Russia wouldnt need to go nuclear to destroy most of Kyiv. A few thermobaric bombs would level a city easily.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Weird obsession? They are the only other truly big player on stage, they are not a democracy a la Europe or US, they have an underlying, antagonistic line in common with Putin and they are apparently neutral in this escalating war.
The response from the west might be equally escalatory, though
Morbid curiosity at this point, but do we know if there a match between cities in case of a nuclear strike. Let's say russia nukes sheffield instead of london, the UK wouldn't nuke moscow but an equivalent city. Is this a thing?
Yeah I'd almost hope it would be.
It should be unthinkable for Russia to level Kyiv because then what on earth is the point of the war? It was supposed to be a surgical hit on Ukraine's leadership, make the military stand down and install a puppet government. Can't take over a functioning country if you annihilate its capital.
Yes. But the problem is a lot of the newer ICBMs have countermeasures to counter it
Looking at the state of Russian tech though, I think our counter measures will still work....hopefully
I wonder if there is such thing as an order for one brave pilot to detonate it by missile at it's highest point in the atmosphere... but regardless we'll all get cancer anyway so it may not matter
That's going to be a bloodbath
No because I doubt there exists a place on earth worse than Sheffield.
I don't think it would matter since any nuclear strike would result in a massive retaliation by the other side, for fear that not doing so may prevent them from doing so after a 2nd strike.
Somebody tell me that Putin isn't deranged enough to level Kiev just because his war isn't going very well.
ICBMs in theory can be intercepted, but most likely in very limited conditions. US intercepted one from Hawaii (as part of a test). It is very unclear that they can be intercepted if sent by a strong country like Russia or China, and it is virtually certain that they cannot be intercepted if in large numbers.
So the answer is no.
Once you start playing with nukes, I think the world (or at least the northern part of it) gets burned.
Having a bunker in New Zealand/Australia/South Africa/South America would be the best bet to survive.
Everyone against Russia is not really a WW. China won’t risk getting involved in that, it’s not their fight and Putin will be a losing horse to bet on. They will just sit and count the Yuan.
Again… the scenario is of a man having a last glass as the nukes rain down. As legendary master distiller Fred Noe said… “Drink it any damn way you want to, if you like it that way”.
That’s sort of the point though. There are almost no realistic scenarios whereby a nuke being detonated doesn’t cause a domino effect.
Understand that. But IF Putin falls and IF Russia goes democratic equates to a low probability multiplied by an even lower probability.
It would be great. No doubt.
But I always urge people to be careful what they wish for.
Putin obviously appears quite desperate at this point, but he has a chain of command that I'm fairly sure don't want to, and don't want their families to, die in a nuclear hellstorm. I doubt Putin wants to either.
If anything they’d probably thank them.
It is called MAD.
Depends on whether he's still a rational actor or whether he has some sort of mental health issue that is obscuring his ordinary thought process.
Very mixed, I'd say, but generally speaking, relief. Most people I personally know feel a lot better now, since most of us always expected our military to be trash and completely outdated and underfunded. Also, we all knew that we are an economical giant (for Europe at least) and that we're profiting a lot from the EU but not participate and give enough back in terms of international responsibility for our continental safety. But I mean, we live in a bubble, so I guess I'm surrounded by likeminded (and affluent pub going) people.
The media's response was mostly positive and the scale of this drastic change was noted.
On the other hand, most of the older generation (talking about around 1960 and older) seem very worried and do not like that development. And I can understand that. They were born shortly after 2nd world war and experienced the cold war and the possibility of total annihilation very closely. Also, they are the ones that shaped Germany as a counter movement to the older war generation, making Germany a peaceful and [almost] pacifistic state (I obviously know about our weapon exports). They fear this development as a step towards escalation and they also fear that Germany might not be suitable for this role in Europe. Everybody who has lived around 40 years or longer hates change, so I guess it has a lot to do with the general education they received over the years and the picture they have from our country.
Hopefully - Portugal would be my place to retreat once red lines are crossed in terms of nonconventional weapons.
I assume so ... Think the Asian markets open in about 2 or 3 hours
Well done General.
If you fire nukes at Russia you only have Moscow and St Petersburg to aim at. Maybe Kazan. If Russia were to fire a nuke anywhere within Nato or the UK or the US the response would be Moscow being deleted off the map.
I'd say it would make sense to target Moscow regardless, as that's where the command to launch potentially more nukes would come from.
to actually set off a Nuclear bomb there's a precious chain of events that need to occur, at best though you'd probably knock it off course and cause abit of a radiation hazard in say somewhere before London (Kent) or Delaware if going for Washington.
At this point I'm about one or two inciting events away from calling a Romano style Here.We.Go on the fall of Putin.
Realistically, how can Putin survive this once his mission has failed? Surely he can’t remain in power after this shitshow? He’d be far too unstable to let him continue as Russia’s leader no?
A few nukes by itself would not risk the change of cancer in the world. I think there have been several thousands detonated.
An all open war (let’s say all 13K nukes) would most likely kill the majority of people in the Northern hemisphere (as a combination of kinetic damage which would be instant and radiation damage which would go for a couple of weeks) and possibly/likely create a nuclear winter which will make farming impossible for some time.
In any scenario a few billion of people would die.
Lots of miss information and accusations on twitter about this and BBC correspondent even tried to make out a bigger issue with this
Ukrainians priority is to ensure its citizens can leave the country and neighbouring countries are welcoming everyone with a Ukrainian passport.
There are a number of other nationalities, students / workers who didn't leave beforehand despite being told to leave over a week ago and now they are trying to board trains and also cross boarders.
Their embassy's in those countries are helping them, however, the Ukrains POV is that they must secure their own citizens first.
I can't comment if that is right or wrong, but I believe it's an accurate view of what is actually occurring.
The embassy's of many nations representatives are involved and I'm guess providing necessary visas and help as appropriate.
Unfortunately in a war, not everything is able to go smoothly.
Also any democracy can be eroded from within. Putin did it, Lukashenko did it, Erdogan did it, Orban is trying to do it.
If Russia went full democratic, one would be inclined to ask “for how long?”.
They'll probably just leave Hull for the lolz
Yeah I know we are all on frayed nerves here, but I won’t tolerate intolerance towards how I want my last glass of whisky served.
But that's the thing. Mutually assured destruction only becomes a thing if the country who is nuked nukes back...
Isn't it better to live in Pan-Russia than having no life at all?
The difference is that the US is better at shock and awe than the Russians, that much is clear after what we have seen over the last few days. Russians have suffered almost the same number of deaths reportedly in the last few days as the US suffered in the entire Iraq war.
Last edited:
I can see protests reaching boiling point about everywhere in Russia if the mess keeps on getting worse or if people get news of Putin deploying weapons that should not be used at all. In the context that the Kremlin has ordered nuclear forces to be on alert, that's oil poured on fire. What can the police and the Russian government do if the masses become enraged? Kill all of them without repercussions? Every single additional day of people being misinformed about the war, mothers being worried about their sons, people being arrested here and everywhere for speaking out will only erode Putin's control further brick by brick.
Putin may be surrounded by yes men at this moment, but it only takes one to grow disgruntled enough to take an action that changes history. Interestingly, the South Korean dictator Park Chung-hee was killed by his close friend and chief of the KCIA in the midst of massive student protests that were followed by repression and the instoration of martial law in October 1979.
Has any government ever issued a direct threat to the Swiss government over something like that before? If not, the time for setting up a precedent is about now. Has to be said that the entire banking industry in Switzerland has been morally bankrupt for centuries. Neutrality my ass.
Yeah, chimes with my thoughts too: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/russian-invasion-of-ukraine.468216/post-28546884
Right I'm definitely having a whisky later tonight. Hope I see tomorrow morning.