- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
As a Finn I say this is fine. Every military resource that is tied down and not raping and destroying Ukraine is net positive.
As a Finn I say this is fine. Every military resource that is tied down and not raping and destroying Ukraine is net positive.
Never going to happen. Russia has nukes, remember?
how many of them are correctly mantained and in working conditions?
1% would be enough
Maybe. The issue is we don’t know. Are our missile defense systems able to take down that 1%? How reliably? What if that’s 5% instead?
It’s all a game of probability, and all it takes is 1 missile to slip through. The only 0% chance is if no nukes are fired in the first place.
So does Ukraine, so why hasn’t Russia tried anything with them? Oh because there is no winning a Nuclear War, idiot.
Russia isn’t threatened behind their own borders by Ukraine. If a NATO army were to invade Russia however, and Putin has his back against the wall, then I’m not sure he wouldn’t order that button to be pressed.
I suppose he could threaten foreign nations who breach the borders, but it’s not accurate to say they aren’t currently threatened behind their own borders. Russia recently lost a major railway connecting to china to the war, and a few months ago there was a military coup that had Putin hiding in a bunker.
Fair point, but it’s still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil.