The only realistic case for Russia using nuclear weapons is if they face an existential threat. All their other threats should be ignored.
The only realistic case for Russia using nuclear weapons is if they face an existential threat. All their other threats should be ignored.The question is how many of those are missiles versus tactical nuclear weapons to be delivered via artillery to dropped by a aircraft? Does Russia even have enough working delivery systems to place them onto the targets that it wants around the world?
Then we have to consider how much the west should take into account Russia's nuclear blackmail to allow Russia to get it's way in Ukraine? This entire war in Ukraine is over Russia's expansion of it's borders after 2014.
The strategists wrote numerous recommendations for articles or social media posts, the documents show. One sought to compare the level of homelessness in America with that of Russia and states that the United States is starting to increasingly resemble a “Third World country.” A recommended social media comment from a fictitious American in response to the article states: “I am overcome with anger when another Ukrainian aid package is distributed right before my eyes into the pockets of American and Ukrainian officials. Indeed, it is hard to understand such gestures of ‘help’ when one’s own homeless sit at the feet of passersby [and] sleep under bridges.”
To be fair, so does most the MAGA....repeats it basically verbatim.
This is what makes me think @Young Grasshopper is not just a useful idiot, but of course it's all just a guess. He will NEVER criticize Russia in any way, shape, or form. Most of the MAGA morons are comfortable saying 'sure Russia is terrible but...'. This guy though? Never.To be fair, so does most the MAGA.
But their exclusive interest in US foreign policy topics is a dead give away. As is their contextual framing for many things. Only ever shit talking the US, and the West. Never saying a single bad word about Russia, or Russia's allies. What separates them from MAGA, is that they are the Russians telling MAGA what to say and what to think. We have two of them here, a feeble troll and their smarter supervisor.
Would be good to see a map of their ips and the vpn they are using.There's all kind of horse shit sleeper accounts in this forum that will never get the attention they should. There's a pile of accounts started around 2014 that just sit dormant, post a handful of things in a graphics card or processor forum and then just jump balls deep into heated political topics years later.
Uh huh.
I know we're just a splash in a pond as far as influence but it still drew some interest from some bad actors looking to seed disinformation.
For varying degrees of existential. Invasion force on Russia proper? Newly annexed territories in Ukraine? Crimea?The only realistic case for Russia using nuclear weapons is if they face an existential threat. All their other threats should be ignored.
Invasion force on Russia proper, and one that appears likely to succeed.For varying degrees of existential. Invasion force on Russia proper? Newly annexed territories in Ukraine? Crimea?
Yes, that makes sense. It's just, at what point has Russia diminished itself to the point where it's an existential threat to itself? All gear all manpower fertilizer in Ukraine - at which point it wont take much of an force of anything to pose an existential threat to "Russia proper".Invasion force on Russia proper, and one that appears likely to succeed.
The problem is your defn of existential threat is not the same as Russia; the person making the decision is Putin and Putin likely defn is preventing something from happening that causes him to not control the situation. So it wouldn't take him as much as for example a rational person because fundamentally Putin is irrational.The only realistic case for Russia using nuclear weapons is if they face an existential threat. All their other threats should be ignored.
The problem is your defn of existential threat is not the same as Russia; the person making the decision is Putin and Putin likely defn is preventing something from happening that causes him to not control the situation. So it wouldn't take him as much as for example a rational person because fundamentally Putin is irrational.
No-one would say not to that if the territory is barren of russian lifeLike if they offered to give Kaliningrad to the Poles they would decline.
No-one would say not to that if the territory is barren of russian life
The problem is your defn of existential threat is not the same as Russia; the person making the decision is Putin and Putin likely defn is preventing something from happening that causes him to not control the situation. So it wouldn't take him as much as for example a rational person because fundamentally Putin is irrational.
Of course, but if somehow Europe entered war with russia, that region would be cleansed. Inhabitants moved to "mother" russia. End of. Can't allow any orcs in Eu anymore.An extremely unlikely thing to happen.
Well that’s definitely a choice someone could make.
Well that’s definitely a choice someone could make.
I wasn't going to post this, but since you posted that .....Yep. And the Russian assets do what they can.
Mike Turner, the Chairperson of the US House Intelligence Committee, accused his own party members of repeating Russian propaganda on the House floor. He's not alone either.
"Russian propaganda has made its way into the United States, unfortunately, and it’s infected a good chunk of my party’s base,” - Michael McCaul (R), Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
Russia and Putin are victims. Don't let this be democracy vs. fascist dictatorship. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.