▲ 628 ▼ Putin: Russia will concentrate more military units near Finland (yle.fi) submitted 2 years ago* by fosforus@sopuli.xyz to c/world@lemmy.world 168 comments fedilink hide all child comments As a Finn I say this is fine. Every military resource that is tied down and not raping and destroying Ukraine is net positive.
[–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children) Never going to happen. Russia has nukes, remember? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) So does Ukraine, so why hasn't Russia tried anything with them? Oh because there is no winning a Nuclear War, idiot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Russia isn't threatened behind their own borders by Ukraine. If a NATO army were to invade Russia however, and Putin has his back against the wall, then I'm not sure he wouldn't order that button to be pressed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I suppose he could threaten foreign nations who breach the borders, but it's not accurate to say they aren't currently threatened behind their own borders. Russia recently lost a major railway connecting to china to the war, and a few months ago there was a military coup that had Putin hiding in a bunker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Fair point, but it's still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) how many of them are correctly mantained and in working conditions? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) 1% would be enough permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Maybe. The issue is we don't know. Are our missile defense systems able to take down that 1%? How reliably? What if that's 5% instead? It's all a game of probability, and all it takes is 1 missile to slip through. The only 0% chance is if no nukes are fired in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) So does Ukraine, so why hasn't Russia tried anything with them? Oh because there is no winning a Nuclear War, idiot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Russia isn't threatened behind their own borders by Ukraine. If a NATO army were to invade Russia however, and Putin has his back against the wall, then I'm not sure he wouldn't order that button to be pressed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I suppose he could threaten foreign nations who breach the borders, but it's not accurate to say they aren't currently threatened behind their own borders. Russia recently lost a major railway connecting to china to the war, and a few months ago there was a military coup that had Putin hiding in a bunker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Fair point, but it's still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Russia isn't threatened behind their own borders by Ukraine. If a NATO army were to invade Russia however, and Putin has his back against the wall, then I'm not sure he wouldn't order that button to be pressed. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I suppose he could threaten foreign nations who breach the borders, but it's not accurate to say they aren't currently threatened behind their own borders. Russia recently lost a major railway connecting to china to the war, and a few months ago there was a military coup that had Putin hiding in a bunker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Fair point, but it's still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I suppose he could threaten foreign nations who breach the borders, but it's not accurate to say they aren't currently threatened behind their own borders. Russia recently lost a major railway connecting to china to the war, and a few months ago there was a military coup that had Putin hiding in a bunker. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Fair point, but it's still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Fair point, but it's still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) how many of them are correctly mantained and in working conditions? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) 1% would be enough permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Maybe. The issue is we don't know. Are our missile defense systems able to take down that 1%? How reliably? What if that's 5% instead? It's all a game of probability, and all it takes is 1 missile to slip through. The only 0% chance is if no nukes are fired in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) 1% would be enough permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Maybe. The issue is we don't know. Are our missile defense systems able to take down that 1%? How reliably? What if that's 5% instead? It's all a game of probability, and all it takes is 1 missile to slip through. The only 0% chance is if no nukes are fired in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Maybe. The issue is we don't know. Are our missile defense systems able to take down that 1%? How reliably? What if that's 5% instead? It's all a game of probability, and all it takes is 1 missile to slip through. The only 0% chance is if no nukes are fired in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent