People say that Russia can't escalate any further after dropping his IRBM with MIRV. I disagree since they can actually restart surface nuclear detonation testing which was banned since 1963 via the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. I hope we can provoke monke further so we can get 4k footage of thermonuclear bombs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_Nuclear_Test_Ban_Treaty
>>62912374Many of the old tests were actually filmedYou know with filmThat's basically as high quality as 4K, just go watch Trinity and Beyond
They can hit military targets of those who fire weapons into Russia.You can always escalate.
>puccia nukes itselfHaha take that hohols
>>62912415yeah but they won't
>>62912425Hopefully.
>>62912374>They can't escalate further except to nuke themselvesKek
GOOOOOD MORNING /KOPING /KONGOLOID ZIGGERINOS
>>62912374I encourage Russia to take the Belka approach. Remind me how much radiation damage did they do to their own people when conducting these tests?
>>62912374I tried the search string "horses wearing gas masks" on several of my favorite pr0nhubz. I am many disappoint.
>>62912374An interesting one is they could nuke the Kursk salient. With something small. maybe a neutron bomb. Call it an "internal policing issue" KEK.
>>62912495>russian policemen armed with nukesi knew they like 40k and 2000AD but i didn't know to which extent until now
Hell yeah! For saber-rattlemaxxing NATO and Russia conduct their tests at their border zones. Every now and then the other side would employ the Nixon madman doctrine and send a wave of bombers at the enemy only for them to turn back at the last kilometer. Alternatively we could launch a wave of inert ICBMs at their population centers and give them re-entry vehicles that burn up in the atmosphere so they can't say we attacked them.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY&t=260s
how about the US sends a carrier battlegroup to vladivostok and conducts drills a couple miles from the coast? the russians ain't gonna do shit about it, cause 99% of their fighting force is the other side of the world and their shitty MiGs wouldn't dare to do their usual bullying stunts in front of a Ford class. this would also make the norks shit their pants and the chinks immediatly cutting all trades with russia on the spot. that would be hilarious, and it's not so hard to pull it off, either.
>>62912374They're desperate and afraid
>>62912523Just nuke Vladivostok as a subtle joke
>>62912433Nah they definitely won't tho
>>62912495>engage in war of conquest>nearly 3 years later nuke yourselfIt would certainly cement russia's failure in this war as the worst military blunder in human history
The USA literally used nukes on two japanese cities because couldn't beat the Japanese in land war
>>62912572they could've, it would've been bloodier and the US was done playing games with the yellow incels. but not as bloody as one might believe. the yamato spirit was broken and anally violated long before enola THE gay soared above hiroshima, the nukes were just a show of strength.
>>62912374Haha yeah epic right yeah what a great planExcept for one thing; nukes cost a lot of money and Russia is really trying to not spend any of that. It's also a given that the world will laugh at their pathetic small dick posturing because we all know they aren't going to attack with one.There's also an extremely high chance their nuke will fizzle or fail and then the entire world will laugh at them even harder.>>62912415Haha yeah epic start shooting wars with NATO members!Except they won't, will they. And we'll laugh at them if they say they might.
This war is everything to Putin. If he loses, he loses his power structure. He’ll lose the European energy market which paid for that power structure. Right now he’s desperate to get it back AND secure its future. There’s NO limit to his escalatory capacity — as long as he can get away with it he’ll DO IT. He WILL nuke Ukraine before losing outright which is why the Biden admin has been slow-walking the war. Because only utterly deluded propaganda-consumers think anyone is starting a nuclear war over Ukraine. So if some town goes up in a flash of light there will NOT be a nuclear exchange. Biden will not dive for the nuclear football. Putin is winning on the battlefield currently which is probably holding him back from going to nukes. But he’s also on a timer and he may eventually push the button if he thinks battlefield victory is taking too long.
>>62912594No, he won't. Because NATO has made it clear fallout landing in a NATO country is article 5 immediately.
>muh nuclear testshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9lquok4Pdk
>>62912597And? Who cares about article 5 when MAD has started?
>>62912583Russia is on a WILD spending spree. As of this year they are back to Soviet-era spending. HUGE investments into the MIC. Over 6% of GDP by 2025 and with no limit in sight, not even counting the non-budgetary spending they do. Money isn’t the problem for them right now.
>>62912599No new designs of nukes have been detonated since 1963. If Russia starts again, we'd be entering another age of nuclear arms race, I think that the chinks would like that since they're currently in the process expanding their nuclear arsenal and would want to test their nukes with new designs outside of computer simulations
>>62912374>MUH MUH WHAT IF SOMETHING HAPPENSIt won't anon. Nothing ever does. How long will it take you to learn this truth?
>>62912513>Alternatively we could launch a wave of inert ICBMs at their population centers and give them re-entry vehicles that burn up in the atmosphere so they can't say we attacked them.queue an arms race of who can come up with the most contrived, looney tunes -esque contraptions to simulate but never actualise nuclear conflict
>>62912399>Many of the old tests were actually filmed>You know with film>That's basically as high quality as 4KExcept he wouldn't be watching the film, he would be watching a digital scan which would be of a lower quality
>>62912594>So if some town goes up in a flash of light there will NOT be a nuclear exchange. Biden will not dive for the nuclear football.If russia drops a nuke on ukraine, the first missiles to reach moscow will be chinese, not american.
>>62912374>>62912594Also forgot to mention, anyone who thinks MAD wouldn't start over ukraine doesn't understand MAD. We figured this shit out in the sixties and everything since has just been trying (and failing) to find a fault. Any use of a nuclear weapon by russia will result in an instant total thermonuclear war. There is no way it doesn't,
>>62912625this is incidentally why russia will never use a nuclear weapon unless they're suicidal (which I wouldn't put past them, but we're not nearly there yet). Putin also doesn't have sole control of the russian nuclear arsenal, unlike in america.
>>62912572sorry I missed the part where Honshu and Kyushu were US states in late summer 1945, I must need to brush up on my history
>>62912495Oh yes, the Seven Pillars gambit. Very cool.
>>62912615>looney tunes -esque contraptions to simulate but never actualise nuclear conflictI got one>B2 Spirit dropps a B-61 onto Red Square>it sticks in the ground, doesn't detonate>instead the back opens up and a flag saying "BANG" pops out
>>62912625All theory. Never been tested.
>>62912513Detonate a 1MT device at 30,000km directly above Moscow.
>>62912685>2+2 is 4 is just a theory, it's never been tested!
>>62912620holy cope
>>62912689No one will self-destruct over ukraine, its a delusion.There are no internal political risks associated with betraying them.
>>62912594>He’ll lose the European energy marketIt's already lost
>>62912698>No one will self-destruct over ukraineThen why did Russia?
>>62912594>>62912620China has agreed to defend Ukraine in the event of nuclear invasion or threats of invasion, though it's not clear what exactly that means. US officials have stated that the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine would trigger a conventional response, probably one that'd make Desert Storm look like a joke. Maybe they'd even get China in as part of the coalition.
>>62912708>russia is destroyed and is no morephew, I thought there was some talk about nuclear escalation, good to know it cant happen because there's no longer an adversarygood to knowyou absolute cretin
>>62912698Ukraine? This war is not about ukraine, it's about russia. Russia isn't allowed to go by its old imperialistic practices, period. The EU won't let them, NATO won't let them, russia is supposed to stay put, shut up and behave like a european first world country. But they ain't. If they threaten the sovereignity of other nations by chest thumping and boasting about how they're gonna submit europe, they will get targeted. And if they actually harm them, they WILL be attacked. It's not so hard to understand.
>>62912399Film is for stupid cavemans.
>>62912721>This war is not about ukrainethats right. nuclear war is not about ukraine.it will not start over ukraine.
>>62912513>we could launch a wave of inert ICBMs at their population centers and give them re-entry vehicles that burn up in the atmosphere so they can't say we attacked them.Retard.
>>62912726You're right, nuclear war won't start over ukraine.>because russia won't use nukes
>>62912726Are you being obtuse on purpose? If russia attacks ukraine with nuclear weapons, they will poison nearby countries with the fallout. I don't know if you remember but chernobyl almost caused a war, and that was because of an accident.
>>62912582USA didn't want to conquer Japan
>>62912605>As of this year they are back to Soviet-era spending. HUGE investments into the MIC. Over 6% of GDP by 2025They were at 20% in the '80's.>>62912615Younglings don't remember Able Archer 83. We were this close.>wewesmaltang.img
>>62912732Russia might get pushed into using them.No one wants that, not US, not China, not Russia itself. Ukraine kinda wants that, to escalate into a larger conflict. If Russia does it, it will face real economic isolation, not the current fake one. But it will not cause a global nuclear war.
>>62912694You think China likes having neighbours who chuck nukes around?
>>62912602Uh... everyone cares, dude. MAD would start because of nuclear fallout blowing into a NATO state. What do you not understand about this?
>>62912737>they will poison nearby countries with the fallout.It will not, it did not, and its not important. Don't talk to me.
>>62912741macarthur absolutely, positively wanted japan. it was pivotal for his plans of encircling the soviet union and having a foothold in the west pacific. halsey didn't want to, but halsey was a braindead moron.
>>62912572
>>62912594>he loses, he loses his power structure. He’ll lose the European energy market which paid for that power structure.Stop findings exscuses for Putin.Dictatorship doesn't need war to hold power. They start wars because they have power and don't need to rule be consensus.Saddam lost two wars (Iran-Iraq War, Gulf War). His power didn't bulged a bit.
>>62912753Okay but they didn't
>>62912752>it did not
>>62912752It did, it did, you don't know shit.
>>62912757they did the second best thing. they bitchslapped the emperor, gave them a pass for their war crimes, and turned them into vassals.
>>62912374>Russia can't escalate any furthernone of this is meaningful. Just dick waggling. I would be interested if Russia restarted nuclear tests just to see if their bombs are old and fizzled or still effective.tests don't matter if you won't use them.
>>62912620>>62912715What? Any non click bait source about this?
>>62912737>>62912752>>62912750both sides of this argument are retarded. Russia using a nuke on ukraine would trigger MAD because you're using a nuclear weapon against a western aligned non-nuclear armed state. This leads to MAD. Radiation would piss the europeans off sure but tactical nuclear weapon usage in ukraine would have negligible if not non-existent radiation effects on europe depending on where they're used. Nuclear weapons in general release fuck all radiation if they're airbursted (which they almost always will be) compared to how they're depicted in media. Radiation as an entire concept has been totally warped by retarded hollywood depictions to the point of insanity, it drives me insane seeing people influenced by it.
>>62912730Obviously you don't start by doing that, have to get the enemy used to the idea. For example, Russia. could start by shooting some at Ukraine. Then over Europe. Making sure they burn up or disintegrate in space so there isn't a territorial issue of course. Then over the Atlantic and over Canada and so on.
>>62912766can't give you a source for china saying what that anon said but it's generally well known china is actually aggressively opposed to russian use of nuclear missiles because china stands to get MASSIVELY fucked over the proliferation of nuclear weapons that would ensue from russia nuking ukraine going unpunished>Russia nukes ukraine>west doesn't do shit>every small nation in the world now develops their own nuclear weapons>china's entire backyard (taiwan, vietnam, south korea etc etc etc) now has nukes >nukes are no longer limited to a very small and select group of (mostly) intelligent actors>the likelihood of nuclear war breaking out somewhere is now exponentially higher>this makes world events significantly less predictable, makes the stakes higher for EVERYONE, and generally completely fucks up the 5D chess game that the chinese think they're playingchina is exceedingly risk averse, unlike putin.
>>62912768>This leads to MAD.It doesn't.A nuclear weapon used in Ukraine is NOT equal to an ICBM falling on a western capital, but escalating from there IS.Thats why it isn't the final line.
>>62912780*china stands to get massively fucked over FROM the proliferation
>>62912737>>62912759My niggers, "small" modern tactical nukes dont posion shit beyond the impact zone. No fallout would reach EU if east ukraine gets nuked
>>62912768>what are dirty bombs>implying russia wouldn't use them
>>62912572But they could. You forget that any invasion of Japan would have had the British involved as well. It was just worked out that it would be insanely costly to do so. Also because the Russians were marching through Manchuria, it was a way to get them to stop and not take any more shit. Nukes were the best option because it prevented a need for a costly invasion and made USSR go 'What the fuck?'.
>>62912797negro, i can see the effects of an icelandic volcano erupting the other side of the world on my sunset, what makes you think irradiated dirt can't travel 800 measly kms and land on poland?
>>62912766https://web.archive.org/web/20220302044101/https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/feb/28/putins-war-tests-chinas-nuclear-pact-ukraine/
>>62912694>>62912780>>62912766How fucking retarded are you? China has a Nuclear Umbrella Treaty with Ukraine. They have just tried to wiggle out of it in 2022.
Russia's critical infrastructure depends on Western suppliers. Oil and gas production, avionics. Rare things are almost impossible to get without sanctions. There are many levers of pressure. Putin is just a coward rat who has surrounded himself with Yes man.
>>62912783>A nuclear weapon used in Ukraine is NOT equal to an ICBM falling on a western capital, Actually, it is. At least in terms of outcomeSee >>62912780 for why the chinese would nuke russia. This reasoning applies to america and NATO too: they also do not want loads of random countries getting nukes, since that fucks EVERYONE over. So that's one reason nuclear war will start over ukraine, although in this instance it's less the traditional cold war MAD and more "everyone nukes russia"In terms of actual MAD though, the calculation goes something like this - >russia nukes ukraine>this crosses the primary threshold, which is nuclear weapon detonation. Not even where that weapon is used, or who against necessarily matters - just that it is used. >this designates russia as ready and willing to use nuclear weapons to get their way against an enemy. It also implies russia would be willing to use more nukes, and might do so.>if russia is allowed to do this, then russia will ultimately come to believe it can get away with worse. Therefore, a first strike against them is the only rational option. Not first striking russia immediately allows them to potentially first strike YOU, as the russians will be making this same calculation and have probably realised by now that just like in the prisoner dilemma, you will opt to nuke them before they can nuke you.>MAD ensues>the russians know this btw which is why THEY WONT USE TACTICAL NUKES ON UKRAINE IN THE FIRST PLACEWE FIGUREDTHISSHITOUTINTHESIXTIESRETARD there is no such thing as a tactical nuclear weapon. There is only total thermonuclear war
What does this prove? Everyone already knew Russia has nukes and ICBMs. They still won't use them because that would be the end of Russia for all time.
>>62912797>tactical nukes THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A TACTICAL NUKE. THERE ARE NUKES AND HOW YOU USE THEM DEFINES WHAT THEY ARE. IF I DROP A 1MT NUKE ON A CIVILIAN POPULATION CENTRE I HAVE NOT DROPPED A 'TACTICAL NUKE' I HAVE DROPPED A LOW YIELD NUKE IN A STRATEGIC WAY. IF I DROP A 50MT NUKE ON A AIRCRAFT CARRIER DROP I HAVE NOT DROPPED A 'STRATEGIC' NUKE. I HAVE DROPPED A HIGH YIELD NUKE IN A TACTICAL WAY.HOW YOU USE THE NUKE DEFINES WHAT IT IS. IF YOU USE IT TO GAIN TACTICAL ADVANTAGE ON THE BATTLEFIELD BY BLOWING UP AN AIRFIELD WITH 100 AIRCRAFT ON IT OR A FOB OR AN ARMOURED THRUST YOU HAVE USED A NUKE TACTICALLY. THE SIZE IS IRRELEVANT. THE NUKE IS A TACTICAL NUKE. IF YOU BOMB POPULATION CENTRES AND MISSILE SILOS AND OPERATION CENTRES AND GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS YOU HAVE USED IT STRATEGICALLY REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE.FINALLY THE USA IN LIKE 2016 STATED THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 'TACTICAL' NUKE AND ANY NUCLEAR WEAPON USED IS CONSIDERED A STRATEGIC GAME CHANGER.PLEASE STOP USING THIS SHIT DUMB RETARDED TERM.
