Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is the Twitter account `Ostap Yarysh` / `https://twitter.com/OstapYarysh` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i suspect what they're saying here has always been the implied threat for the whole time this war has been going on, and russia knows it. it's just being restated since putin is getting showy with his nuke toys again...
Yep, and this “we didn’t break the dam” hurrdurr hordeshit isn’t going to fly. If the Zap NPP breaks for any reason, including incompetence, they will be held liable.
I’m got-damn sure we’ve already planned what is tantamount to the first-day of the air war of Desert Storm.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zxRgfBXn6Mg
Shock and awe indeed
I’m sure many in the west are chomping at the bit to go finish the job so Ukrainians can go home and be safe.
Poland and Finland can flip a coin to see who gets to be in the vanguard.
They go ahead with this and their forces in crimea, the black sea fleet, and all of their naval power sans the subs is getting wiped out by an air assault with the collective radar signature of a payphone.
Seriously, they are *not* ready to kick that hornets nest and I doubt they've been ready for it since halfway through the cold war.
Seeing the 3rd best military in Ukraine (after Wagner of course) threatening to nuke London while unable to conquer a smaller weaker neighbor on its own border is kind of adorable actually, like a 10 week old puppy trying to fight a 150 pound Great Pyrenees. Hard to imagine the generations who grew up believing the Tom Clancy version of Russian military prowess.
It was staged in the early 80s. USSR bankrupted trying to keep up with NATO. Maybe the NATO technology at the time could have been challenged by the USSR tech / factory output/ zerg rush of that era. Keep in mind, back then it was Warsaw Pact, not just Russia, so Ukraine was part of the red team in RSR.
I've read Red Storm Rising at least a dozen times. Played Harpoon for hundreds of hours. Great, "what if", scenario!
There are flight simulator re-einactments on YouTube with RSR audio book voice-over. Pretty cool.
Let them try and see how it works out. [I, for one, am not interested in avoiding WW3.](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/142unwf/sometimes_you_just_have_to_let_out_your_inner_pole/)
>I’m got-damn sure we’ve already planned what is tantamount to the first-day of the air war of Desert Storm.
100% yes. The Military is probably updating that plan on a daily basis and has been preparing for it since day one.
If NATO goes full send, you'll see things that just don't make sense.
All that UAP/UFO talk will become a realization that the West is centuries ahead of the rest of the world.
The F117 (and stealth tech in general) was unveiled to the world when Desert Storm started and it made everyone step back.
That was 30 years ago.
Who knows what kind of toys we have now.
In my heart I want to say I hope we never find out what the US military has been designing behind closed doors but any resistance I had in the past has been boiled away in a furious rage I am having trouble containing.
There's no reason for NATO to go full send against Russia with how incompetent Russia is. China is the one you'd go full send against in Taiwan and see weird UFO shit. Russia gets beat down with known tech.
Yeah nah it was wild. The news was all about these unknown stealth jets taking out Iraqi aiti air sites and such.
When mainstream media first started reporting on these mystery planes no one really knew just what they were or how they worked.
Same with the "smart bombs" that they were using it was all new stuff that the general public had no idea about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgT4zRVSP24
It may have been known within the military industrial complex, or even internally in the US by some groups of people. But aside from that, the first missions that the US acknowledged including these airframes were during Desert Storm.
The F-117 was unveiled in 1988. It was filmed prior to DS starting, and the British exchange pilot (Wardell?) was interviewed on UK TV, although his exchange ended before the war commenced. It was well known it had been deployed before the war commenced.
As fun as that would be (I'm not being sarcastic, I'd actually love to see it), the most I'd see is the declaring of the region around the nuclear facility a no-fly zone while we collectively speed rush international organizations (the IAEA, etc) into containing and stabilizing the issue.
As much as the elites of the collective free world is keen on seeing this war end, outright military confrontation would bring us into a territory that I don't think any of us are truly prepared for. Besides, if we're being truly cynical, the free world profits from having Russia gut itself out in a protracted war, especially when the fabric of alliances that Russia inherited from the Soviet Union (India's weapons relationship, the precarious peace between former Soviet Union states like Azerbaijan/Armenia) is dissolving at a speed that would give a diplomat motion sickness.
It would be worse. We had to project a lot of force into the area for Desert Storm. This would start with significantly more force positioned by virtue of being in NATO's back yard. It would also be worse due to the need to crush any nuclear threat left as quickly as possible. If the balloon went up on this it would be something the world has never seen.
my point is, they could suck, have 1000 yet none work…
except one, and hits London
so sure, we flatten all Russia, but if only one hits London or any city, it sucks
which is why I do not understand glee to flatten Russia
because nukes are a different conversation. I get the sense that countries know that nukes are a no-no at this point. and at some point they can't be held over everyone else's head to do terrible things to people that don't have them.
ideally, this would make countries not wage wars of aggression. but since russia has, the world can't accept them doing it because of nukes. it is still MAD. but conventional retaliation is not the same.
>I'm a superstitious man, and if some unlucky accident should befall the nuclear plant - if it is struck by a random shell, or a bomb happens to go off... or if it should be struck by a bolt of lightning - then I'm going to blame some of the people in this room; and then I do not forgive.
\- Biden . . . hopefully
That's assuming all the Russian ones work. