53
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 30 points 2 days ago

$5 says that they won't back down on allowing use of midrange missiles into russia because they don't believe russia has anymore and/or to save face on the narrative that russia is on the ropes over ukraine.

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 2 days ago

The real question is what they will do if Russia responds by sending an Oreshnik to UK. It's basically what Putin said would happen in response to next attack.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 27 points 2 days ago

i get the feeling that the labour government believes that russia is merely saber rattling again and i don't like where this is going if labour displays the same obstinacy as the democrats did during & after the election.

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 23 points 2 days ago

Exactly, if they think Russia is bluffing and Russia actually hits the UK then we're firmly in WW3 scenario.

[-] NothingButBits@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 2 days ago

I mean, what would the UK do if they got hit by a Russian missile? Can they even fight a war with Russia? Would the US care?

[-] Lemmykoopa@lemmygrad.ml 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why would Russia ever hit the UK? Outside of the situation where they have lost and the Russian state itself is going to collapse and be balkanized. They're making steady gains in Ukraine and everyone is waiting to see what Trump ultimately does. Putin as the Western media portrays him would, I guess, but actual Putin went to war with Ukraine to ensure Russia's future, not doom it.

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The UK can't do much of anything on their own, so the real question would be whether the US would risk a nuclear holocaust over UK or not. If the US does nothing then the whole NATO scam is going to collapse overnight though.

Incidentally, the FT just described UK military as a Potemkin village

The result is that Britain has a Potemkin village military retaining the emblems of a pocket superpower, but without the necessary hard capabilities. The present disordered world does not leave room for such tricks.

https://archive.ph/oD87z

[-] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 1 day ago

i believe the US absolutely would retaliate, because just like you said, NATO would be done in a day if they didn't.

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 day ago

NATO serves to bolster US interests though, and having an all out nuclear war is not what US oligarchs want as Trump victory shows. So, I think there's a very good chance they cut their losses. It's not like Europe wouldn't be dependent on US without NATO at the end of the day.

[-] ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 1 day ago

NATO's 2 largest intrests where to collapse the USSR, and to ensure Europe stayed dependent on the United States, it has done that, the US is coasting off of it, however it very quickly could become too much hassle.

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 1 day ago

Pretty much what I'm thinking. It's also worth noting that the US sees China as the main adversary, so Europe is losing its strategic relevance.

[-] ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It also would make sense because even when the US drops Europe, they will still be financialy dependent on them, especialy after the US got them to cut all ties with russia

[-] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 day ago

but for how long? if NATO ended, then who is going to actually stop European countries from going back to Russia and forming new alliances with China? isn't NATO the lynchpin that keeps Europe dependent on the US?

[-] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 day ago
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
53 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2315 readers
153 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS