this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2024
188 points (97.5% liked)

World News

32161 readers
629 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Shroedinger's Russian nuclear arsenal. When there's a story about risking escalation, libs tell me it's fine because Russia doesn't have the money to maintain its nukes, so it'd only be a "limited" nuclear exchange. When this story comes out, the libs tell me that Russia has a much larger and better maintained nuclear stockpile, so it's only necessary for the US to spend more on it to catch up. It's sort of the same way that Russia simultaneously is on the verge of defeat, yet also has the intention and capability to conquer all of Europe, like Hitler, if we don't stop him here.

The enemy is both strong and weak, and you never know which one it's gonna be.

[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The thing is countries can change. Russia was ill equipped to fight a war against a prepared equipped country. Supplies were missing because people sold off supplies they thought were never gong to be needed. Now they know they need that equipment and the countries economy is on a war footing.

Look at how much a difference being prepared made for Ukraine the recent invasion compared to the earlier invasion of Crimea.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 months ago

I'm not talking about changes over time, talking about things I've seen recently on here regarding Russia's current status, in response to news stories and comments discussing the danger of escalation going nuclear.