• Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Fox news is desperately pushing this and signal boosting their true leader constantly.

  • josefo@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    My bet is, if Putin dares to drop a single nuke, he will get assassinated. Lot of secret service agents, and other enthusiasts are straight up going to try that. During war that’s allowed right?

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Mutually assured destruction is still a thing. We may not be at Cold War levels of insanity, where between the US and Russia there were enough nukes to glass the planet like 150 times over, but plenty of nations have arsenals (especially in Europe), and the best way to make enemies of the entirety of the world would be to be the first one to launch a nuke. Dropping a nuke would signal to every leader in the world that no country is safe from becoming an irradiated wasteland.

      I think if Putin dropped a nuke, his allies would drop him faster than it would take NATO to declare all out war with Russia.

      • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        You say that, and yet Exxon-Mobil have proven that actively trying to destroy the world does nothing to turn world leaders away from trying to buddy up with you.

      • Teppichbrand@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I read this book and it changed my opinion a little. Every scenario ends in a nuclear apocalypse, no matter who started with how much.
        There might be a hero or two refusing to launch down the command line. But should we rely on that?

      • josefo@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        My point was, the assassination goal would be him not being able to drop a second one. Also slay the first 100 people in the chain of command and leave them headless.

        Cool thing is that nuclear winter will fight global warming

        • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Unfortunately, nobody would be able to take him out that quickly. Russia still has plenty of nukes, and they could fire them all before anybody has time to react. If that nuke is an ICBM, though, as soon as it leaves the silo the world would know, and the counter barrage of nukes would be firing up before it even lands.

          I originally meant that dropping a nuke would have the entire world declare war on Russia, even his former allies because no one wants to rule over a pile of radioactive rocks, but thinking about it, his allies would probably be the ones most likely to try to have him assassinated in that situation. A maniac with a big stick is only useful so long as you don’t have to worry about him smacking you with it, too.

    • sunstoned@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I think if you’re assassinating a public figure you’re a little past caring about what’s “allowed”

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      If they browse NCD they’ll be mad a lot. People on here have the normal take on whether the North Koreans are secret Wakanda good guys, and it comes up constantly.

    • humble peat digger@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I take Putin very seriously.
      Us military is on the same page.

      Weirdo nutjobs on the Internet create memes on how much everyone is wrong but them.

  • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    115
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    In my experience people who are against more Ukraine aid think that the dollar amount we send is actual cash that can be spent in other places, rather than pallets of munitions that don’t keep forever anyway.

    • slaacaa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      It’s literal economic stimulus, US sends them old shit, and buys new and more expensive shit from local military suppliers. This is the “creating jobs” thing the right likes so much, except when it’s against Russian interests

      • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yes, but it is really inefficient. If we simply ignore the nuke threat it would probably take the US a month of bombing to restore pre 2014 borders.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      And a part of that is old stuff that would be decommissioned so the cash is to make the new products. Or so I have understood it.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        nah that’s right. we’ve sent ukraine a shit ton of basically decommissioned shit. and even then we’ve been weirdly stingy, and unresponsive to their non military aid requests (their biggest ask is glass)

      • mkwt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        And we’re also saving a bunch on disposal costs for the old stuff.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Even for new weapons and ammo it is usually just spending on the local weapons manufacturers so basically just supporting your own economy.

    • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      12 hours ago

      This is the most obscene attempt to understate the US’s involvement in the war in Ukraine I’ve ever seen.

        • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          33
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Not always, but it’s the fault of the USA far more than it should be. Like a pants shittingly stupid amount of the time. Almost as pants shittingly stupid as Americans who pretend that isn’t the case.

          • ShadowRam@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            40
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            It’s USA’s fault Russia annexed Crimea? and now attempting to annex more?

            How’s that?

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            Eaglestan has been known to start weird unnecessary wars, but this is not one of them.

            (I personally can’t really comment on surplus vs. new in detail, though)

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    Man, I wonder if those Russian propaganda guys ever wish they had more non-bullshit to spew. Like, they have to keep up appearances, but it’s usually easy to tell which statements are for the public, and which ones they might actually mean (like the threat to do proxy wars of their own), so it’s just a lot of wasted words.

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    Fox has been pumping up the Russophobia since Putin started saber-rattling, most likely to justify Trump’s incoming “peace negotiations” that will result in sacrificing Ukrainian territory.

    • Freefall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      They need Biden to go easy on russia until the fat orange can get in power and come save daddy putin.

  • BonerMan@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    One day the fire of a thousand suns will cleans the world from good and evil alike and will bring true balance.

    • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Nah. It’s gonna be bird flu.

      Covid shut down the world with a death rate of like 1%.

      Bird flu is 56%.

      Don’t let the sink in. It’s coughing and looks like it’s got Bird flu.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I think bird flu is deadly enough that people will actually take it seriously, the survival rate of Covid was high enough it was possible you would know multiple people who’ve had it and survived.

        • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          But if it does kick off, it’s going to kick off with absolutely the worst people in charge of managing it coupled with lunatics running podcasts who see everything as a conspiracy or are snakeoil salesman/women with a massive reach.

          It’s going to rival the Black Death if it happens under Trumps administration.

          • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.deM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            no it won’t. plenty of infected people probably got under the radar because they thought it’s regular flu. covid initially had much higher fatality too

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Thankfully, I’m nowhere near the USA, and my country has largely competent leaders, so I’ll be watching in horror from the other side of the world.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        And this time people know to get mad and deliberately cough on each other for freedom in advance, instead of just buying TP.

  • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Can someone explain to me why it’s ridiculous to take them seriously? Genuine question.

    • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.deM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      that’s because MAD still works and things like sending ATACMS are nowhere close to actual nuclear threshold, which would be nuclear attack or overwhelming conventional invasion threatening existence of country. nobody would be even thinking of nukes until Ukrainian tanks roll to Moscow lol. if you have a spare hour https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWKGYnO0Jf4

        • PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          There has been some debate over the response to tactical Nuclear weapons - notably NATO threatened a conventional response to the use of nukes (likely meant to be read as, “We will end this war, no nukes needed.”) but it would depend massively on their usage.

    • TheDorkfromYork@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 hours ago

      When your enemy has strategic nukes, the extreme ways to respond are:

      A, not taking the nuclear threat seriously.

      B, give up.

      Saying we shouldn’t arm Ukraine because of nukes is close to option B.

      Nukes may go off, but if arming Ukraine is the trigger, than we were likely to witness nuclear war because we wouldn’t accept option B, rather than any weapon system giving Ukraine an advantage. If that is the case, nuclear war has most likely already been decided.

      The real game is to make those in Russia believe that backing down works towards their goals. If they hope in 20 years the US will fall apart, they may wait, or maybe someone will kill Putin and take over Russia, being rewarded by less sanctions.

      Long story short, nuking Ukraine don’t benifit Russia more than it will hurt it.

      I am not an expert

        • vga@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          USA should conquer Taiwan, Cuba and South America before somebody gives them nukes.

          Opposing this would be blood thirsty war mongering, a direct cause of WW3.

  • obre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Add a soyjak with an ushanka in the bottom frame next to the chud for extra accuracy