this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
464 points (98.3% liked)

World News

39000 readers
2317 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Bankir and his men have been trying to fight off Russian attacks along the Ukrainian front lines for more than two years. But it’s only now that they are finally able to strike where it hurts: Inside Russia’s own territory.

The newly granted permission by the United States and other allies to use Western weapons to strike inside Russia has had a huge impact, Bankir said. “We have destroyed targets inside Russia, which allowed for several successful counteroffensives. The Russian military can no longer feel impunity and security,” the senior officer in Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) told CNN. For security reasons, he asked to be identified by his call sign only.

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 160 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Breaking news: in a war, shooting back at your enemy works

[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 22 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Fake news! We should ask Ukraine for peace talks! Otherwise we might provoke Putin!!

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Look, Putin has been very clear that he wants peace. All Ukraine have to do is surrender and pull out of the quarter of their country that Russia has "Annexed" while not in control of. Then peace negotiations can begin as to what else Ukraine has to give up in order for the fighting to not resume.

(Note, not sarcasm, this actually the offer Russia has given for a ceasefire, not even peace terms)

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

All Putin is doing is dropping a few bombs and staging a bit of an invasion, and everyone is talking about war. What has the world come to?

[–] ms_lane@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Justin Trudeau in shambles.*

*there is no valid source for that quote

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

No way! Tell me more! What other great wisdoms are there?

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 45 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What was working was bombing Russia oil and gas infrastructure with planes.

The only reason Russia has money for war is their fossil fuel production. But Biden banned that because it would drive up global energy prices.

As long as Russia has money to continue to manufacture and buy new weapons this will not change much.

[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 14 points 4 months ago

It's almost like the war is not meant to be won

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 36 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Everybody knew it would work. The critical part is actually "without Putin escalating with nukes."

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 54 points 4 months ago (1 children)

People keep saying this, but take the premise a little more seriously and it falls apart. Whom does Russia nuke, and in hopes of what outcome?

The only winning move is "nuke everyone all at once so far that nobody can retaliate, and then rule the world". They simply don't have that capability.

[–] upto60percentoff@kbin.run 13 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Ukraine?

Striking inside their territory won't matter all that much if they can just nuke Kiyv.

And breaking the nuclear taboo is a catastrophe for everybody, regardless of who the target is.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 36 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

It would not instantly win them the war - it more likely would provoke a direct response from Ukraine's supporters. Further, Putin would have to go on TV explaining why it was necessary, given that state media has been shouting Russian military supremacy from the rooftops this entire time. I don't see how he justifies it to his side, and critically, to the power brokers in Russia who support him. He would jeopardize his own situation with nukes, at least for now.

As all of the (nine?) nuclear powers know, normalizing the use of nukes on non nuclear powers will lead directly to massive proliferation, which is a nightmare scenario for Russia. Their entire geopolitical outlook depends on a world of purely bilateral agreements in which they are usually the stronger, so having to deal with more nuclear powers down the line would be seen as a major impediment.

[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

This would instantly give Finland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia the excuse to allow nukes on their territory. Literally within 10 minute lauch+flight from Moscow and St. Petersburg

And that’s REALLY bad for Mr P

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Even from a pure geostrategic point of view massive proliferation has the most negative impact for larger nations rather than smaller ones.

Whilst nukes don't really help in a war of conquest (they basically destroy the very land and resources that the war was meant to conquer), they're far more effective for a nation defending itself - which if getting to close to defeat is highly likey to nuke the attacking nation - in effect nullifying the greatest advantage of the larger nations which is that they have the manpower and wealth to field much larger and more advanced conventional armies.

So even the likes of China would turn against Russia if they used nukes, because China itself does want to expand its territory or at least to control more natural resources (just look at what's going on in the South China Sea) and if nukes were used offensivelly in a war of aggression it would lead to all the little nations around China to get their own nukes (along with everybody else) by which point China wouldn't be able to bully them anymore.

