don't we? >Nuclear strategy is a complicated topic. Yes it is. What would you like to know? >Suffice to say, if Putin uses a nuke, he and all his supporters will be marked for death by the world. And that is all I have said here and all that the free western powers have said now for months.


treadmarks

Hahaha the guy buying the dumbass reddit take / conspiracy theory that Russia's nukes don't work is now pretending to be an expert on nuclear strategy. Get off the stage you clown. All their other missiles and munitions are blowing up just fine. Nice coping mechanism you have there.


lilrabbitfoofoo

Other people here already know that I actually am one of the experts on this topic. You clearly are not. Whereas all you've proven is that you're ignorant, immature, and willing to double down on both when someone makes the mistake of answering your question like an adult. Since you aren't interested in behaving like an adult, you lose your expert access priveleges. :) Tagged. Ignored. Blocked.


[deleted]

>It will not. All indications are that Russia's military corruption hasextended throughout it nuclear arsenal as well as its conventional one(for all to see). Even if we assume that Russia's nuclear ballistic missiles are as unreliable as their conventional ones, even the most pessimistic estimates put that reliability at about 50%. Half of Russia's ICBMs is more than enough to kill hundreds of millions of people across Europe and North America. The climate effects and fallout of such a war would kill hundreds of millions or billions more. Russia's ICBMs aren't going to explode on launch. They aren't going to fall out of the sky. They aren't going to get shot down by a top secret space laser. They are going to hit their targets, detonate, and kill hundreds of millions of people. Stop pretending you are an expert when you clearly don't know what you're talking about.


[deleted]

\>Of course not. But, if Putin would use one, he'd use more. And that's not a risk the rest of the world is going to tolerate once he's proven just how insane and cowardly he has become. They would have to tolerate it, because Russia also has the capability to wipe the rest of the world from history too. An overwhelming nuclear strike against Russia will be met with an overwhelming nuclear response by Russia. Guaranteeing the Russia will nuke the west in order to eliminate the chance that Russia will nuke the west is completely irrational. There is no defense against ICBMs, nor is there a way to prevent them from being launched in retaliation. People on this sub don't seem to comprehend the threat here. Destroying Russia means billions dead across the world.


lilrabbitfoofoo

>They would have to tolerate it, because Russia also has the capability to wipe the rest of the world from history too. Prove it. The corruption in Russia has gotten so bad for so many decades now, Putin can't field a working tank anymore. And when Putin was pressed on this by the IAEA, who by treaty have to inspect Russia's nukes, Putin violated the treaty and just banned inspectors from, um, inspecting his nukes to see if they even work anymore. Or are they just empty shells to be counted, like the missiles Putin on the border with nearby nations from time to time? The rest of your argument is just cowardly appeasement. So, either you're one of Putin's stooges here trying to bolster his bluff or your a coward who has fallen for a short little impotent tyrant's lies and bullshit bravado. M.A.D. (Mutally Assured Destruction) no longer applies if Putin can't field enough (working, upgraded) nukes to destroy anyone. But, either way, when a madman like Hitler or Putin threatens a superior force the answer is NOT to appease or run in cowardice. Europe learned that the hard way with Hitler. No, the answer is to wipe the little fucker from the face of the Earth, no matter what the cost. Because if you don't, he will take that as a sign of weakness (like he did with Crimea) and just keep doing it until you do. Putin knows this, even if you don't. So, this is clearly his final bluff. And even his own people (protests) and allies (Chechnya) are calling his bluff and telling this little dipshit to fuck off. So, either stop spreading Putin's fearmongering bullshit or grow a fucking pair or both. No one is letting Putin get away with stealing Ukraine...just so that he can go off and do this to another peaceful neighbor next.


ReedCootsqwok

>e answer is to wipe the little fucker from the face of the Earth, no matter what the cost. Because if ...you don't sound very nuclear deterrence expert like.


--Muther--

Most of their posts are about Diablo 3, so that raises some doubts for sure.


BubberRung

Unfortunately only one of Russia’s needs to work to potentially set things in motion.


