21–30 of 213 posts
>The world's longest-running online daily news and commentary publication . . . The opinion pieces presented here are not purported to be fact . . . No thanks, I'll wait for factual information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the idea is that Ukraine’s attack on Russian nuclear capable bombers weakens Russia’s nuclear triad (plane, sub, and ICBM nukes) and makes the situation less stable. Can’t say I blame Ukraine though.
It's kind of like WWI. Where some minor player commits some act and the entire Western-Russo world spirals out into war. Only this time we use nuclear weapons instead of trenches and cannons. Would be an interesting case study for Brazilian historians in the future.
> As we sit, possible poised on the verge of a nuclear conflict in the Northern Hemisphere, maybe it's time to look at the damaging effects of the electromagnetic pulse that follows a nuclear detonation. I guess that's what I get for not doomscrolling like I used to, but I wasn't aware we were on the brink of nuclear annihilation. Can someone explain that for me?
Following a devastating recent strike on the air leg of the Russian nuclear triad by Ukranian drones, some analysts believe the use of nuclear weapons by Russian has become much less unlikely.
1) Don't worry about it. If one goes off over a NATO country or Russia/China, you'll soon have much, much bigger problems to worry about. 2) There is no 2)
Can't I just chuck it in the microwave and hope no one presses start?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's kind of like WWI. Where some minor player commits some act and the entire Western-Russo world spirals out into war. Only this time we use nuclear weapons instead of trenches and cannons. Would be an interesting case study for Brazilian historians in the future.
Or New Zealand ones :) I imagine Peter Thiel might be spending more time down there these days :)
I mean, just consider it from our (US) perspective. Any Russian naval assets that are harbored in, say, North Korea; I'm not sure that we could assume they don't mean us any harm. So I'm almost certain our subs launch strikes on North Korea despite them not really being involved directly in NATO-Russian hostilities. I think the same would go for US, (or NATO), bases and NATO naval assets harbored in Australia or New Zealand. There's just no way Russian sub captains let those targets go.
I think, in general, having had your nation destroyed is probably more reason for all those guys to fight each other and strike at targets of that nature. Not less.