without sounding mad?
>>526065142HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>526065142
You don't.Get mad. Use that anger.If the last 10 years had one concrete lesson, it's this: Without nukes, smaller countries are doomed to be pushed around by superpowers.So, if you can enrich uranium? You should start building a stockpile.And if you ever get nukes? You should never, ever give them up. Ever.
>>526065142If Putin offered the Ukrainian government XX blns of $ for Donbas and Luhansk, he would probably go to history as a XIX century style enlightened autocrat.For (((unknown reasons))) he decided to ruin the image of RF forever.Not that I'm complaining. It had to happen at some point.
How do you respond to picrel without sounding mad?
>>526065142idgi what did i miss
>>526065972It's funny how we theorized it's not the *people* but other factors.
>>526065902Ukraine had nukes but had no means to deliver them to the destination. Missiles, installations and codes were Russian. Ukraine used to be R&D central for USSR, just as Poland used to be the funnest shack in the socialist camp and Georgia used to be a wine barrel, but that simply wasn't enough.
>>526065902>Without nukes, smaller countries are doomed to be pushed around by superpowers.nukes is just a kindergarten-level understanding of powerprojection.You need to have the technology (and control that technology) to produce missile engines, maintain nuclear warheads, have satellite-navigation and survaillance to determine targets and calculate launch settings, etc.It's same as with owning a gun. If you just have a glock, and that's it, then you won't really have a chance against cops. (all of whom also have glocks, but also so much more than just glocks)
>>526065142when Ursula will put the Danish flag on her social media avatars you know it's over for Denmark
>>526065902>If the last 10 years had one concrete lesson, it's this: Without nukes, smaller countries are doomed to be pushed around by superpowers.Yep. "Nations" without the ability to pose a serious existential threat to, at the very least, their entire region are only nations because those with said weapons currently allow them to exist.It's laughable when people act confused as to why the DPRK refuses to disarm.
>>526066947NK is under Chinese umbrella.
No, no, that's pretty accurate! Bahahaha!
>>526066333Untrue. Ukraine had the missiles, installations, and codes as well.Soviet C2 was designed to be highly survivable to the point where the local Unified Command Post of the local Rocket Forces division could launch in an emergency if communications were severed, they just couldn't alter the targets.The same applies to the US to this day. Ukrainians could have gotten independent nukes, but to acomplish that would have literally cost more than the entire GDP of the Ukrainian SSR at that time.
>>526066520>You need to have the technology (and control that technology) to produce missile engines, maintain nuclear warheads, have satellite-navigation and survaillance to determine targets and calculate launch settings, etc.It depends on what you're trying to acomplish, and against whom. Who are you trying to deter, and from doing what? If you're trying to affect the calculus of the big boys, the "minimum credible deterrent" is considered 4 submarines capable of launching nuclear missiles, of which 1-2 are constantly at sea. To support it, you need all the things your message brought up, not to mention survivable command and control etc.This allows a credible deterrent, though ideally it would need tactical nuclear weapons to allow tit-for-tat escalation for maximal signaling and to prevent chickenshit politicians from having to jump to the big guns immediately.However, if say, the Baltics needed to get a nuclear weapon? Their enemy is much closer. A minimum credible deterrent would be 5-10 air-to-ground tactical nuclear warheads launched from planes constantly in flight, able to strike at St. Petersburg and/or Moscow. In the grim calculus of nuclear war it would make any hostile action sufficiently costly to deter aggression.TL;DR. Even a toddler with a gun will make a cop think twice. You might not have a chance in a shooting war, but you'll make them think twice before acting.In the calculus of internatiional relations and nuclear war, that's enough.