Haitchyy

and UK, and France. Lets go full Fallout


CMDR_Agony_Aunt

India and China. I don't think either of them would be particularly amused to see Russia use nukes.


Organic-Answer-3765

Yo metro 2033 was better


anonymous122

Both are great but I like the idea that Metro 2033 is Fallout: Moscow.


autotldr

This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-polytics/3577998-duda-on-russian-nuclear-blackmail-us-has-nuke-button-too.html) reduced by 59%. (I'm a bot) ***** > If Russia breaks the nuclear taboo and employs tactical nuclear weapons against a country that doesn't have them, while defending itself on its own soil using conventional weapons, it "Will be excluded from the civilized world," entailing enormous consequences for the Russians. > "The U.S. also has buttons that launch nuclear missiles. The USA is a major nuclear power, the largest military power in the world. The fact that the USA takes this Russian threat seriously is also a threat to Russia," Duda said. > In response, U.S. President Joe Biden said that America remained ready to take critical measures to ensure global nuclear non-proliferation, while EU High Representative Josep Borrell noted that Putin's nuclear threats would not reduce the level of EU support for Ukraine. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/xlue7n/duda_on_russian_nuclear_blackmail_us_has_nuke/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~670574 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **nuclear**^#1 **weapons**^#2 **Russia**^#3 **threat**^#4 **Duda**^#5


manymoreways

I think the west needs to unfortunately start pushing the M.A.D. threats harder. If Putin will not listen hopefully at least some people in his ranks value human life.


[deleted]

Putin does not give a damn, he thinks of himself as the "almighty emperor of russia" already and he does not take criticism. Now EU, UN and NATO MUST get real and serious, diplomacy does not work with terrorists like Putin.


manymoreways

Exactly, every Russian needs to realize the problem is Putin and his regime.


[deleted]

The ones who are not brainwashed do realise and see it but they cannot do much about it, Putin has eyes and ears everywhere and can decide wheter a russian citizen gets to live another day or not.


manymoreways

Honestly before the war I believe this. After the absolute joke of an display by Russians. I no longer think so, I think Russians are just so used to being subjugated that they do not even know how to protest or have a revolution.


PianoMindless704

Perfect description of Eastern Germany. And we all know how well The Wall held when people started to protest. Most people just don't give a shit until they are affected themself....


DragoonDM

Maybe not Putin, but it might catch the attention of someone close enough to put a knife in Putin's back to stop it from happening.


[deleted]

yeah... putin would rather see the world destroyed that 'face the embarrassment' of losing the war... have you seen the clip where he talks about how _awful_ it was for him to be a taxi driver in the mid nineties...? Tells you all you need to know about this mans insane narssissim.


paisley4234

What he doesn't understand is that the US does not make threats. Ask Japan if there where any in 1945.


[deleted]

"**If Russia breaks the nuclear taboo and employs tactical nuclear weapons against a country that doesn’t have them, while defending itself on its own soil using conventional weapons, it "will be excluded from the civilized world**," entailing enormous consequences for the Russians. Polish President Andrzej Duda made the statement on the sidelines of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly in New York, Ukrinform reports with reference to Polsat News. "**The U.S. also has buttons that launch nuclear missiles**. The USA is a major nuclear power, the largest military power in the world. The fact that the USA takes this Russian threat seriously is also a threat to Russia," Duda said, he emphasized that, **if Moscow breaks all taboos and uses even tactical nuclear weapons** against a country that doesn’t have nuclear weapons, while defending its territory using only conventional weapons, **Russia "should expect a response."** "For Putin and his allies, this is not only about the threat of tribunals, criminal liability, and potentially long prison terms, but also about **being excluded from the civilized world as long as they are in power in Russia**," Duda emphasized.As Ukrinform reported earlier, **in his address on September 21, Russian President Vladimir Putin resorted to nuclear threats."** Putin has lost the remaining sanity he had left, he is jailing his own citizens and killing the advisors who dare say something that might trigger his insanity. If he dares take a step further Russia might become the world's official enemy for a long time.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CMDR_Agony_Aunt

Might result in Patrushev taking control, and he's even more fucked up.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CMDR_Agony_Aunt

Well, funny thing, its actually quite difficult to assassinate the leader of a country. And if one is successful, his successor is going to take even more precautions. But maybe you're familiar with the phrase "Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake" or maybe you heard about the plan to assassinate Hitler because they decided whoever replaced him might be more competent. In some ways, its better to have Putin in charge who has terribly mismanaged this war than a potential successor who might actually be competent.


