Ukraine

Tactical nuclear weapons are very different from all out nuclear war.

 

Why? What is the difference between a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine and one on Moscow? I would nuke Moscow off the face of the earth.

 

Putin won't cease to exist. He'll be in one of Russia's many nuclear bunkers well before the first missile is launched. Ordinary Russian people will cease to exist in minutes if nuclear war starts, but Putin has consistently demonstrated that he gives exactly zero flips about them.

 

While ours and the American missiles are flying to Moscow the Russian ones would be flying to all the major cities in the west, its a no win situation.
That's why the arms race started way back, its called a Nuclear
Deterrent for a reason.
I'm not up on all the battle field weapons, but I seem to remember hearing about some that use depleted uranium, I think the Russians used them in Syria, I might be wrong.

 

I'm sorry but I dont understand why only Russian people will cease to exist.
I'm near enough London to cease to exist as well.

 

You are right. I was picking up on the specific point that Putin would cease to exist in minutes.

None of it is any good for ordinary folk anywhere.

The only slight consolation I take is the knowledge that for Putin to attack any NATO country, he has to take out ALL NATO countries at once because as soon as one is attacked, Russia will just get pounded into oblivion. So while his strategists have to work out how best to distribute his arsenal, NATO just has one country to aim for.

 

I dont think , hope, Russia is up to taking on NATO, judging by what is happening in Ukraine they are not.
But, trying to "take" and hold a country is a very different proposition to just chucking missiles around.
Said it before, Russia got out of Afghanistan eventually, and so did we, invading a country and holding it, even trying regime change is very difficult if the local population is against you.

 

We used shells with depleted uranium in them in Iraq, mainly against armour. Uranium is dense so shells have more mass for their size and literally pack more of a punch.
Depleted uranium is not particularly radioactive, but contamination of destroyed vehicles and surroundings can be a problem

 

Did anyone see the piece about new Russian soldiers purportedly being issued with rusty automatic weapons?

https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1573650479799799809

 

Just a bit of surface rust, nothing that some WD40 and wire wool can't sort out.

 

Mass protests are happening in Russia. Some of those that have been arrested have been served conscription papers.

Meanwhile in Ukraine, Russian soldiers in occupied areas are going door to door, intimidating people to vote to be part of Russia.

Also Zelensky has assured Russian soldiers that if they surrender they'll be treat in a civilised way, and they won't be sent back to Russia if they fear repercussions.

It feels to me like the war has entered a new phase. It feels like it started off with the primitive approach of just shooting things. Now it feels far more tactical, like a game of chess, but with people's lives.

And where is the UN? Maybe I think too simply, but I think there has been a massive diplomatic opportunity that's been completely lost. Russian held areas are holding referendums, which of course won't be done in a fair and objective way. The UN could have offered to run the referendums, with international peacekeeping forces there and a negotiated ceasefire while it happened. Russia is actually a member of the UN, so if they'd refused it would send a clear message to the world of their hostile intentions. If they'd allowed it, then the result could form the basis of the following actions. But once again, the UN is nowhere to be seen when you need them. I honestly don't understand what they're for.

 

I tend to think Putin might have shot his bolt regarding call up.
It's totally pointed out that a special military operation that is going as planned, isn't.

 

The UN are helpless. Russia is on the Security Council and can veto any resolution. The other day when they were discussing the situation in Ukraine Russia's representative, Nebenzya, walked out at the beginning. They don't want any UN involvement as it won't be in their favour. The UN is fine for Eritrea or Lagos or the like but is useless where a Security Council member is involved.

 

That's kind of my point though. If the UN has publicly asked to oversee the referendums, then Russia would have had to very publicly refuse to let them. Then it would be abundantly clear to everyone what Russia was playing at, and Putin could never claim that the referendums were legitimate.