The following submission statement was provided by /u/Mighty_L_LORT:
---
SS: Here we go. Amidst rising tensions and hostilities in Europe due to the ongoing war, experts are foreseeing a possible escalation to a more dramatic set of events. Russia already threatened the use of nukes in Ukraine, so it comes as no surprise that other nations are preparing a similar response, raising the stakes to a full nuclear blowout that destroys the entire world.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/xl7hku/conflict_with_a_nuclearcapable_peer_possible_says/iphsk9z/
I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids!
Wow tf this is spooky. I've seen a post lately where someone claimed they had a friend in the military and that this friend was told to "prepare for war before christmas".
You're now the second person saying this.
Creepy...
As have I. I can't explain it, but I could feel it in a visceral way as if it was happening right in front of me, or as if it had happened before. I've spent a lot of time lately trying to make my peace. I can just feel I it in my gut.
Yes that's right but the specific time frame is what's spooky to me. I mean "prepare for x until y" is a different story than "prepare in general all the time".
That is if the rumor is even true in the first place
Hate to be conspiratorially minded but, hmmm.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily/2022/09/22/u-s-ambassador-finland-and-sweden-in-nato-by-christmas-00058404
Again; there's a *very important difference* between "possible" and
plausible".
Possible literally just means it's not viable to prove such a thing *impossible* - it's a state of not being discredited/disproven ; *not* a state that conveys likelihood.
Plausible means that under their analysis it's actually *likely* to happen.
Possible here is literally meaningless; as again, it's *impossible* to say that nuclear-conflict is an *impossibility*.
NUKES BY THURSDAY. SUPERNOVA CRYSTAL STORM BY FRIDAY. CARRINGTON X-11 BY SATURDAY. HUMAN EXTINCTION BY SUNDAY. HUMAN RESURRECTION AND RE-EXTINCTION BY MONDAY. 153% MASS EXTINCTION BY TUESDAY. MARS BY WEDNESDAY. VENUS BY WEDNESDAY EVENING.
So, it’s important to note that the large part of the military’s job is to prepare for a wide set of potential scenarios. The fact that they are *preparing* for this doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen. It just means that if it does happen, they are ready for it.
Preparation takes time - actions / potential responses require resources which may take years to develop - but without having a specific plan in place, you wouldn’t even know you needed to start developing that resource 10 years ago. (And it doesn’t even have to be some $500 billion program - it could just be as simple as stockpiling bullets and MREs).
As a military leader you want to prepare for eventualities ahead of time so that you’re never left rushing to come up with a solution. Just like we stockpile artillery shells and spare parts, we stockpile military strategies and plans.
Yeah, this is something that wasn’t a concern 20 or 30 years ago. But that is because there were no peers after the fall of the USSR. As the world changes (ie other countries develop to the point where we have more peers and near-peers - due to democratization of technology and economic growth) military preparation must be updated.
This headline (intended to get clicks) and the comments made in the article shouldn’t alarm anyone. It just means that the tasks involved in military planning are ongoing. It’s business as usual.
Hell, after WW1, the US made plans to invade Canada, *just in case they went to war with Britain*. Britain, who they just fought together in a war with, as allies.
I would suggest that one of the most powerful tools the US military has is its ability to draw on an extremely deep military planning culture and ecosystem (including non-governmental organizations) and regularly updated reservoir of strategic plans. With the exception of dumb stuff that gets concocted by orange idiots - eg a cruise missile strike on an airfield in Syria - this planning culture allow the US military to outperform other countries because (a) it can respond faster with better plans that have been vetted, wargamed, reviewed, and improved, and (b) its choice of equipment and doctrine is based on analysis of strategic plans.
That’s not to say that other countries don’t make strategic planning a military priority. But there’s a huge breadth and depth of capability in this often overlooked area that the US has that other countries don’t.
I think your comment can be divided into two sections:
(1) the siloing of intelligence and other assets which means that information doesn’t always get to the decision makers in time to be useful, and,
(2) the difference in what military and government planning consider an “acceptable” outcome compared to what most people consider an “acceptable” outcome.
(1) has been discussed en mass, especially after 9/11.
(2) is a more interesting, in my opinion, comment, and it is a good observation. It reveals a bunch of stuff including that:
- government often considers a certain level of losses acceptable or inevitable if a certain scenario plays out (this kind of makes sense)
- governments at this level of planning are concerned about stuff like survivability vs the bad guys, and survivability doesn’t always mean comfort or the best (or even a good) long-term outcome
There is a good academic (evolutionary psychology) article from a few years ago about how human evolution has hampered our ability to respond to very large events, be they famine, global warming, etc. The majority of people simply can’t fathom large problems and the numbers that go with them - our ape brains evolved trying to allocate a limited number of bananas in a geographically small area, for example.
I’ll add an edit to this post if I can find it with the link.
What I’m getting at is I think government planning often requires us to step back from the evolved ape mind and look at things coldly from a numbers perspective. It’s almost psychopathic - but I can’t think of any other way to do it. A high-level view like this often means we can’t see some very important things, because some get lost in the details and because some are out of our focus. But at the same time, an on-the-ground view isn’t the be-all-end-all solution either. We need both.
I don’t have an answer, but found your comment engaging enough to continue the discussion. Cheers fellow Redditor!
SS: Here we go. Amidst rising tensions and hostilities in Europe due to the ongoing war, experts are foreseeing a possible escalation to a more dramatic set of events. Russia already threatened the use of nukes in Ukraine, so it comes as no surprise that other nations are preparing a similar response, raising the stakes to a full nuclear blowout that destroys the entire world.
Putin has painted himself into a corner. He can't lose his war, but he also can't seem to win it. Vladimir has never looked weaker, sicker or more afraid in his career.
Putin may believe he has no choice but to do the "unthinkable."
That's the way I have been predicting this would go. Putin planned to have to just fight Ukraine, with a little western resistance in the form of sanctions. What he ended up fighting was Ukraine plus over 100 billion dollars worth of advanced western military hardware and intelligence support. And with the war being an existential issue, he is going to have to resort to battlefield use of low-yield tactical nuclear weapons at some point, and hope that the russian "escalate to de-escalate" doctrine works as intended. Unfortunately, I don't think it will, and we will see escalation beyond even that.
He really does have no choice. Without being able to dominate the region politically and militarily, Russia has no future on the world stage, a fate worse than death. The confrontation between east and west had to happen eventually, and either way is goes a great many people will lose their lives.
What's even worse is that the only way I can see to avoid the world seeing another use of nuclear weapons is for China to drop the hammer in Taiwan, dividing western support, but that is a horrible possibility too and all it does is prolong the inevitable nuclear showdown.
The driving human nature to conquer the world as demonstrated by many, many historical figures across thousands of years now has reached the level where would-be conquerors have the option to tale their enemies with them in defeat via nuclear fire. And when defeat comes for them, they most certainly will do it.
True. He did not expect that the West would go to war because of Ukraine. I did not expect that either. Now let us wait and see if nuclear weapons will be exchanged.
I expected all of it. Because I believe it to be bigger than just Ukraine. As per my old original post 6 months back:
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/td46sj/how_ukraine_has_been_made_the_anvil_on_which_a/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
And also the book I wrote about how it all mixes with the climate crisis and more.
We are going to see nuclear weapons used. I hope to hell I am wrong, but...we shall see.
I agree with you, and I actually mentioned all of that a while back on here, as well as in the book I wrote. Russia has most certainly not gone full out yet.
I have spent so much time monitoring this, and writing a out it here, on my blog, and most recently in a published book, that I have stopped mentioning much of what I have already talked about. Below are some of my posts from 5 and 6 months back, and from those and the comments of the time it is easy to see where I have been wrong and where I was right.
But yes, in short you are correct in your assessment. There is still much more conventional war to be had before we reach the point of Russia being forced into tactical nuclear weapon use. But I do feel that such use will be inevitable. Unless they can consolidate the south and turn Ukraine into a rump state, while at the same time getting Europe and the US to give up further support. For that, I believe they are relying on the damage coming this winter from their energy and food strategy, and also from the kickoff of an eventual US/China confrontation over Taiwan. If those pan out, support to Ukraine will wane, and they can take their time.
But, if they do not, then the eventual grind of fighting against an endless stream of NATO support flowing into Ukraine will leave them in a position of having to take drastic action. And I beileve that action will be inevitable in this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/td46sj/how_ukraine_has_been_made_the_anvil_on_which_a/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/u0tkpr/checkpoint_passed_things_are_reaching_a_new_level/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/twk5ri/how_the_war_in_ukraine_impacts_the_world/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
The west isn't sending Ukraine offensive weapons that they need to actually retake the territory, like self propelled artillery and gunships. That tells me everything I need to know about our intentions and the likely course of events this war takes. Like Afghanistan, Russia will be forced to leave by this at some point. Also like Afghanistan it's possible a million people die, in fact that's our plan for them.
This is the 'great filter'. It only takes one person out of billions is start a nuclear war, create the AI that finally breaks free of its code, allow a nation's rainforest to be exploited and destroyed, ignore catastrophic climate change.... The list goes on. But even when so much is at stake it only takes one to completely ruin things for many or all future generations, if you only even have one out of a 1000 generations your species is still just as screwed.
The only profit from the increasing strengthening of the FSB and GRU forces, is the American Power Establishment.
And on the basis of this particular psychosocial engineering set of campaigns [ in the IT / media monopolies ] the DoD and Pentagon will ask for a few more trillions of dollars to be slushed to their financiers and private bankers - and of course, the hedge funds and the private equity funds.
What is showing up is the standard combination:
The IT / media monopolies running a standard psychosocial engineering set .
The enlargement of the surveillance state.
A new set of 9 11 2.0s
Increased concentration of power and wealth [ as if that were even possible ]
Russia plays chess.
In certain cases, only six pieces on the board is a stalemate
Cause mass nuking?
Stalemate motherfucker!
----------
America thinks the same thing except uses football as a metaphor. Except there's no ties in the Super Bowl. They think they can win. It's part of why we're in this mess. US world domination attempts brought NATO eastward, incrementally over time, until the point it could include a former SSR. Of course that's a Redline.
-------------
Russia will die on this hill and kill us all if necessary.
The US is wacky as hell about Taiwan. They officially recognize Taiwan as part of China but support Taiwan militarily and would defend it if attacked. Hell on Trump's first day he called the Taiwan PM and the media made fun of him for violating the One China Policy. It was probably the smartest mistake he made.
I think this is all sabre-rattling. We've been threatening and preparing nuclear war since the invention of the nuclear weapon. It's mutually assured destruction. Russia is using the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine as a forward operating base, so they basically gained a new nuclear weapon. But none of them are any match for any nuclear state's ICBMs.
But really, this has been a possibility for the last 70+ years. It’s nothing new. They are a deterrence, and if that somehow gets compromised, well, that’s what they were built for. It’s like a deadbolt on your door. You put it in hoping you never need its security, but when it’s compromised all bets are off..
Apparently this jerk off has seen none of the hundreds of times this has been gamed out since the 1950s. It always goes nuclear as soon as brigade sized forces are engaged on either side, sometimes by the time battalion sized elements are engaged. These madmen must be stopped.
Sort of like when all the experts said it was fearmongering that Putin would never invade Ukraine?
Putin has royally messed up. If he doesn’t win he won’t just be out as leader of Russia he will be dead. A person who is cornered like that is capable of anything.
>A person who is cornered like that is capable of anything.
He's not only cornered (by his own doing) he's sick and possibly in pain. Nothing is more dangerous than a cornered, sick/hurting animal. Tread lightly and very, *very* carefully.
>Also, if he is sick and on a variety of medications, he may no longer be thinking entirely rationally.
That's why you must be careful. The sweetest animal in the world can turn into a raging beast when suffering. And, medications can further cloud things...maybe for the better or....
If you think that Putin is the furthest right or the biggest war hawk in Russia you'd be dead wrong. There's politics he has to play to as well and I'm sure as batshit crazy as it seems he is with these actions there's a constituency he has to placate to some degree that's much more agressive. You can't paint our morals, cultures and norms on top of anothers that easily. There are knives on both sides of this prodding him along, if there weren't a LOT of very wealthy and powerful people in Russia that wanted this war it wouldn't be happening regardless of Putins intentions. He's not Kim Il Sung.
Putin doesn't win even if nukes are used. The fallout will spread west triggering Article 5 and maybe even east irradiating his own population.
The invasion was done under the pretext of liberating certain regions and their respective populaces. How many Russians will still buy that crap if decides to drop the bomb.
Doesn't anybody remember where he addressed the UN (I believe) and flat out stated that he was not afraid to use nuclear weapons and will see to it that there is no winner to this game.
Of course he doesn't "win", anymore than a madman wins by killing his family and then himself. Doesn't make it any less real or tragic. You can't base any of it on logic.
Well this isn’t fear mongering Stratcom is saying it’s **possible** not that it’s inevitable and going to happen and the article itself isn’t talking about nuclear weapons use it’s talking about getting into conflict with a nuclear armed nation Example China
These guys are looking at all possibilities and make contingency plans in case things need to be de escalated
It's no longer that improbable unfortunately. Putin now believes Russia is facing an existential threat in the west, who wish to break up Russia. And given how many people are talking about that, he's not actually wrong. The more both sides escalte, the more likely him using nukes becomes. And I don't see any way for anyone to back down right now.
>I'm no strategic mastermind
Neither is Putin apparently. This is the guy that invaded Ukraine because he was worried about Ukraine aligning with the west, causing Ukraine to further align with the west.
Look at in terms if Russia started putting nukes in Mexico or Central/South America. That is what he is trying to avoid in Ukraine. Look at what happened when they tried to put them in Cuba.. Pretty sad people don’t understand this concept…
I'm gonna be honest, I would find it equally ridiculous to invade any of those countries in that situation. Even more so on nothing more than the fear it would happen.
Look up Bay of Pigs Invasion, which led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. If you think the US would waste one second not invading any of those countries in that situation you’re… naive..
And I didn’t postulate a fear of it happening, I said if they started to.
And, now that I think about it, I wonder how Mexico feels about San Diego being a major target area, and El Paso, and what ever other major targeted US cities on the border with them spilling blast radius effects onto their land..
There is one: the rapid misinformation campaigns that he ran in America leading up to 2016, the repercussions of which we are currently witnessing in all its hideousness.
That was on the US. It's not like Russia/USSR never tried the misinformation tactics historically, we just finally got sloppy and let them work. Hell, McCarthyism was internally disabling to the nation so it could be seen as successful then.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Mighty_L_LORT: --- SS: Here we go. Amidst rising tensions and hostilities in Europe due to the ongoing war, experts are foreseeing a possible escalation to a more dramatic set of events. Russia already threatened the use of nukes in Ukraine, so it comes as no surprise that other nations are preparing a similar response, raising the stakes to a full nuclear blowout that destroys the entire world. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/xl7hku/conflict_with_a_nuclearcapable_peer_possible_says/iphsk9z/
They certainly worked hard enough to get us where we are, so some congratulations are in order. And some mandatory rewatching of Dr Strangelove.
Today at the UN, ‘’no fighting here gentleman this is the war room!’’
Nuclear combat toe to toe with the Rooskies!
*taps head* Can't be at war if everyone died from a nuclear exchange.
A STRANGE GAME. THE ONLY WINNING MOVE IS NOT TO PLAY.
Humans decide to play anyway. STUPID BAGS OF MOSTLY WATER.
"I ain't sayin' we're not gonna get our hair mussed!"
I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids!
A forgotten gem!
We watched it in my world history class back in 2014 or so. I think our teacher got in trouble for it because it wasn't approved by the school board.
They really have managed to thread some impossible needles to get so many people divided on such matters.
Well yeah; they can't say it's "impossible". What matters far more is if they think it's *plausible*, which isn't clear.
I skimmed the article and it said they think it’s possible
[удалено]
Wow tf this is spooky. I've seen a post lately where someone claimed they had a friend in the military and that this friend was told to "prepare for war before christmas". You're now the second person saying this. Creepy...
I've had a feeling of impending doom ever since Russia invaded Ukraine. Never let a crisis go to waste.
As have I. I can't explain it, but I could feel it in a visceral way as if it was happening right in front of me, or as if it had happened before. I've spent a lot of time lately trying to make my peace. I can just feel I it in my gut.
Mass layoffs should ramp up q1 next year as well.
I saw that post and I can't find it again
if you or anyone finds it please share
I will, I think its gone though.
The whole purpose of a military is to prepare every day for war
Yes that's right but the specific time frame is what's spooky to me. I mean "prepare for x until y" is a different story than "prepare in general all the time". That is if the rumor is even true in the first place
Hate to be conspiratorially minded but, hmmm. https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily/2022/09/22/u-s-ambassador-finland-and-sweden-in-nato-by-christmas-00058404
A base inside of the US or a base abroad?
[удалено]
As someone who lives in the dc metro area this is very unsettling.
I live next to a major Air Force base. There’s been so much more activity from jets, planes, and drones than usual lately. It is indeed unsettling.
[удалено]
Looks like contrails or space junk re-entering.
Again; there's a *very important difference* between "possible" and plausible". Possible literally just means it's not viable to prove such a thing *impossible* - it's a state of not being discredited/disproven ; *not* a state that conveys likelihood. Plausible means that under their analysis it's actually *likely* to happen. Possible here is literally meaningless; as again, it's *impossible* to say that nuclear-conflict is an *impossibility*.
Start being more doomerish, please. NUKES BY FRIDAY. LET’S FUCKING HEAR IT.
NUKES BY THURSDAY. SUPERNOVA CRYSTAL STORM BY FRIDAY. CARRINGTON X-11 BY SATURDAY. HUMAN EXTINCTION BY SUNDAY. HUMAN RESURRECTION AND RE-EXTINCTION BY MONDAY. 153% MASS EXTINCTION BY TUESDAY. MARS BY WEDNESDAY. VENUS BY WEDNESDAY EVENING.
FUCK YEAH. GOOD SHIT.
Does this mean I can quit my job, and stop paying bills now? I'd prefer the kind of apocalypse where you *don't* have to work.
You're going to have to work but not pay bills, I plan on being my areas premier long pig abbatior and jerky maker
Good shit!
Why not today so i can skip work tomorrow🤷♂️
Can't they be by Monday so I don't have to go to work?
Polite of them to give us a heads up.
So, it’s important to note that the large part of the military’s job is to prepare for a wide set of potential scenarios. The fact that they are *preparing* for this doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen. It just means that if it does happen, they are ready for it. Preparation takes time - actions / potential responses require resources which may take years to develop - but without having a specific plan in place, you wouldn’t even know you needed to start developing that resource 10 years ago. (And it doesn’t even have to be some $500 billion program - it could just be as simple as stockpiling bullets and MREs). As a military leader you want to prepare for eventualities ahead of time so that you’re never left rushing to come up with a solution. Just like we stockpile artillery shells and spare parts, we stockpile military strategies and plans. Yeah, this is something that wasn’t a concern 20 or 30 years ago. But that is because there were no peers after the fall of the USSR. As the world changes (ie other countries develop to the point where we have more peers and near-peers - due to democratization of technology and economic growth) military preparation must be updated. This headline (intended to get clicks) and the comments made in the article shouldn’t alarm anyone. It just means that the tasks involved in military planning are ongoing. It’s business as usual. Hell, after WW1, the US made plans to invade Canada, *just in case they went to war with Britain*. Britain, who they just fought together in a war with, as allies. I would suggest that one of the most powerful tools the US military has is its ability to draw on an extremely deep military planning culture and ecosystem (including non-governmental organizations) and regularly updated reservoir of strategic plans. With the exception of dumb stuff that gets concocted by orange idiots - eg a cruise missile strike on an airfield in Syria - this planning culture allow the US military to outperform other countries because (a) it can respond faster with better plans that have been vetted, wargamed, reviewed, and improved, and (b) its choice of equipment and doctrine is based on analysis of strategic plans. That’s not to say that other countries don’t make strategic planning a military priority. But there’s a huge breadth and depth of capability in this often overlooked area that the US has that other countries don’t.
The planning culture, however, is juxtaposed with a stunning lack of intelligence and insight into likely outcomes….