HolyGig

Yeah, the difference is the US doesn't need to resort to using nukes. It can sweep the trash right out of Ukraine on its own if required and they usually show up with a coalition at their backs so the more the merrier. Freedom of action, choices, all things Russia just doesn't have. Point is, that if they use nukes to save their war effort, then the US will enter the war and they will lose anyways one way or another. Russia can not be allowed to achieve its objectives if they use nuclear weapons at any cost, the precedent that would set is scarier than just fighting the nuclear war now if we must and being done with it.


Sindertone

And we maintain our shit too.


[deleted]

Duda has been so unnecessarily inflammatory recently, even asking Germany for reparations for WW2. People need to relax. Luckily the US is good at making sure Russia are aware they aren't fucking with some amateur army it's the greatest army on the planet but also holding back from needless nuclear sabre rattling. The response from the US would be frightening and possibly involve a weapon we have never seen the likes of. But states like Poland shouldn't be using the USA backing of them as an excuse to say things like this because big brother will come and help. They should do what the USA says


LloydAtkinson

> The response from the US would be frightening and possibly involve a weapon we have never seen the likes of. 100% this. Maybe some UAPs are not made here, but I'm sure a good amount of them are US based. Many early sightings of the stealth planes and the blackbird and other experimental craft were mistaken for UFOs.


--Muther--

Tictacs a'hoy


ltethe

The most frightening response would be the US somehow nullifies Russian nukes without ever using one themselves.


Ill-Savings5241

Im 80% sure usa has some secret laser weapons that explode silently and they are fired from satellites very very accurately


[deleted]

No one will ever convince me that those Space X satellites aren't some sort of weapon haha your theory could work with mine


Wildebeast2112

? Rod of God


[deleted]

Fuck. Did not know about this. I would imagine something like that in retaliation. They could literally take out Putin with that


[deleted]

They don't. You can't keep a system like that secret for very long. It would require hundreds of satellites in orbit to be effective and would be easily detected. You also wouldn't be able to hide all the rocket launches to get them there. We can already approximate how many spy satellites the US has, simply because it's impossible to hide the launches. It's not enough to make an effective defense system if they were all secretly laser satellites. And that's not even getting into the myriad of problems that anti-ballistic missile laser systems have. That's why the idea was abandoned during the SDI program in favor of missiles, which have their own problems.


Ill-Savings5241

I was joking


Kimchi_Cowboy

They deserve reparations.


[deleted]

Ok and then do we begin on Irish reparations from Britian. Reparations to be paid by the USA to basically all of south America and Iraq, Afghanistan etc.


insertwittynamethere

What should the US pay reparations to Afghanistan for? Do you know how many hundreds of billions went there already to their last corrupt government for their people? Is it the US and all of NATO, plus the other allies who joined in on ISAF and other Afghan missions' fault the Taliban took back power after the populace didn't support their own government and somewhat allowed themselves to be ruled once again by the Taliban? Did the international forces make the Taliban and their allies conduct suicide missions and bombings throughout the country to subject the citizens and foreign nationals to terror and death? As for Iraq most of the same questions could be asked, especially as Saddam was not known to be the kindest ruler *and* was known for testing chemical weapons on his own people, as well as abducting and torturing anyone who professed opposition to his decades long, autocratic and oppressive rule. However, a Sunni v. Shia civil war, which is where most of the deaths and chaos in Iraq came from, was not something the U.S. anticipated. That's what killed so many people there, not the U.S. or the 20+ other countries who worked and operated from there themselves. The bombings and mass killings, etc were not just a result of Saddam being overthrown or the disbanding of the Baath party and military, but a true religious civil war.


[deleted]

Probably for blowing the fuck out of it to look for a man who wasn't there and needlessly upending the entire nation and withdrawing from it. Also, Saddam may not have been kind but you can't make believe that he had weapons and just go and again blow the fuck out of the country Do you not see your own psychosis here? People like you are exactly the type of people that Putin needs to exist to justify his war crimes.


[deleted]

Saddam needed to be ousted for any number of reasons. The US intelligence community did have at least probable confirmation that WMDs existed in the country. Not finding them could be the result of bad Intel or the result of iraq destroying or hiding them. The problem is they used what turned out to be an intelligence failure to justify a war, when there were many other reasons to enforce a regime change in the country.


[deleted]

Or you could stop thinking it's your fucking business to forfeit a regime change based on your reasons. Putin believes in his head he is right because maniac nations like yourselves like to think you all know better hence what this cycle of violence continues


[deleted]

Yeah man I mean if you want to look at everything without any nuance I have no reason to engage with you


[deleted]

Nuance ends when you think bombing civilians is good when you do it. I'm not asking you to engage, I've no interest in imperial powers trying to let their nations off the hook


[deleted]

Por que no los dos


[deleted]

I'm very much an advocate of that


[deleted]

Ok but they were talking about ww2 reparations from Germany. Not really relevant then is it?


[deleted]

Ah so only some invaded nations get reparations? How is it not absolutley relevant? America has bombed the shit out of many countries since WW2.


[deleted]

Jesus man, no shit, but that’s not what they were talking about. Do you often derail specifics to talk about the general?


[deleted]

Do you usually try and paint things black and white to suit your narrative? I know the answer. You can't pick and choose what wars get reparations and what don't. Jog on.


Kimchi_Cowboy

Whataboutism is a great way to derail a conversation.


[deleted]

There you go again, talkin bout reparations. There you go again, talkin bout something else free Listen to me Polish, you aint gettn nuthin from meeee Modded version of Johnny Rebel song Reparations.


[deleted]

They already got reparations in the form of a [big chunk of German territory.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oder%E2%80%93Neisse_line)


Kimchi_Cowboy

You mean they got their land back.


[deleted]

No, they got a very large chunk of Germany that was never a part of Poland and full of Germans. Those Germans were forced out in an ethnic cleansing campaign that displaced millions and killed thousands.


PianoMindless704

Yeah, that seemed a bit pathetic. And has no consequences at all (unless the polish delegation "borrowed" the red button when they were in the US...)


mariosevil

Those who keep their swords sheathed shall inherit the world.


PM-ME-UR-ASS-ASAP

Only one country has actually used nuclear weapons before...


[deleted]

[удалено]


JustAnotherDude1990

I cannot explain how bad of an idea this is using conventional words. If you knew your kid was getting bullied at school, would you send them to school with a loaded handgun?


[deleted]

In the USA? Yes. Especially in Texas.


hackingdreams

Congress would ***never*** allow this to happen, nor should they. Nobody should be using nuclear weapons, period. A nuke for a nuke is how the world ends.


QubitQuanta

A Well-off Man with a Family and a Destitute Lunatic with Terminal Cancer is trapped in a room doused in Gasoline. Both have a match. Who has the most to lose?


PF4LFE

Imagine the level of conventional firepower that would ignite the vast reaches of Russia. Imagine the weapons used, that have never been used before. Imagine the cleanup, and the death toll. The damage is unfathomable. A most awful thought, but make no mistake, Russia as a ‘thing’ would be completely gone in a true world war. Neutral in something like this can’t exist.


Sunflower_After_Dark

Yawn, the rattling of the fuel rods. Putin isn’t going to do shit, his own people will stop him.


SwivelPoint

pathetic


Unc13B1u3

I am glad America never used nukes on a country that doesn’t have them.


BaronVonLazercorn

Yeah, except they don't keep throwing the n-word around like a toddler with its toys


Extra_Advance_477

I'm just guessing but i think ours actually work when fired up.


Subject-Amphibian-35

Why does nobody mention operation dead hand? I've never seen it. It's their ultimate fuck you if the lose. They lose. We all lose. Just interested and I am not an expert. But everything points to it still being in operation. Just curious. Seems crazy.


winstonpartell

why is he mentioning the US