And this is of course whithout even considering just how much more likely massive proliferation makes that we destroy part or all of our planet due to some otherwise shitty shit escalation or some nutcase getting control of a country's nuclear arsenal, something which is bad for everybody, not just the larger nations.

Somebody using nukes in a war of aggression would see every single nation on the planet turn against them, especially the larger ones.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Yep. And they can't afford to lose China's support at the moment, though their interests are only temporarily aligned.

[–] upto60percentoff@kbin.run 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not saying they'll do it, I'm saying it's incorrect to state that there's no valid strategic target when there absolutely is.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The target you mentioned does tick that box... But only if you carefully cut the corners off so that you're only looking at what happens inside Ukraine within the space of a couple of months.

[–] lmaydev@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

They'd get absolutely flattened by everyone else. It would be an insanely short sighted move.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Generally speaking, nuking a next-door-neighbor is really bad for your own country.

[–] eleitl@lemm.ee -1 points 4 months ago

They could just take out logistics hubs like railway tunnels and the Odessa port, and destroy the rest of the power plants with few kT tactical nukes. Minimal direct casualties, but plenty dead in the aftermath.

[–] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 30 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Putin is waging a war of aggression, for conquest. Nuclear attacks would contaminate the land and reduce its overall value.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Putin is also not suicidal. And he has grandchildren.

He's an absolute monster, but he'd have to be hiding in the bunker with Eva and the German shepherds before he pushed the button.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

or they could go to Argentina and just hang out

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

At this point I don’t understand what he hopes to get out of it and how it could be profitable for him. Everything he might annex is a bombed out wreck and there are no longer the people that ran it. Even the existence of the harbor he wants to be a big naval base again: how could he expect that to ever be safe for the remainder of the fleet?

Even were he to win, he’s starting over with everything. Infrastructure, resources, people. When Ukraine wins, we will (hopefully) help them rebuild, but what is Russia going to do? Take out loans from Bank of China and dig themselves even deeper under a mountain of debt?

[–] Appleseuss@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

He wants the port in Crimea for trade. Russia is a mainly landlocked nation.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

MAD wouldn't be a thing in a first place if it weren't for human spite, and the potential thereof. The ideal rational agents from game theory turn out to ignore it.

[–] aniki@lemmy.zip 12 points 4 months ago

Baseless fearmongering.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 4 months ago

Yeah, I'm kinda glad it's not my job to figure out. There's no manual, you just have to read the mood of the Russian establishment about what looks like expected consequences of their actions delivered in an orderly manner, and what looks like a NATO first strike.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The critical part is actually “without Putin escalating with nukes.”

It doesn't even have to be a nuclear response. Russia still has plenty of conventional munitions to throw into this war and Ukraine still has plenty of infrastructure left to be demolished.

[–] TheMightyCanuck@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

'plenty of conventional munitions'

None that they'd be willing to part with, without creating some holes in their national defence structure.

Everything else has been sent to the front

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago

I've been hearing this practically since the war started. "Russia out of ammo, Ukrainian victory is assured!" headlines have been coming out for years.

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago

Gee no shit. Imagine that being allowed to wage the war in a way that could actually be successful is allowing them to be successful. Suck it Russia.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago

........this is news? I mean to the people calling the shots.

"Sir! We're at war, what should we do?"

"Hmmmmmm........let's try staying here, and only shooting the ones who get this far."

"SIR!!! IT'S NOT WORKING!!! THEY HAVE ENDLESS SUPPLIES OF MEN!!!"

"Try blasting them inside their OWN territory....."

"Sir, it's working!!!!"

"Wait, that actually worked???"

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago

aw man, german weapons production has just started ramping up. and that failed assasination on german arms manufacturer really helped remove most red lines. russia is so doomed. germans dont stop until you tell them directly. US weapons stationed in germany is already massivly increasing. again: they wont stop until someone tells them. and that means there will be ammo&weapons.lots of it! the decision has been made. run russians. run.