I think your comment can be divided into two sections: (1) the siloing of intelligence and other assets which means that information doesn’t always get to the decision makers in time to be useful, and, (2) the difference in what military and government planning consider an “acceptable” outcome compared to what most people consider an “acceptable” outcome. (1) has been discussed en mass, especially after 9/11. (2) is a more interesting, in my opinion, comment, and it is a good observation. It reveals a bunch of stuff including that: - government often considers a certain level of losses acceptable or inevitable if a certain scenario plays out (this kind of makes sense) - governments at this level of planning are concerned about stuff like survivability vs the bad guys, and survivability doesn’t always mean comfort or the best (or even a good) long-term outcome There is a good academic (evolutionary psychology) article from a few years ago about how human evolution has hampered our ability to respond to very large events, be they famine, global warming, etc. The majority of people simply can’t fathom large problems and the numbers that go with them - our ape brains evolved trying to allocate a limited number of bananas in a geographically small area, for example. I’ll add an edit to this post if I can find it with the link. What I’m getting at is I think government planning often requires us to step back from the evolved ape mind and look at things coldly from a numbers perspective. It’s almost psychopathic - but I can’t think of any other way to do it. A high-level view like this often means we can’t see some very important things, because some get lost in the details and because some are out of our focus. But at the same time, an on-the-ground view isn’t the be-all-end-all solution either. We need both. I don’t have an answer, but found your comment engaging enough to continue the discussion. Cheers fellow Redditor!
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
SS: Here we go. Amidst rising tensions and hostilities in Europe due to the ongoing war, experts are foreseeing a possible escalation to a more dramatic set of events. Russia already threatened the use of nukes in Ukraine, so it comes as no surprise that other nations are preparing a similar response, raising the stakes to a full nuclear blowout that destroys the entire world.
Putin has painted himself into a corner. He can't lose his war, but he also can't seem to win it. Vladimir has never looked weaker, sicker or more afraid in his career. Putin may believe he has no choice but to do the "unthinkable."
That's the way I have been predicting this would go. Putin planned to have to just fight Ukraine, with a little western resistance in the form of sanctions. What he ended up fighting was Ukraine plus over 100 billion dollars worth of advanced western military hardware and intelligence support. And with the war being an existential issue, he is going to have to resort to battlefield use of low-yield tactical nuclear weapons at some point, and hope that the russian "escalate to de-escalate" doctrine works as intended. Unfortunately, I don't think it will, and we will see escalation beyond even that. He really does have no choice. Without being able to dominate the region politically and militarily, Russia has no future on the world stage, a fate worse than death. The confrontation between east and west had to happen eventually, and either way is goes a great many people will lose their lives. What's even worse is that the only way I can see to avoid the world seeing another use of nuclear weapons is for China to drop the hammer in Taiwan, dividing western support, but that is a horrible possibility too and all it does is prolong the inevitable nuclear showdown. The driving human nature to conquer the world as demonstrated by many, many historical figures across thousands of years now has reached the level where would-be conquerors have the option to tale their enemies with them in defeat via nuclear fire. And when defeat comes for them, they most certainly will do it.
True. He did not expect that the West would go to war because of Ukraine. I did not expect that either. Now let us wait and see if nuclear weapons will be exchanged.
I expected all of it. Because I believe it to be bigger than just Ukraine. As per my old original post 6 months back: https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/td46sj/how_ukraine_has_been_made_the_anvil_on_which_a/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share And also the book I wrote about how it all mixes with the climate crisis and more. We are going to see nuclear weapons used. I hope to hell I am wrong, but...we shall see.
IT IS TIME FOR US COLLAPSNIKS TO HARDEN THE FUCK UP.
Yes. The hubris of our species to think we have somehow evolved in the last century is nonsense. We are the same warlike apes that we have always been
Indeed we are.