>>62912812Fucking this.
>>62912495Sure, but this would scare the shit out of Russian civilians expect mass emigration if not unrest.
>>62912801>what makes you think irradiated dirt can't travel 800 measly kms and land on poland?2,056 nuclear tests in the last 50 years. You eat more radioactivity walking around your city than in a nuclear crater in Nevada
>>62912812>for why the chinese would nuke russiaOr, because they have a nuclear umbrella treaty with Ukraine and not some 'I'm actually fucking smart' retarded logic greentext. >>62912809
>>62912828Wasn't aware of that umbrella treaty but it doesn't mean shit anon. Treaties don't mean shit in general to the russians and the chinese. Feel free to disprove my "retarded logic" if it's so stupid anon.
>>62912830actually, I take that back, I was wrong. This treaty in particular is extremely important, and thanks for bringing it up, because the existence of this treaty will give those countries which want to develop nukes the perfect reason to - that china has betrayed its legal obligations to protect ukraine, and that therefore they should be able to betray nuclear nonproliferation treaties.
>>62912830Your logic doesn't apply because you're assuming rational actors. Putin's entire decision to start the war is completely irrational. His reasons for doing it dumb and have achieved the opposite of what he wanted. A treaty is a solid diplomatic and geopolitical thing. If China breaks the treaty (which it clearly is trying to do) it puts China in a really bad position globally because not only was this treaty their first 'We're a big player now' treaty but also because it makes every nation they have a treaty with (such as Belt & Road, or stuff in Africa or the soft power grabs in Canada and Australia) go 'Hey, if you broke that, you could break this, why should we trust you'. Then other nations they need deals with go 'Hang on, you could break this, so we want more shit to secure it or we won't sign'.Finally if the treaty is not honoured then it just makes people go 'Well if we're not going to be protected, why shouldn't we have nukes? It's the only thing to secure our situation' and nobody in the nuke club wants nuclear proliferation.
>>62912820you are correct anon although just for fun to debateIs nuking a carrier group truly tactical, or strategic? On the one hand if it's part of an ongoing massive engagement where carrier groups are just one pawn out of many, nuking one is just another tactical decision; but then on the other hand, if a carrier group hasn't been nuked yet or the war hasn't been large enough to have carrier groups lost, it could be viewed as strategic due to the sheer importance of a carrier group. idk
>>62912841yeah no I agree with your reasoning >>62912845 on the treaty ultimately, although I do think it falls under my reasoning for china pretty neatlyAlso how exactly does putin being a rational actor or not impact MAD? If anything, him being an irrational actor would only further justify against a first strike against russia.It's a bit of a tautology also because putin using a tactical nuke against ukraine makes him an irrational actor de facto
>>62912841A treaty is nothing but noise to a bugman.
>>62912856*justify in favour of a strike against russia
>>62912715>Maybe they'd even get China in as part of the coalition.Even without considering treaties and whatnot (because they sure won't lol), given how not enthused Xi has been about Putin's antics, I could easily see the reaction to the nuclear option as >Hey you know what? Fuck those guys, never liked em anyway. Need help slapping their shit?Or at the very least do the geopolitical equivalent of shrugging and pretending they didn't see anything. I just don't see them going to bat for russia if they go full retard like that.
>>62912812>Actually, it is. At least in terms of outcomeOnly ukrainians think of Kyiv as a western capital. No one else really thinks that. Besides, first use does not have to be on Kyiv.
>>62912870We know what think zigger, and no one cares what your primitive beliefs are.
>>62912870What the fuck are you talking about anon? When I said "Actually, it is. At least in terms of outcome", I meant that using a nuclear missile on a western capital and using a tactical nuke on ukraine have the same outcome - total nuclear war against russia.
>>62912877You'll be the first to cope yourself into a corner, just saying.
>>62912879>using a nuclear missile on a western capital and using a tactical nuke on ukraine is equalIt's not, and there are no reason to think this way. If you try to come up with such reasons, all of them will be abstract, like "threatening of sovereignty" which have no tangible entry points.
>>62912891Nigga did you not read the rest of the post you replied to?>>62912812also this dude>>62912820tell me how this is wrong
>>62912858>an outcome that ensures mass nuclear proliferation is not of concern to China>causing Japan, South Korea, Taiwan to develop nukes is not a concern to ChinaRetard.
>>62912891>all of them will be abstractIt's really not a hard concept to grasp. You can't nuke a country just a little bit. Once you've shown you're willing to throw nukes the only question is when and where you're going to do it next. And the only answer anyone's going to come up with is >I'd rather just make sure they can't
>>62912927admittedly you could argue it's not the treaty itself that matters so much as the implications/context of said treaty. You might then ask "isn't that just all treaties" to which I would say that it's a good way of filtering treaties that matter from treaties that don't.
>>62912902>Nigga did you not read the rest of the post you replied to?Sure. You are describing internal deterrence arguments that comprise MAD and actually make it worth the paper it is written on. But it is also just another doctrine, it is not an automatically enacted algorithm. The use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine does not "trigger" MAD, it means that it - in part - is no longer reliable as a concept and another set of incentives has to be discovered.Your mistake is thinking like an object of the doctrine, not like a subject of it.
>>62912933I can appreciate that you're coming at this from the perspective of a reasonable sceptic, not a retarded zigger, so I would agree that we shouldn't be complete braindead adherents of "MAD says this so it will happen". I certainly do wonder sometimes whether things really would play out the way they do. That said, I simply think that apparatuses the size of countries (and countries nuclear arsenals) are simply too large, complex, and the institutions that make them up hold enough momentum, that MAD theory and game theory by extention is the only thing that is worth considering when predicting their actions.
>>62912415Wish a nigga would.
>>62912942*worth considering when predicting their actions in terms of nuclear war specifically, not their actions in general
>>62912618unless, you know, it was a 4k scan or something
>>62912933also>The use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine does not "trigger" MAD, it means that it - in part - is no longer reliable as a concept and another set of incentives has to be discoveredthis doesn't make sense to me anon. This would only be true if the use of nuclear weapons in ukraine did not result in a massive strike against russia from the west - if it does, then MAD's still in effect. We don't know until we cross that line.That said yammering on about MAD I realise I'm speaking more about game theory in general than MAD specifically, MAD at this point doesn't really exist anymore the way it did in the cold war since 1. far fewer nukes 2. most of russia's probably don't work and 3. nukes are much less destructive now due to greater accuracy and smaller warheads
>>62912931You are struggling with two points - first is that use of a nuclear weapon is immediately projected as an unacceptable decrease in security - which is not a given - and the second point is that the solution to this is first strike.The question of first strike is not related to potential "decrease in security" because it is much more dependent on the fact that the response to first strike still bears unacceptable consequences.The security may go down, but its a separate and independent problem from mutually assured destruction. Can first strike prevent the retaliation? No, it can't. Can you prevent the response to the first strike? The answer to that defines the first strike. Not the use of a nuclear weapon in a regional conflict.
>>62912374>can actually restart surface nuclear detonation testingThey would have to get their nukes to detonate first. They have announced 5 different underground nuclear tests over the last 2 years (which also violate the nuclear test ban treaty btw) - but none of them have successfully gone boom yet.
>>62912536Would Russia even notice? I guess they might pick up on the slight reduction in trash and rubble in the area and put two and two together.
>>62912968>use of a nuclear weapon is immediately projected as an unacceptable decrease in security - which is not a givenYes, it is anon. Breaking the nuclear taboo, against a non-nuclear armed state, fucks EVERYONE, everywhere. >the second point is that the solution to this is first strike.This is the only thing that works. Total eradication of the enemy. You don't technically need it to be nuclear though - america could do just as much damage conventionally to russia.
>>62912745>Russia might get pushed into using them.they are free to leave at any time lmao
>>62912374https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWZY90HMYlIThe footage we have is good enough
>>62912374You're not incorrect but it will be a retarded move and just signal that Russia is ready to go for nuclear war rather than just admit defeat and leave Ukraine (which they can't because then Putin will be ACK'd).
>>62912968>first is that use of a nuclear weapon is immediately projected as an unacceptable decrease in security - which is not a givenIt is 100% a given. "regional" or not, they used nuclear weapons on a country to get what they want. Suddenly all of that cute little strongman nuke posturing looks a lot less cute in hindsight and very single nuclear armed country on the planet is going to completely flip their shit because no one wants to accept that as the norm and just wait to see who catches a "regional" nuke next. There's nothing about a nuclear strike that will end favorably for russia and/or everyone in general.
>>62912942I think MAD is real and works. It just shouldn't be projected to places it doesn't work at. People like to project and they also like to debase terminology for minute political gain.We're still moving towards the world predicted by George Orwell in 1945 as the aftermath of use of nuclear weapons against Japan. And that world is cut in spheres of influence of countries with nuclear weapons, oppressing countries without nuclear weapons
>>62912756I’m trying to explain the real world to you. In the real world there are real motives to do things.
>>62912620China wouldn't launch lol. They would cut all trade relations though, and so would India. Basically only some random african shitholes would still be willing to trade with Russia after that point. The nuclear taboo is more important to nuclear powers than anyone, paradoxically, because if it's violated they will be the primary potential targets of nuclear weapons. Only pathetic and incompetent countries would need to nuke a non-nuclear country in order to win which is why the west, despite some saber rattling (uk vs argentina, us vs vietnam and korea) has never done it, even in cases where there is basically 0 chance anyone would counter launch on them.
>>62912715>US officials have stated that the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine would trigger a conventional responseThis is a lie told to the public to pacify them. The response would be nuclear.
>>62912374They first need to actually have a successful above ground missile test.
>>62912495>neutron bombsci-fi bullshit that doesn't existwhy do nuke threads attract the 14 year old sci fi nerds so much>>62912726keep chanting your self-affirming mantras like a insecure fat woman you little faggot cunt
>>62914731>They first need to actually have a successful above ground missile test.They literally just did in Dnipro
>>62912756Putin isn't a normal dictator, he's running a Mafia state. He needs loot and heists to keep his people with fat pockets otherwise they'll start finding other ways and people to keep them and their yatchs in business. Ukraine has lots of stuff to steal.>>62913157in the real world your mother sucked my dick and puked
>>62914758https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W66_(nuclear_warhead)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W70
>>62912768tactical nukes are just regular nukes used in a tactical manner why are these Call of Duty addicted faggots posting? Why do they get their knowledge from video games and pop culture movies? Will they ever grow up and get a job and move out of their parents' house?>>62912891you know what else is abstract? Fucking MAD and nuclear warfare. You know what isn't? Your fucking retarded rotten brain. Did your single mother beat you on the head too much while you were a child?
>>62912495>Russia unironically pulling a BelkaWould honestly make for great marketing memes for the next Ace Combat game
Try It monke
>>62912374>that video>mfw Death Korps of Krieg was based on a propaganda videoalso is that video from Russia or China?
>>62912809>treaty>with china>implying they would put their own skin in the game for ukraine or anybody else for that matterI have got a bridge to sell you
>>62912594so your point is that Putin should get what he wants or he'll NOOK?
>Faced with waves of counterattacks from nearly 60,000 Russian troops, Ukraine has lost more than 40% of the territory it once controlled in its August invasion of Kursk, Reuters reported, citing a member of the Ukrainian General Staff.>“At most, we controlled about 1,376 square kilometers (531 square miles), now of course this territory is smaller. The enemy is increasing its counterattacks,” the source told Reuters.>“Now we control approximately 800 square kilometers (309 square miles). We will hold this territory for as long as is militarily appropriate.”https://www.twz.com/news-features/ukraine-lost-nearly-half-the-territory-it-captured-in-russia-reportat this rate, Ukraine will be fully pushed out of Kursk in 2 months, just in time for Trump presidency. he'll then force Ukraine to accept an unfavorable peace deal and freeze the current frontline
>>62917136>that video>mfw Death Korps of Krieg was based on a propaganda video>>also is that video from Russia or China?China: https://youtu.be/hOQ3EQjIo5I?si=095N-dZUU-wIjFbn
>>62912415>targets of those who fire weapons into Russia>those who fireUkrainians??? But they already do..
Monke's warning didn't work lol! Now the French have given permission for Ukraine to use SCALP missiles on Russian soil.
>>62912759That is not significant at all.Go ahead and try to find correlation in cancer rates...
if Russia used a nuke literally the entire world will turn against them and the entire country will be up for grabs chinese will get the biggest cut of the pie i bet
>>62917163>it took ukraine 2 months of offensive to take back kherson, while russia has been pushing back against a smaller portion of kursk for over 3 months>ukraine is still projected to hold kursk for as long as russia held khersonThis really underscores how far the inheritor of the Soviet legacy has fallen
>>62912764>I would be interested if Russia restarted nuclear testsThey did.>just to see if their bombs are old and fizzledThey were.
>>62917536Except that they didn't, because atmospheric testing has been banned since 1963, and both sides have followed that rule.
>>62912667>>looney tunes -esque contraptions to simulate but never actualise nuclear conflict>I got one>>B2 Spirit dropps a B-61 onto Red SquareI like it so far>>it sticks in the ground, doesn't detonateNot really as enthusiastic about the whole thing as I was>>instead the back opens up and a flag saying "BANG" pops outYou fucking retard. Do you understand anything about MAD at all? Or anything about nuclear game theory in general? If you're going to go through with something so escalatory like that. Obviously the little flag shouldn't say "BANG" it should say "BOOM!!!" or alternatively "BOOM!!!!" with each "!" denoting another hundred kt of yield. Honestly man what kind of half assed message are you hoping to send with a little flag that says "BANG"?
>>62912399High speed film is no where as good as current high speed digital cameras.
>>62912572Hadn't the US already won the land war several times at this point, which is why they were at the Japanese home islands in the first place?
>>62912374>they can actually restart surface nuclear detonation testingIf the Russkies really want to start dropping nukes on themselves, okay dokey!
>>62918364I wonder if we would be able to capture the flux?
>>62912572We could, we just decided it wasn't worth the bother, especially aince the Soviets were so useless that we had to give them a fleet before they'd even consider planning a landing.
>>62918409Stop pointing out facts, you're upsetting his carefully constructed fantasy.
>>62912374Did you know that China had the last atmospheric test in 1980
>>62912399Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory youtube has a lot of new footage.
>>62912433Lol no they 100% won’t.1: a conventional attack would mean we open up Russias asshole in Ukraine2: a nuclear attack means we genocide the Russian people.Putin likes his custom suites, his dachas, his yatch, going to plays and shows, he loves his fine dining. He’s also not a fan of seeing Russia genocided
