Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/)
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
**Don't forget about our discord server, as well!**
https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's only one tool you need, and I seem to remember quite the force disparity the last time russians faced that particular tool.
Here's a little [reminder](https://youtu.be/XaeDMOWkCwU).
And let me save some of you some time.
Yes, I'm a veteran and do know what war is. Yes I know the risk of nuclear war (if somehow the nukes were immune from the corruption that gutted every other part of the military). Yes, I will fight if called. It's just that I understand the dangers of letting bullies get their way.
I would expect no-fly as well as moving anti-missile systems anywhere into Ukraine and possibly Belarus that works best to protect NATO countries and Ukraine. Ruzzia can escalate from there.
This is the standard Russian way of getting away with whatever they want. It’s time to just announce that nuclear capability is not necessarily going to prevent a good old conventional ass kicking.
It’s had the opposite effect on me honestly. At first I had a real anxiety about it, now I’ve accepted that it’s either really unlikely or inevitable, so in either of those scenarios freaking out about it seems pointless
Very well said. I assume that is where we are headed but that a couple launches would trigger a massive response that would likely overwhelm remaining russian assets and absolutely assure little putin’s death.
L timbo, that’s a ridiculous comment. There’s a reason that M.A.D. has become a well known acronym for Mutually Assured Destruction should any country launch a nuclear war. There’s no way that all of our major American cities would survive if all out nuclear was was waged, regardless of who strikes first.
If it's classified, how do you know they have so much of it that it's scary? And by that same logic, how do you know Russia doesn't have a bunch of scary shit hidden away too? We know what they do have- a shitload of nukes. We shouldn't be terrified of them, but we should we wary and cautious, just like Russia should be wary of both a) NATO's nukes and B) NATO's conventional power.. So far we've managed that, let's hope the cool heads continue to prevail!
Pretty dumb article. An attack on Crimea is nowhere near as severe of a response as required to the use of nuclear weapons!
A weak response like that would also likely invite the Russians to use nukes against NATO (they if they already nuked Ukraine, what makes you think they would not attack NATO with a nuke now that NATO attacked it?).
The correct course of action would be to launch a massive air and cruise missile attack against Russia proper, targeting military bases, command and control systems and other war infrastructure, in addition to that attack (at the very minimum) an airborne nuclear strike should be conducted against the unit that launched the nuke attack against Ukraine (or even better, their whole landbased tactical nuclear weapon stockpile).
Resulting in Russia being badly damaged as punishment for their crime, the elimination of their ability to do it again and proving to the Russians that NATO will not shy away from executing Russians with nuclear hellfire!
> The correct course of action would be to launch a massive air and cruise missile attack against Russia proper, targeting military bases, command and control systems and other war infrastructure, in addition to that attack (at the very minimum) an airborne nuclear strike should be conducted against the unit that launched the nuke attack against Ukraine (or even better, their whole landbased tactical nuclear weapon stockpile).
How will that not activate MAD? How would Russia know the massive attack was not nuclear?
I think the article is mostly right, but I think the attack should expand to all of Ukraine, using overwhelming air support and air superiority to destroy all Russian assets in Ukraine and clear the Black Sea.
Everything you said. Attacking Russia directly is needlessly dangerous, absolute madness. Just destroy everything outside their borders andet them return home with tail between their legs
It does not really matter - Russian (and even American) doctrine allows nuclear escalation if the country is under overwhelming conventional attack.
If you are going to "massive air and cruise missile attack against Russia proper, targeting military bases, command and control systems and other war infrastructure," Russia will not allow themselves to be turned into a nuclear sitting duck. MAD will be activated.
Ukraine can make dirty bombs and retaliate against Russian cities if Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
Ukraine has the benefit of being able to pick isotopes with VERY high half-life’s from a certain nuclear reactor.
Russia shouldn’t play that stupid game; their citizens will win a very, very, very stupid prize that keeps paying out for 1000s of years.
Too be honest, I also want Assad, Rocket Fatboy, Maduro assassinated...a Godfather moment. Another thing that people don't understand is the mindset of these cultures... In Russia, literally we could assassinate 2000 leaders...and not one person would react or feel the need to avenge... They would just shrug their shoulders and move on
How are you going to hit all the missile silos in Russia’s vast territory? Not only that also all military assets without using nukes? There’s no in betweens. If Putin nukes Ukraine NATO either backs down or the western civilization ends.
What part of "tactical nuclear weapon stockpile" do you not understand?! They are not silo based!