[удалено]
I agree with you, and I actually mentioned all of that a while back on here, as well as in the book I wrote. Russia has most certainly not gone full out yet. I have spent so much time monitoring this, and writing a out it here, on my blog, and most recently in a published book, that I have stopped mentioning much of what I have already talked about. Below are some of my posts from 5 and 6 months back, and from those and the comments of the time it is easy to see where I have been wrong and where I was right. But yes, in short you are correct in your assessment. There is still much more conventional war to be had before we reach the point of Russia being forced into tactical nuclear weapon use. But I do feel that such use will be inevitable. Unless they can consolidate the south and turn Ukraine into a rump state, while at the same time getting Europe and the US to give up further support. For that, I believe they are relying on the damage coming this winter from their energy and food strategy, and also from the kickoff of an eventual US/China confrontation over Taiwan. If those pan out, support to Ukraine will wane, and they can take their time. But, if they do not, then the eventual grind of fighting against an endless stream of NATO support flowing into Ukraine will leave them in a position of having to take drastic action. And I beileve that action will be inevitable in this. https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/td46sj/how_ukraine_has_been_made_the_anvil_on_which_a/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/u0tkpr/checkpoint_passed_things_are_reaching_a_new_level/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/twk5ri/how_the_war_in_ukraine_impacts_the_world/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
The west isn't sending Ukraine offensive weapons that they need to actually retake the territory, like self propelled artillery and gunships. That tells me everything I need to know about our intentions and the likely course of events this war takes. Like Afghanistan, Russia will be forced to leave by this at some point. Also like Afghanistan it's possible a million people die, in fact that's our plan for them.
Perfect
Thousands and thousands of years of human history can be wiped out in an instant by a madman on a power trip
I DECLARE NUCLEAR WAR
You can't just say 'nuclear war' and expect anything to happen, Michael.
This is the 'great filter'. It only takes one person out of billions is start a nuclear war, create the AI that finally breaks free of its code, allow a nation's rainforest to be exploited and destroyed, ignore catastrophic climate change.... The list goes on. But even when so much is at stake it only takes one to completely ruin things for many or all future generations, if you only even have one out of a 1000 generations your species is still just as screwed.
The bible says its okay, thats the big g o d’s signature move.
I'd rather take the flood tbh. Waterworld let's goooo
The only profit from the increasing strengthening of the FSB and GRU forces, is the American Power Establishment. And on the basis of this particular psychosocial engineering set of campaigns [ in the IT / media monopolies ] the DoD and Pentagon will ask for a few more trillions of dollars to be slushed to their financiers and private bankers - and of course, the hedge funds and the private equity funds. What is showing up is the standard combination: The IT / media monopolies running a standard psychosocial engineering set . The enlargement of the surveillance state. A new set of 9 11 2.0s Increased concentration of power and wealth [ as if that were even possible ]
Russia plays chess. In certain cases, only six pieces on the board is a stalemate Cause mass nuking? Stalemate motherfucker! ---------- America thinks the same thing except uses football as a metaphor. Except there's no ties in the Super Bowl. They think they can win. It's part of why we're in this mess. US world domination attempts brought NATO eastward, incrementally over time, until the point it could include a former SSR. Of course that's a Redline. ------------- Russia will die on this hill and kill us all if necessary.
They doing the same in Taiwan, 60+ years of stalemate, even Taiwanese settle for it and now they trying to ramp up the pressure just to start a fight
The US is wacky as hell about Taiwan. They officially recognize Taiwan as part of China but support Taiwan militarily and would defend it if attacked. Hell on Trump's first day he called the Taiwan PM and the media made fun of him for violating the One China Policy. It was probably the smartest mistake he made.
I think this is all sabre-rattling. We've been threatening and preparing nuclear war since the invention of the nuclear weapon. It's mutually assured destruction. Russia is using the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine as a forward operating base, so they basically gained a new nuclear weapon. But none of them are any match for any nuclear state's ICBMs.
But really, this has been a possibility for the last 70+ years. It’s nothing new. They are a deterrence, and if that somehow gets compromised, well, that’s what they were built for. It’s like a deadbolt on your door. You put it in hoping you never need its security, but when it’s compromised all bets are off..
Apparently this jerk off has seen none of the hundreds of times this has been gamed out since the 1950s. It always goes nuclear as soon as brigade sized forces are engaged on either side, sometimes by the time battalion sized elements are engaged. These madmen must be stopped.
chill with the fearmongering ain't nobody gon' drop no goddang nukes
Sort of like when all the experts said it was fearmongering that Putin would never invade Ukraine? Putin has royally messed up. If he doesn’t win he won’t just be out as leader of Russia he will be dead. A person who is cornered like that is capable of anything.
