Seems like Putin has not got long left https://www.skynews.com.au/world-ne...ws-story/78df638b69d47c9fccbff3f102b45237?amp
Seems like Putin has not got long left https://www.skynews.com.au/world-ne...ws-story/78df638b69d47c9fccbff3f102b45237?amp
Seems like Putin has not got long left https://www.skynews.com.au/world-ne...ws-story/78df638b69d47c9fccbff3f102b45237?amp
With a fragmented Russia I doubt any of the resulting states would be able to afford to maintain nuclear weapons, even with the arsenal and strategic forces and equipment divided up or trying to pool resources towards that end.
But knowing you have an unfriendly nuclear armed neighbour might make it worth the expense - would Ukraine be being invaded now if it had kept its weapons.With a fragmented Russia I doubt any of the resulting states would be able to afford to maintain nuclear weapons, even with the arsenal and strategic forces and equipment divided up or trying to pool resources towards that end.
We spend about £3bn a year maintaining our, relatively small, nuclear weapon capability and that benefits from having additional nuclear capabilities which have some overlap (and the US facilities), which fragmented states of Russia wouldn't have.
My goodness, who would have thought that was still a thing in 2022.New British intelligence update out!
![]()
It depends whether you think Ukraine would launch a nuclear response to being invaded by Russia and therefore committing suicide through MAD. We believe (generally, though there are some obvious exceptions) that Putin will not launch a nuclear attack on Ukraine (or, Ukrainian territory annexed by Russia), and Russia might believe that would be the case in an invasion of Ukraine. We will never know.But knowing you have an unfriendly nuclear armed neighbour might make it worth the expense - would Ukraine be being invaded now if it had kept its weapons.
I think it would have prevented Russia from nuclear sabre rattling if it knew the consequence of using its weapons was to have some back.It depends whether you think Ukraine would launch a nuclear response to being invaded by Russia and therefore committing suicide through MAD. We believe (generally, though there are some obvious exceptions) that Putin will not launch a nuclear attack on Ukraine (or, Ukrainian territory annexed by Russia), and Russia might believe that would be the case in an invasion of Ukraine. We will never know.
They better surrender now, before they end up like thatUkraines going to be a total mess. Would hate to have to return to that place after Russia has finished.
They better surrender now, before they end up like that
![]()
Who drew thst mapThey better surrender now, before they end up like that
![]()
Many countries are building nukes.I think it would have prevented Russia from nuclear sabre rattling if it knew the consequence of using its weapons was to have some back.
It is a concern to me that if Russia did use nuclear weapons (and I think this very unlikely) and the other nuclear powers did not intervene on the attacked countries behalf, then every country on earth would then feel the need to obtain it's own deterent and the world would be a less safe place.
At what point are all his posts in here just classed as pure trolling.Looks like Kylew has refilled his Copium pipe
I would love to know more about your background to hold such views. Where were you born? Where did you grow up? Do you remember how many times you were dropped on your head as a child?They better surrender now, before they end up like that
![]()
Why, most of the cities will modernise and become efficient. Historical builds are a pain and cost a lot to service.Ukraines going to be a total mess. Would hate to have to return to that place after Russia has finished.