this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
189 points (87.1% liked)
Ukraine
8312 readers
701 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam
- No content against Finnish law
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
unless they let loose the whole thermonuclear, biological and chemical warfare...
Well, nobody wins in that scenario
Russia would be hardest hit though because most of their population is confined to two or three cities. In most of the rest of the world the population is more distributed.
It would be devastating to all sides of course, assuming Russia's oligarchs haven't stolen the nukes, but Russia would come off worse. Anyway Putin wants to be in charge he isn't going to risk getting the entire country destroyed, if only because it's not fun ruling over a crater riddled radioactive moonscape.
Also because the wind blows East out of Europe. So, nuking Europe pushes the fallout across Russia. They would essentially be nuking themselves. The United States is probably the most dispersed population. The country is huge, and other than the big coastal cities, people are spread out over thousands of miles.
Even if he survived the exchange, he would be killed. There's no way he'd be allowed to live.