What would have happened if Ukraine had kept its nuclear arsenal after the fall of the USSR?
>>225569829nothing, nobody knows how to maintain nukes anymore
Should've launched it at Russia instead of discarding it
>>225569829bunch of african and muslim countries would get their hands on nukes i guess
>>225569829nothingthey would be the same just with a nuclear arsenal.
>>225569870>bunch of african and muslim countries would get their hands on nukes i guesswhy do you say that?
Russia is the legal successor of the USSR so they're required to give them back their nukes
>>225569829>implying Ukraine had a choice
>>225569968ussr was a confederation it had no 'successor'
>>225569932they would be easy to buy off. that country is corrupt to the bone, and their elite are not experienced leaders
>>225569829Depends on how exactly this happens. If we straight up just refused to give them up, we would be under North Korea-tier sanctions, and that's something we probably wouldn't survive. If he somehow managed to negotiate keeping a small arsenal, without part of the delivery systems, that would be a different story, but that didn't happen, unfortunately.What should have happened, but didn't, unfortunately, is our leadership at the time should have negotiated more benefits out of the process, including NATO membership, economic support and more comprehensive and specific security guarantees.Also, inbefore: "thEy cOulDn't usE thE nUkes, TheY diDn't hAve tHe laUch cOdes!1!!"We could have used them, I literally asked the retired officers who served at the command post of the 43rd Rocket Army in Vinnytsia.
