If Ukraine kills every last Russian soldier in its territory, it will still have to deal with a blockade, cruise missiles and convincing Russia not to nuke them. The war must be resolved with a settlement.
if UA army pushes back and threatens or takes donetsk, does putin nuke donetsk?
But at least theyāll be in a stronger position to negotiate a settlement.
So, kill the orcs.
1 Like
I doubt it. Kyiv is more likely, though still unlikely.
heād nuke a city with 2-3m civilians rather than the UA army?
Yes, according to one person who seems to be qualified to have an opinion.
https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1515667033421135882
See bullet point 3:
a 1kt weapon seems pretty dinky until you realize thatās basically 90x the MOAB yield.
Who knows. The upside of using a tactical nuke against spread out forces seems to be pretty small while how the West (and maybe even other countries) react to it could be catastrophic for Russia.
Or about the size of the Beirut port explosion.
Assuming Russia still wants to conquer Ukraine instead of obliterating it out of spite, the primary purpose of nukes would be to break the Ukrainian will to fight.
You can do that but youād need a growing economy to manage it or else your going to have no choice but to take your broke ass out ransacking your neighbors house to get the cool shit you want like Russia.
You should be really careful wasting all that straw given the various shortages these days
Zelinskyās open to negotiating, but he seems to think that WW3 is preferable to giving up Ukrainian sovereignty or territory, while leaving neutrality on the table. I donāt believe this is a stance being forced upon him by the US. I do believe it is a stance that deserves support.
Some might say he is not giving Putin any room to compromise.
ukraine hasnāt even tried to reclaim any territory in battle yet. the north collapsed by withdrawal. i think zelensky will certainly realize that ukraine successes to date arenāt at their strongest negotiating potential. they will try to at least prepare taking back kherson or melitopol or mariupol before even thinking about signing anything that leaves those two places under russian control.
i know we think of zelensky as a single decider, but his military advisers are mostly quite hawkish towards russia. and they are all still hinting at striking back when the war changes stages.
I think Zelensky expresses the will of his people, certainly more so than Democrats do in this country.
I would find it understandable if Ukrainians resorted to terrorism against the West if there was a pullback of support in an attempt to force Ukraine to negotiate a settlement before they are ready.
I mean, Iām not saying they should, just that I would understand it if they did.
But, hey, I have a lot of respect for a people who would be willing to fight to the last man and woman to defend their country. Itās better than the milquetoast Americans who canāt be bothered to feel the least bit of militancy in defense of democracy.
My friend hates America so much that his basic position is that NATO aggression / USA was the cause of this war āRussia had no choiceā but Putin is bad guy, āall wars are started by USAā.
I think this blame NATO comes from extreme loathing of USA and they have to Mind warp an argument together that somehow blames USA.
apples and oranges, but UA public is way more united than the dems are, and the eDems really need to consider both dem voters and independents.
Yeah actually had an argument with someone today who said Ukraine war was proving why all leftists are as bad as right wingers as they all support Putin. I lolād, ofc Iām certain that view is widely shared by many (probably some on this forum too).