Seems like a bit of a waste to launch an intercontinental missile at a country next door, on the same continent. Isn't Russia supposed to have plenty of short and mid range ballistic missiles? I guess they must be running low.

I was under the impression that ICBMs weren't all that great for conventional warheads. Their payload capacity isn't enormous and their accuracy tends to be relatively low- which matters not a jot if you're firing nukes (which do a lot of bang per kilo, and where a few hundred metres either way isn't likely to be critical), but not so great for dropping normal munitions.

[–] Streetlights 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I suspect the use of an RS-26 was meant to serve as a provocation/response to the recent ATACMs strikes.

[–] Kyrgizion 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

I posted elsewhere about the rumour Russia was going to fire an RS26.

I got called a liar and warmonger.

Well, my next prediction remains the same: Russia WILL eventually use nukes. Because there will come a moment of "use it or lose it", and Russia prefers a destroyed world over an intact one without Russia.

[–] Streetlights 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There's still a few steps left on the escalation ladder.

Conceivably I can see them detonating a nuke somewhere over the blacksea at a high enough altitude to minimise fallout as a demonstration that they are serious and have the capability.

[–] Kyrgizion 12 points 1 month ago

I think they would use a tactical one in Kursk since it's "their" territory.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Russia prefers a destroyed world over an intact one without Russia.

That much is true, but none of this is existential. If the Russian military packs up and heads home, Russia continues to exist. They don't want to do that ofc, but obviously Russia prefers an intact world with Russia compared to a destroyed world.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Russia: launches nuke…

West: does nothing because they don’t want to start WW3

Russia: that’s what I thought bitch

Seems to be the way things are going.

[–] Valmond 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

You see why you are called out. Putin will never use nukes. He will die if he does so and he fears for his life.

Nuclear weapons launched on the west only work as a threat, they don't actually work for anything really except that.

Secondly, they do not have any tactical gains to have from tactical nukes (and it seems they do no longer have the batallions needed to use them, so they'd nuke themselves as much as the Ukrainians), and they would lose support from China and India for using them which would really hasten the downfall of the Russian regime.

So no, there is no nUkes cOmMing.

Even I, a certified armchair general, knows this.

Edit: you got called out because you said this:

There's rumours that Russia is readying a RS26 missile at this very moment in retaliation.

If they actually do this, the war will go nuclear.

Very interesting news, kudos to you for finding and sharing them (really), but the rest is fear mongering.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

@Valmond @Kyrgizion Plus, there is a high probability that the warheads turn out to be inoperable due to neglected pit maintenance.

[–] Valmond 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes, but they have, supposedly, 6.000 so for now there are most certainly some that have received maintenance and scavenged material from the others.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

@Valmond Some might still work, but Russia's only strategic deterrent would be called out as a bluff.

load more comments (19 replies)