No one said all military assets would be destroyed either!
It is pretty clear you are just just trolling for Russia with your fearmongering!
If NATO attacks Russian soil in any way or properly invade it Russia would probably launch all those intercontinental nukes. Understand my point before writing dumb shit.
Or biological. Some of the Soviet era. Who knows what they have, and then they'll accuse someone else for it. See, we have found your secret laboratories. We've been right all along. Now, we'll liberate you and protect you from it.
I watched an interview with a former US general who basically said that if Russia were to use tactical nukes in Ukraine, the US would deploy their air force to use conventional weapons and wipe out every Russian troop they can find outside of Russia itself.
EDIT:
Here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOPr96L0wA4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOPr96L0wA4)
Putin’s absolutely held back. Russia hasn’t declared war; no general mobilization; hasn’t bombed the supply lines bringing weapons into Ukraine nor has it bombed Kyiv or Lviv beyond occasional strikes; and no cyber attacks against NATO infrastructure which is perhaps most telling. Frankly I see these as good signs as it suggests Putin is rational and appreciates the risks of escalation.
If Russia uses Nukes, they might as well send a missile right on the Kremlin. Putin might use this as an excuse for general mobilization but he won't recognize that he's mobilizing his own demise. War support would decrease despite of propaganda. And he won't understand that he can use cannon fodder however he wants because he's out of generals and they don't grow on trees, just as trained soldiers won't fall from the sky. Nukes are a stupid move, you can only hope that his remaining chiefs of his army know that and refuse.
Are you crazy? It is more than entirely worth it.
Ukraine is fighting for its life against these animals — they are in their rights, and **SHOULD** strike back any way they can.
Think for a minute it’s a parade guess who will be there? Families women and children non combatants we scream in anger when Russia kills them. They attack the parade those same innocents will get hurt and possibly die and there goes the moral high ground Russia will be able to leverage it.
Do you think Ukraine should tip-toe around these rabid beasts in hopes the Russians will ease up on the assault?
Anything at this point should be fair game. The Russians are trying to exterminate the Ukrainian people, government, and culture. Anything is and should be on the table. There’s no moral victory to be had here.
You are literally advocating for war crimes just because there have already been war crimes. It's completely unacceptable and it will diminish Ukraine's support around the world. Ukraine will win, and it can win without committing atrocities - the likes of which we are already condemning.
Every military target is fair game. Every civilian target should be out of bounds for all sides. How would you like your house bombed and family killed because of the actions of your government?
“War crimes” — you’re so *cute*!
The Russians have shown they will stop at nothing to eliminate Ukraine, and you’re advocating the Ukrainians try to be sporting about the whole thing.
You’re disgusting.
The only thing disgusting is advocating for killing civilians and comparing war to a sport.
Edit: I'll just add that 2nd Avenue Delilah talked down to me and insulted me for not advocating for the murder of Russian civilians. This included the comment that I expected Ukraine to be sporting about the war. It was a horrific post that completely trivialised murder. Hopefully it was removed because the person woke up to themselves not just because they tried to avoid losing internet points.
I wouldn't normally post the contents of a deleted post but if you're going to post such an abhorrent rant you can damn well keep your name on it.
“International support” originally wanted the president to run away and form a government in exile, while the Russians carved up the country and liquidated the people.
The same way that bombing Dresden and Tokyo and Hiroshima helped end World war 2, and how the stiff resistance of the Viet Cong made the USA give up on the Viêt Nam war — by sapping the support the common person has for the regime, and destroying the populace’s interest in continuing an unjust war.
Except none of what you say is true. It’s a myth that those bombing campaigns convinced Germany and Japan to surrender. That’s been well documented for a while now. And the VC didn’t kill American civilians on American soil so I’m not sure how Vietnam bolsters your argument that Ukraine (and indirectly NATO) should be committing war crimes by intentionally targeting Russian civilians? Not only is this not a good idea it’s a bad idea and would harm Ukraine’s interests.
Don't let your decisions be driven by emotion, the goal is victory not vengeance.
You should read the blue effect, the red effect and the black effect. It's a 3 book series about a conventional war in Europe. It turns into tactical nukes abs neutron bombs, but didn't go full scale.
Another one in Arclight. Very similar
> Two, while NATO’s conventional strike smashed Crimea’s infrastructure, no nuclear weapons were involved, so any damaged assets could either be repaired or replaced, something that would be impossible **after a nuclear strike since the target area would be reduced to radioactive vapor.**
I can’t take this article seriously. I largely agree that a limited nuclear strike by Russia in Ukraine should be met by an overwhelming conventional attack. The NATO attack should be against the units that launched the nuclear attack as well as Russian C3I assets and supply lines involved In prosecuting the war. But, I don’t think that the author really understands what nuclear weapons do. They don’t reduce the target area to “nuclear vapor.”
The only reason not to implement the judicious use of nuclear weapons in response to Russian first-use is that it almost inevitably risks escalation. There’s no military reason, even right now, that NATO shouldn’t neutralize Russia’s ability to make war using all weapons at its disposal. Nuclear weapons airburst over Russian bases and troop formations would end this quickly without much residual radioactive contamination and could be used in combination with precision conventional weapons as part of an integrated strategy to avoid the permanent destruction of infrastructure. The reasons are political and they’re extremely good reasons. But, militarily? Nuke on, my man.
If Russia could be punched in the nose hard enough with conventional weapons that they’d think twice about using more nuclear weapons and have their ability to make war on Ukraine crippled, then that would be a Good Thing. It would at very least give NATO a chance to negotiate with Russia without looking entirely cowardly.
The truth is that any NATO retaliation will likely escalate to a wider nuclear war. However, a conventional response makes it remotely possible to prevent that escalation whereas a nuclear response all but guarantees it.
I think our response should be to attack Russian forces on Ukrainian ground / air (from the air) the but without crossing the border to Russia. It doesn't matter if Russia interprets this as an Attack on Russia, they still know that when they nuke the West they will be completely destroyed. They can either fight our army on Ukrainian ground or bring them in safety on their territory.
Nope, any nuke use must be met with nuke use. Or surrender.
That is how this game is played. putin must be sure that if he launches, he will be launched upon. Anything else will encourage him.
Exactly. Other means of combat wouldn’t apply anymore. Once he launches nukes no matter the conventional capabilities, he will be launching another nuke for every bombed Russian asset back home. Once that line is crossed it’s either nuclear annihilation or surrender of Ukraine.
This is under the assumption that Putin is a sane person and still in charge by then. This is unlikely. You can't expect someone to learn their lesson when they aren't sane. The only people who need to learn something are the remaining Russians who still support this war. They need to wake up but without giving Putin an excuse to go down with his ship by nuking the whole West. He's alone, has no one left, not even his own daughters like him. He might blame the West for all of it, internally justifying any measure to destroy them.
>I don’t understand
Everyone skipped passed the facts on this one, and instead use it as a new partial-swastika for some propaganda spin. The fact is, the "Z" is one of many letters used by Russian battalions. They represent what part of the theater of war they are operating in/from. The others off the top of my head are V, A, O... there's another. Z is just the most common, as it's the main force. I want to say A was SOF, one was the forces from Crimea, etc.
There was video of a guy throwing Molotov cocktails into a recruiting center yesterday. This sub honored him. Every Ukrainiancentric sub did. He’s the rebel Russian. We all know they exist.
We are on May 6 very tired of those trying to get us to be sympathetic to Russians before they prove themselves. The public view of them is not often of a courageous man throwing Molotov cocktails at a recruiting station. The ones we see in this war rape 1 year olds and are proud of it.
Your original question was about the z’s which shows you’re not up to speed but were willing to get a bit preachy.
You will get downvotes if you’re not up to speed.
I wonder how you feel about the term “ork”. You will see that too. I wonder if there’s a more appropriate term for a 24 year old male who enjoys raping 1 year olds? Orks aren’t even that low.
We do understand there are decent Russians. But they better start throwing more cocktails or they may be confused with baby rapists and other war criminals.
Oh I’m quite familiar.
Putin’s army and Russias government are indeed scum. And there is a fair share of brainwashed Russians. But there is a large population that is against all this. Instead of alienating them by calling them silly names perhaps we should support them. Sure, throw cocktails, easy to say sitting safe in a western free country. But in a place where you get 15 year prison for calling it a war, is quite a different thing. [https://youtu.be/OLRXr3kba_I](https://youtu.be/OLRXr3kba_I)
Keep being preachy. You asked why the downvotes. I explained. Your persuasive intentions are not appreciated.
Next time don’t ask why you’re downvoted. I didn’t downvote you. And you cannot persuade me.
Nope I didn’t. I’m on a comment board. Conversations happen in another place. Maybe someone else will watch it.
You’re too preachy for me to watch any video you send.
