Russia amps up nuclear threat.

  • @JesusSon
    link
    English
    287 months ago
    1. Use tactical nukes in Ukraine
    2. get sanctioned out of existence/bombed back to the Paleolithic era
    3. ???
    4. Profit
    • @qooqie
      link
      English
      107 months ago

      He won’t just fling nukes to Ukraine. If he’s going to do that he’s going for much more. He also doesn’t care if 95% of the world suffer from the nuclear fallout

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 months ago

        Given the effectiveness of the ruzzian orc army and preparedness of NATO to meet their threats, I wouldn’t be surprised if most, not all the silos were hit before they could even launch.

      • @chronicledmonocle
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        “Nuclear fallout” in modern nukes is isolated to the area they hit. As such, modern nukes aren’t going to irradiate the atmosphere that would lead to a Fallout video-game style world.

        What they will do is kill a f*** ton of people and thermally destroy a specific area REALLY hard. If you’re in the blast radius, you won’t even know it. You’ll be dead from the shockwave so fast you’ll have literally less than a second of confusion before you get turned into meat mist.

        • @sugartits
          link
          English
          177 months ago

          And who says Russia will use “modern” nukes?

          We’ve already seen rusty museum pieces on the front line in this conflict.

          • @chronicledmonocle
            link
            English
            0
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Modern nukes are also more damaging and explosive. I’d imagine if Russia wanted to go full agro, they’d use the biggest ass bomb they can muster.

            But you’re right…they might not use H bombs and opt for A bombs instead.

        • Rayquetzalcoatl
          link
          English
          97 months ago

          Is that true? :o I thought the way nukes irradiated the atmosphere was through all the dust and shit thrown up during the explosion being blown around by wind currents? Has that changed with new nukes?

          • @ours
            link
            English
            77 months ago

            I have serious doubts about how “clean” even a modern nuke is but modern weapons are supposedly more efficient and therefore cleaner than WW2 equivalents. The other factor is where the bomb is detonated.

            At ground level, it irradiates and throws up more material than if it is detonated high up in the air in an air burst configuration.

            In any case, any kind of nuke crosses a diplomatic line that would bring a world of hurt against Putin which is not worth the tactical win. His nukes are way more useful as a saber to rattle to scare off Western countries from supporting Ukraine too effectively out of fear of escalation.

            I could only see Putin use nukes in a desperate last-ditch defense against invaders at Moscow’s gates.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            47 months ago

            More worried about this triggering an ice age and subsequent global failure of what crops remain.

          • @chronicledmonocle
            link
            English
            27 months ago

            That and also bombs designed to detonate near the surface with an initially downward explosive force.

    • @cygon
      link
      English
      27 months ago

      I believe the idea is:

      1. Mention nukes and grab everyone’s attention
      2. Run social media campaign (“oh noes, <insert undesirable politician or ideology> is leading us into war with nuclear power, they bad”)
      3. Have bought politicians and lobbyists push to reduce sanctions or block additional sanctions
      4. Profit.

      .

      But increasingly, I see step 2 fail and people simply hate the guy more for his destructive megalomania, as they should.