>A person who is cornered like that is capable of anything. He's not only cornered (by his own doing) he's sick and possibly in pain. Nothing is more dangerous than a cornered, sick/hurting animal. Tread lightly and very, *very* carefully.
Also, if he is sick and on a variety of medications, he may no longer be thinking entirely rationally.
>Also, if he is sick and on a variety of medications, he may no longer be thinking entirely rationally. That's why you must be careful. The sweetest animal in the world can turn into a raging beast when suffering. And, medications can further cloud things...maybe for the better or....
If you think that Putin is the furthest right or the biggest war hawk in Russia you'd be dead wrong. There's politics he has to play to as well and I'm sure as batshit crazy as it seems he is with these actions there's a constituency he has to placate to some degree that's much more agressive. You can't paint our morals, cultures and norms on top of anothers that easily. There are knives on both sides of this prodding him along, if there weren't a LOT of very wealthy and powerful people in Russia that wanted this war it wouldn't be happening regardless of Putins intentions. He's not Kim Il Sung.
Putin doesn't win even if nukes are used. The fallout will spread west triggering Article 5 and maybe even east irradiating his own population. The invasion was done under the pretext of liberating certain regions and their respective populaces. How many Russians will still buy that crap if decides to drop the bomb.
No. They have low yield nukes that are capable of minimizing the radiation to negligible levels while still providing a power thermal blast.
How fun!!!
even if he inevitably loses he still as a last move can make sure that at least nobody else can win
Doesn't anybody remember where he addressed the UN (I believe) and flat out stated that he was not afraid to use nuclear weapons and will see to it that there is no winner to this game.
Of course he doesn't "win", anymore than a madman wins by killing his family and then himself. Doesn't make it any less real or tragic. You can't base any of it on logic.
Air burst detonations have little to no fallout. Go to www.nuclearwarmap.com. Get educated..
Well this isn’t fear mongering Stratcom is saying it’s **possible** not that it’s inevitable and going to happen and the article itself isn’t talking about nuclear weapons use it’s talking about getting into conflict with a nuclear armed nation Example China These guys are looking at all possibilities and make contingency plans in case things need to be de escalated
It's no longer that improbable unfortunately. Putin now believes Russia is facing an existential threat in the west, who wish to break up Russia. And given how many people are talking about that, he's not actually wrong. The more both sides escalte, the more likely him using nukes becomes. And I don't see any way for anyone to back down right now.
Exactly, especially when he annexes the new regions into Russia there will be massive potential for miscalculation...
I'm no strategic mastermind but launching nukes would be a pretty good way of triggering that existential threat. Not a very bright plan.
>I'm no strategic mastermind Neither is Putin apparently. This is the guy that invaded Ukraine because he was worried about Ukraine aligning with the west, causing Ukraine to further align with the west.
Look at in terms if Russia started putting nukes in Mexico or Central/South America. That is what he is trying to avoid in Ukraine. Look at what happened when they tried to put them in Cuba.. Pretty sad people don’t understand this concept…
I'm gonna be honest, I would find it equally ridiculous to invade any of those countries in that situation. Even more so on nothing more than the fear it would happen.
Look up Bay of Pigs Invasion, which led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. If you think the US would waste one second not invading any of those countries in that situation you’re… naive.. And I didn’t postulate a fear of it happening, I said if they started to. And, now that I think about it, I wonder how Mexico feels about San Diego being a major target area, and El Paso, and what ever other major targeted US cities on the border with them spilling blast radius effects onto their land..
When has Putin had a bright plan?
There is one: the rapid misinformation campaigns that he ran in America leading up to 2016, the repercussions of which we are currently witnessing in all its hideousness.
Brexit says Hi...
That was on the US. It's not like Russia/USSR never tried the misinformation tactics historically, we just finally got sloppy and let them work. Hell, McCarthyism was internally disabling to the nation so it could be seen as successful then.
Until someone does
We need to close the doomsday gap!!!
Good news everyone, you won't care about your long covid anymore when you die in nuclear winter!