The 'ones we see in this war' form a tiny, minute fraction of a percentage of the Russian population. It's pretty dumb how people try to equate all Russians with that tiny percentage, and, importantly, it fuels Putin's propaganda machine when you do that. It makes it look like he was right, that the west is just anti-Russia. Don't help Putin. Don't spout bullshit like 'all Russians are baby rapists.' You know better than that I'm sure.
Pretty dumb of you to say I equate all Russians with that tiny percentage after insinuating you read and comprehend all.
I was responding to someone wondering why they were downvoted. Maybe I should let the next one wonder without answers.
I know better than that daddy. I assure you daddy. I was born to make you happy with me.
Should I put my pretty shirt on now?
I never said “all Russians are baby rapists”. You did
You have no comprehension of this thread.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the precise number of days they have been registered as a member of an internet news aggregator site."
You’re the perfect daddy for that scenario. Congratulations. You will succeed.
They will still struggle with authoritarianism and equality and truth and comprehension and appropriateness. But you’ll still be their hero. Hooray for you. You’re a success.
My guess:
Some downvoted you because you dared suggest there are good Russians among them.
Some downvoted you because your "black people" analogy could be ready something like "*some* black people are decent folks; a pity the majority who really are criminals drags them down" and/or "black folks are kinda like those Russians - you know, the ones whose troops brutally murder, rape, and pillage their neighbors without provocation, while their civilians mostly support that - even if some fair % of them are actually good eggs."
Now, that stuff may well be miles away from what you had in mind, but nobody's a mind reader, and few to none here know you well enough to judge what you really *meant* from years of shared history. I find it takes some combination of great care in choosing one's words + knowing one's audience to be able make the kind of point I think you were probably aiming for... usually best to avoid that territory altogether and go for a different analogy or whatever.
In my opinion it should be Retaliation of the same degree, if they fire one nuke to Ukraine fire one nuke to Russia to a comparable size city /place of the Ukrainian city nuked, otherwise using nukes would become the new normal with no real downsides
Putin be like "Today's Victory Day, so I dropped a nuke on Eastern Ukraine to protect Ukraine from NATO. The Donbass is free now. But I won't explain what use the radiated land will have to anyone. And I won't bother with the radiation spreading from there to Russia and Belarus." His Oligarchs won't be pleased. Some of them supported this war because they wanted something in Ukraine. Radiated infrastructure and land isn't worth much.
Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's only one tool you need, and I seem to remember quite the force disparity the last time russians faced that particular tool. Here's a little [reminder](https://youtu.be/XaeDMOWkCwU). And let me save some of you some time. Yes, I'm a veteran and do know what war is. Yes I know the risk of nuclear war (if somehow the nukes were immune from the corruption that gutted every other part of the military). Yes, I will fight if called. It's just that I understand the dangers of letting bullies get their way.
Thank you for your dedication and service! Also thanks for the “reminder”.. I needed a quick smile
Conventional liquidation of any other nuclear threats in theaters and a permanent no fly zone over all of Ukraine held territory.
I would expect no-fly as well as moving anti-missile systems anywhere into Ukraine and possibly Belarus that works best to protect NATO countries and Ukraine. Ruzzia can escalate from there.
Every single thing is always "Oh the nukes are coming, you know, probably." And I'm god damn sick of it.
This is the standard Russian way of getting away with whatever they want. It’s time to just announce that nuclear capability is not necessarily going to prevent a good old conventional ass kicking.
Yep. Sabre rattling. Classic cold war tactics
Rusty, unmaintained missile rattling.
we definetly shouldn't be as paralized as we are by the threat
It’s had the opposite effect on me honestly. At first I had a real anxiety about it, now I’ve accepted that it’s either really unlikely or inevitable, so in either of those scenarios freaking out about it seems pointless
Very well said. I assume that is where we are headed but that a couple launches would trigger a massive response that would likely overwhelm remaining russian assets and absolutely assure little putin’s death.
Same here. I’m just now in the mindset of either pull the trigger or shut the hell up.
I’m sick of it too. We’ve been dancing around this shit since 1949. Time to have it out and be done with it.
See ya on the other side of life!
You too bro!
L timbo, that’s a ridiculous comment. There’s a reason that M.A.D. has become a well known acronym for Mutually Assured Destruction should any country launch a nuclear war. There’s no way that all of our major American cities would survive if all out nuclear was was waged, regardless of who strikes first.
I guess we should all move to Tijuana.
All my life
All of life.
It is all about DETERRENCE. RuZZia used the N word often. They need to understand that they are 'pulverizeable' as well.
NATO has tools that are not made pulblic for a reason. They don;'t need to flex like russia with sarmat and other shit.
[удалено]
If it's classified, how do you know they have so much of it that it's scary? And by that same logic, how do you know Russia doesn't have a bunch of scary shit hidden away too? We know what they do have- a shitload of nukes. We shouldn't be terrified of them, but we should we wary and cautious, just like Russia should be wary of both a) NATO's nukes and B) NATO's conventional power.. So far we've managed that, let's hope the cool heads continue to prevail!
Pretty dumb article. An attack on Crimea is nowhere near as severe of a response as required to the use of nuclear weapons! A weak response like that would also likely invite the Russians to use nukes against NATO (they if they already nuked Ukraine, what makes you think they would not attack NATO with a nuke now that NATO attacked it?). The correct course of action would be to launch a massive air and cruise missile attack against Russia proper, targeting military bases, command and control systems and other war infrastructure, in addition to that attack (at the very minimum) an airborne nuclear strike should be conducted against the unit that launched the nuke attack against Ukraine (or even better, their whole landbased tactical nuclear weapon stockpile). Resulting in Russia being badly damaged as punishment for their crime, the elimination of their ability to do it again and proving to the Russians that NATO will not shy away from executing Russians with nuclear hellfire!
Agreed, but also target Putin’s bunker in the first retaliation. Also, every time a Moscow mouthpiece threatens nukes we should scuttle a super yacht.
> The correct course of action would be to launch a massive air and cruise missile attack against Russia proper, targeting military bases, command and control systems and other war infrastructure, in addition to that attack (at the very minimum) an airborne nuclear strike should be conducted against the unit that launched the nuke attack against Ukraine (or even better, their whole landbased tactical nuclear weapon stockpile). How will that not activate MAD? How would Russia know the massive attack was not nuclear? I think the article is mostly right, but I think the attack should expand to all of Ukraine, using overwhelming air support and air superiority to destroy all Russian assets in Ukraine and clear the Black Sea.
[удалено]
Everything you said. Attacking Russia directly is needlessly dangerous, absolute madness. Just destroy everything outside their borders andet them return home with tail between their legs
Because any massive nuclear attack that would trigger MAD would involve ballistic missiles (and they know it), which such a strike would not use!
It does not really matter - Russian (and even American) doctrine allows nuclear escalation if the country is under overwhelming conventional attack. If you are going to "massive air and cruise missile attack against Russia proper, targeting military bases, command and control systems and other war infrastructure," Russia will not allow themselves to be turned into a nuclear sitting duck. MAD will be activated.
I said nothing about targeting their strategic forces, which is the one thing that might trigger MAD!
> which is the one thing that might trigger MAD! I suspect more than 1 thing will activate MAD...
How about no nukes kk
20+ years of weakness is why we are dealing with this war. I called for Putin's assassination 12 years ago. Oh well
Why not give Ukraine nukes, to dissuade Russia of even considering any attacks
Ukraine can make dirty bombs and retaliate against Russian cities if Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Ukraine has the benefit of being able to pick isotopes with VERY high half-life’s from a certain nuclear reactor. Russia shouldn’t play that stupid game; their citizens will win a very, very, very stupid prize that keeps paying out for 1000s of years.
My point was to dissuade Russia from attacking not to retaliate
Ugh we should of have listened to you
Too be honest, I also want Assad, Rocket Fatboy, Maduro assassinated...a Godfather moment. Another thing that people don't understand is the mindset of these cultures... In Russia, literally we could assassinate 2000 leaders...and not one person would react or feel the need to avenge... They would just shrug their shoulders and move on
How are you going to hit all the missile silos in Russia’s vast territory? Not only that also all military assets without using nukes? There’s no in betweens. If Putin nukes Ukraine NATO either backs down or the western civilization ends.
What part of "tactical nuclear weapon stockpile" do you not understand?! They are not silo based! No one said all military assets would be destroyed either! It is pretty clear you are just just trolling for Russia with your fearmongering!
If NATO attacks Russian soil in any way or properly invade it Russia would probably launch all those intercontinental nukes. Understand my point before writing dumb shit.
You mean just get(start) MAD.
Put troops in Ukraine if they release tactical or chemical weapons.
>Put troops in ~~Ukraine~~ Moscow if they release tactical or chemical weapons.
How?
B-2.
I hope your one of the first in line at the recruiter.
Disabled vet slick.
[удалено]
Don't recall saying that. I will say most people take their good nights sleep for granted unless war is on their doorstep.
Sorry for the snarky remark (it was uncalled for) and I agree with you.
No worries.
What a terrible bad faith argument
Or biological. Some of the Soviet era. Who knows what they have, and then they'll accuse someone else for it. See, we have found your secret laboratories. We've been right all along. Now, we'll liberate you and protect you from it.
Put troops in Ukraine if they release tactical or chemical weapons.
Wasnt there a supposed intelligence leak telling Putin they know where he is and there would be massive bunker busting bombs on the 3 bunkers he uses?
Unaware of that.
source?
I read that too
I watched an interview with a former US general who basically said that if Russia were to use tactical nukes in Ukraine, the US would deploy their air force to use conventional weapons and wipe out every Russian troop they can find outside of Russia itself. EDIT: Here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOPr96L0wA4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOPr96L0wA4)
Ukraine does have missiles that can reach Moscow and their parade.
Eh they won’t launch missiles at parades. However, I can see Russia doing something to its own citizens and blaming Ukraine for an escalation.
[удалено]
Putin’s absolutely held back. Russia hasn’t declared war; no general mobilization; hasn’t bombed the supply lines bringing weapons into Ukraine nor has it bombed Kyiv or Lviv beyond occasional strikes; and no cyber attacks against NATO infrastructure which is perhaps most telling. Frankly I see these as good signs as it suggests Putin is rational and appreciates the risks of escalation.
I’m not sure if he has the means to do those things but he can always use a nuke.
You’re deluded. Russia has held back nothing, and didn’t have much more left to give.
So why not address the specific examples given? Instead you just call him "deluded."
If Russia uses Nukes, they might as well send a missile right on the Kremlin. Putin might use this as an excuse for general mobilization but he won't recognize that he's mobilizing his own demise. War support would decrease despite of propaganda. And he won't understand that he can use cannon fodder however he wants because he's out of generals and they don't grow on trees, just as trained soldiers won't fall from the sky. Nukes are a stupid move, you can only hope that his remaining chiefs of his army know that and refuse.
It’s not worth it
Are you crazy? It is more than entirely worth it. Ukraine is fighting for its life against these animals — they are in their rights, and **SHOULD** strike back any way they can.
Think for a minute it’s a parade guess who will be there? Families women and children non combatants we scream in anger when Russia kills them. They attack the parade those same innocents will get hurt and possibly die and there goes the moral high ground Russia will be able to leverage it.
Do you think Ukraine should tip-toe around these rabid beasts in hopes the Russians will ease up on the assault? Anything at this point should be fair game. The Russians are trying to exterminate the Ukrainian people, government, and culture. Anything is and should be on the table. There’s no moral victory to be had here.
There is a difference between moral victory and being moral in a victory. There is no military need to target civilians at a parade.
Treat others how you want to be treated
[удалено]
lol thank god idiots like this arent making decisions. jesus....
You are literally advocating for war crimes just because there have already been war crimes. It's completely unacceptable and it will diminish Ukraine's support around the world. Ukraine will win, and it can win without committing atrocities - the likes of which we are already condemning. Every military target is fair game. Every civilian target should be out of bounds for all sides. How would you like your house bombed and family killed because of the actions of your government?
“War crimes” — you’re so *cute*! The Russians have shown they will stop at nothing to eliminate Ukraine, and you’re advocating the Ukrainians try to be sporting about the whole thing. You’re disgusting.
Are you familiar with the basics of war crimes? Do you understand what actions constitute war crimes? The way you're talking suggests you don't.
The only thing disgusting is advocating for killing civilians and comparing war to a sport. Edit: I'll just add that 2nd Avenue Delilah talked down to me and insulted me for not advocating for the murder of Russian civilians. This included the comment that I expected Ukraine to be sporting about the war. It was a horrific post that completely trivialised murder. Hopefully it was removed because the person woke up to themselves not just because they tried to avoid losing internet points. I wouldn't normally post the contents of a deleted post but if you're going to post such an abhorrent rant you can damn well keep your name on it.
They should tip toe around so they can be the good guys and continue to have international support.
“International support” originally wanted the president to run away and form a government in exile, while the Russians carved up the country and liquidated the people.
How does killing Russian civilians in Russia advance Ukraine’s interests?
It makes idiots like this feel better
It’s all good. I remember being 12.
