this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
33 points (83.7% liked)

World News

32341 readers
484 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MushuChupacabra 17 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] vzq 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

“Spokesperson, issue more empty threats! Surely this time they will finally take me seriously!”

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Almost 25 years of that attitude from the US is how this war started in the first place[1], and now hundreds of thousands are dead or injured and millions are displaced.

[–] MushuChupacabra 11 points 1 day ago

You will find that the actual cause for the dead, injured, and displaced, is that Russia invaded Ukraine.

The simplest fix would be for the Russians to go home.

The more permanent fix would be for the Russians to go home, and have Vladimir Putin accidentally fall out of a window very high up. That would be reasonable, given how many men he basically threw into a meat grinder.

[–] Hemuphone 2 points 1 day ago

The war started because of Russia. It's insane to state otherwise.

[–] vzq 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Every recrimination has an equal and opposite recrimination. In the end, we are where we are and every country chooses how to play their own hand by themselves.

Russian leadership knew what they were doing when they attacked a foreign sovereign country in an act overt aggression.

I’m sure there are plenty of rationalizations they tell themselves, but it’s not the US that “started this” in any meaningful way.

[–] ThePyroPython 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Completely unrelated question: how hard does one have to rattle a sabre before it snaps the blade?

[–] CheeseNoodle 3 points 1 day ago

So I commented this before, Russia spends the same amount on its nuclear arsenal as the UK, while claiming a far larger arsenal. Even accounting for differences in currency value (so cheaper labour) and assuming Russia has some magical efficiency gains in maintenance its still not enough to even come close to maintaining an arsenal that size. Nukes need the fissile material swapped out every couple of decades or they're just really expensive dirty bombs.

This puts Russia in the position where if they launch a single nuke as a warning there's a genuine chance that it might just fizzle, if that happens it would be crippling to their apperance as a nuclear armed state on the world stage, the embarassment of crossing the ultimate red line with nothing to show for it.

So i guess the answer is the sabre is pretty rusty and it might not snap when rattled but there is a chance it snaps when Putin goes in for a real stab.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

~~China's~~ Russia's Final Warning

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If all you had were regular warheads I'd be cheering on Americans playing chicken to their fucking grave but nuclear war would kill me too, get the fuck outta here with that.

At this point, death to America isn't a radical slogan, it's in self defense.

[–] ManixT 2 points 1 day ago

Cool how you completely ignore the country threatening the world with the very nuclear weapons you're afraid of. They get a free pass?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Welp there goes my fucking sleep for tonight. I wish Washington and Langley alone would somehow disappear off the face of the earth and solve half the problems in the world overnight.

Why the fuck does the rest of the world have to risk a nuclear extinction (and a climate one, honestly) just because the US are too fucking stupid and greedy to let go of a single cent in the world.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This instance is hilarious.

Russia makes threats with nukes, because a country they attacked dares to defend itself

lemmy.ml: Why would the US do this?

The notion that Russia doesn't need to invade or make nuclear threats is completely unthinkable around these parts.

If you just analyze the 1000 most recent posts on the local worldnews, it's pretty openly a propaganda channel.

[–] ManixT 2 points 1 day ago

I know, right? Why didn't the rest of the world let Nazi Germany get what it wanted too.

Russians are the only ones to blame and downtown Moscow deserves a nuke if Russia escalates even further.

[–] Hemuphone 2 points 1 day ago

Why do you give Russia a free pass here? They are the ones threatening to use nuclear weapons. But somehow Washington is the bad guys. What a fucked up take.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In a parallel universe, I would like to witness an official sarcastic response.

'U.S. eager to witness Russia's awesome destructive power in person after Oppenhiemer success. Government announces free UV glasses for safe viewing. Populace hopeful for a swift end to capitalism after nuclear winter'

[–] LANIK2000 -1 points 1 day ago

Honestly I just find it laughable. 1, because there are more nuclear red lines behinds us than I care to count. And 2, if the last Russian missile test is anything to go by, I'm more worried about a giant chain reaction blowing up all of Russia.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Biden using his last few months to start ww3

[–] vzq 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

If Russia starts nuking shit, wouldn’t Russia be starting ww3?

Or are we supposed to just accept the implication that only western countries have agency?

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

I doubt Russia will actually use nukes, what with MAD and all.

Then again, people said the same thing about the invasion. Russia doesn't have a no-first-use nuclear weapons policy like the USSR did, so they could use them if they deem the country to be under existential threat.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is clearly a response to the US allowing strikes inside Russia.

Interesting timing to do that when Ukraine, Germany and Russia have been gearing up to negotiate an end to the war next year. Wonder if this is to give the west more leverage in the negotiations or to escalate to give the republican admin next year a tougher time.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

So you're saying Russia has never struck inside Ukraine. Or somehow The US started the war in Ukraine.

Or is it just a freaking stupid idea that one nation can attack another. And expect them not to retaliate.

[–] vzq 3 points 1 day ago

Interesting timing to do that when Ukraine, Germany and Russia have been gearing up to negotiate an end to the war next year

Threatening nuclear war under these circumstances is definitely an interesting timing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The favorite weapon of the westoid, acting like the biggest imbecile in the world and claiming history starts not when they choke you, but when you break their wrist so you can breathe.

[–] vzq 2 points 1 day ago

Let’s take this metaphor at face value for a second.

What in the endless litany of grievances you call history could possibly justify pressing the launch button at this particular junction in time?

I’m serious, make the best possible case you can for Russia starting a nuclear war right now.

[–] vzq -4 points 1 day ago

Russia: if NOTICE ME SENPAI was a country.