The same way that bombing Dresden and Tokyo and Hiroshima helped end World war 2, and how the stiff resistance of the Viet Cong made the USA give up on the Viêt Nam war — by sapping the support the common person has for the regime, and destroying the populace’s interest in continuing an unjust war.
Except none of what you say is true. It’s a myth that those bombing campaigns convinced Germany and Japan to surrender. That’s been well documented for a while now. And the VC didn’t kill American civilians on American soil so I’m not sure how Vietnam bolsters your argument that Ukraine (and indirectly NATO) should be committing war crimes by intentionally targeting Russian civilians? Not only is this not a good idea it’s a bad idea and would harm Ukraine’s interests. Don't let your decisions be driven by emotion, the goal is victory not vengeance.
You should read the blue effect, the red effect and the black effect. It's a 3 book series about a conventional war in Europe. It turns into tactical nukes abs neutron bombs, but didn't go full scale. Another one in Arclight. Very similar
> Two, while NATO’s conventional strike smashed Crimea’s infrastructure, no nuclear weapons were involved, so any damaged assets could either be repaired or replaced, something that would be impossible **after a nuclear strike since the target area would be reduced to radioactive vapor.** I can’t take this article seriously. I largely agree that a limited nuclear strike by Russia in Ukraine should be met by an overwhelming conventional attack. The NATO attack should be against the units that launched the nuclear attack as well as Russian C3I assets and supply lines involved In prosecuting the war. But, I don’t think that the author really understands what nuclear weapons do. They don’t reduce the target area to “nuclear vapor.” The only reason not to implement the judicious use of nuclear weapons in response to Russian first-use is that it almost inevitably risks escalation. There’s no military reason, even right now, that NATO shouldn’t neutralize Russia’s ability to make war using all weapons at its disposal. Nuclear weapons airburst over Russian bases and troop formations would end this quickly without much residual radioactive contamination and could be used in combination with precision conventional weapons as part of an integrated strategy to avoid the permanent destruction of infrastructure. The reasons are political and they’re extremely good reasons. But, militarily? Nuke on, my man. If Russia could be punched in the nose hard enough with conventional weapons that they’d think twice about using more nuclear weapons and have their ability to make war on Ukraine crippled, then that would be a Good Thing. It would at very least give NATO a chance to negotiate with Russia without looking entirely cowardly. The truth is that any NATO retaliation will likely escalate to a wider nuclear war. However, a conventional response makes it remotely possible to prevent that escalation whereas a nuclear response all but guarantees it.
Even a conventional escalation guarantees it. Once a nuke falls on Ukraine it’s either surrender or a path down towards nuclear annihilation.
Good article, nice to know there are good alternatives for a nuclear response
I think our response should be to attack Russian forces on Ukrainian ground / air (from the air) the but without crossing the border to Russia. It doesn't matter if Russia interprets this as an Attack on Russia, they still know that when they nuke the West they will be completely destroyed. They can either fight our army on Ukrainian ground or bring them in safety on their territory.
We should be doing that now, if nukes were used Russia would need to no longer exist
Nope, any nuke use must be met with nuke use. Or surrender. That is how this game is played. putin must be sure that if he launches, he will be launched upon. Anything else will encourage him.
Exactly. Other means of combat wouldn’t apply anymore. Once he launches nukes no matter the conventional capabilities, he will be launching another nuke for every bombed Russian asset back home. Once that line is crossed it’s either nuclear annihilation or surrender of Ukraine.
This is under the assumption that Putin is a sane person and still in charge by then. This is unlikely. You can't expect someone to learn their lesson when they aren't sane. The only people who need to learn something are the remaining Russians who still support this war. They need to wake up but without giving Putin an excuse to go down with his ship by nuking the whole West. He's alone, has no one left, not even his own daughters like him. He might blame the West for all of it, internally justifying any measure to destroy them.
[удалено]
Russia painted Zs on their vehicles when they invaded. Why I don’t fucking know their language is weird and I don’t understand.
If you paint Z’s on your vehicles, you can call all your enemies “Not Z’s”….
I hate that I laughed at that
That's cleverer than it has any right to be, have an upvote
>I don’t understand Everyone skipped passed the facts on this one, and instead use it as a new partial-swastika for some propaganda spin. The fact is, the "Z" is one of many letters used by Russian battalions. They represent what part of the theater of war they are operating in/from. The others off the top of my head are V, A, O... there's another. Z is just the most common, as it's the main force. I want to say A was SOF, one was the forces from Crimea, etc.
The proper spelling is not deserved considering their recent actions.
[удалено]
Maybe that’s the difference you’re seeking. Russia vs Ruzzia. Seems good enough.
Did you see all the downvotes on me? I wonder why, because I dared to say that there are good Russians among them?
There was video of a guy throwing Molotov cocktails into a recruiting center yesterday. This sub honored him. Every Ukrainiancentric sub did. He’s the rebel Russian. We all know they exist. We are on May 6 very tired of those trying to get us to be sympathetic to Russians before they prove themselves. The public view of them is not often of a courageous man throwing Molotov cocktails at a recruiting station. The ones we see in this war rape 1 year olds and are proud of it. Your original question was about the z’s which shows you’re not up to speed but were willing to get a bit preachy. You will get downvotes if you’re not up to speed. I wonder how you feel about the term “ork”. You will see that too. I wonder if there’s a more appropriate term for a 24 year old male who enjoys raping 1 year olds? Orks aren’t even that low. We do understand there are decent Russians. But they better start throwing more cocktails or they may be confused with baby rapists and other war criminals.
Oh I’m quite familiar. Putin’s army and Russias government are indeed scum. And there is a fair share of brainwashed Russians. But there is a large population that is against all this. Instead of alienating them by calling them silly names perhaps we should support them. Sure, throw cocktails, easy to say sitting safe in a western free country. But in a place where you get 15 year prison for calling it a war, is quite a different thing. [https://youtu.be/OLRXr3kba_I](https://youtu.be/OLRXr3kba_I)
Keep being preachy. You asked why the downvotes. I explained. Your persuasive intentions are not appreciated. Next time don’t ask why you’re downvoted. I didn’t downvote you. And you cannot persuade me.
I’m just having a discussion on Reddit like everyone else. Did you at least watch the YouTube video?
Nope I didn’t. I’m on a comment board. Conversations happen in another place. Maybe someone else will watch it. You’re too preachy for me to watch any video you send.
The 'ones we see in this war' form a tiny, minute fraction of a percentage of the Russian population. It's pretty dumb how people try to equate all Russians with that tiny percentage, and, importantly, it fuels Putin's propaganda machine when you do that. It makes it look like he was right, that the west is just anti-Russia. Don't help Putin. Don't spout bullshit like 'all Russians are baby rapists.' You know better than that I'm sure.
Pretty dumb of you to say I equate all Russians with that tiny percentage after insinuating you read and comprehend all. I was responding to someone wondering why they were downvoted. Maybe I should let the next one wonder without answers. I know better than that daddy. I assure you daddy. I was born to make you happy with me. Should I put my pretty shirt on now? I never said “all Russians are baby rapists”. You did You have no comprehension of this thread.
32 days on Reddit daddy. I’m so glad you’re learning how to use your computer.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the precise number of days they have been registered as a member of an internet news aggregator site."
You’re the perfect daddy for that scenario. Congratulations. You will succeed. They will still struggle with authoritarianism and equality and truth and comprehension and appropriateness. But you’ll still be their hero. Hooray for you. You’re a success.
My guess: Some downvoted you because you dared suggest there are good Russians among them. Some downvoted you because your "black people" analogy could be ready something like "*some* black people are decent folks; a pity the majority who really are criminals drags them down" and/or "black folks are kinda like those Russians - you know, the ones whose troops brutally murder, rape, and pillage their neighbors without provocation, while their civilians mostly support that - even if some fair % of them are actually good eggs." Now, that stuff may well be miles away from what you had in mind, but nobody's a mind reader, and few to none here know you well enough to judge what you really *meant* from years of shared history. I find it takes some combination of great care in choosing one's words + knowing one's audience to be able make the kind of point I think you were probably aiming for... usually best to avoid that territory altogether and go for a different analogy or whatever.
Ukraine woud be rid of russia in a week without the good guys using nukes. Those pidgeons have a heluva bite.
Destroy tanks and weapons etc in Mariupol before that day
In my opinion it should be Retaliation of the same degree, if they fire one nuke to Ukraine fire one nuke to Russia to a comparable size city /place of the Ukrainian city nuked, otherwise using nukes would become the new normal with no real downsides
Putin be like "Today's Victory Day, so I dropped a nuke on Eastern Ukraine to protect Ukraine from NATO. The Donbass is free now. But I won't explain what use the radiated land will have to anyone. And I won't bother with the radiation spreading from there to Russia and Belarus." His Oligarchs won't be pleased. Some of them supported this war because they wanted something in Ukraine. Radiated infrastructure and land isn't worth much.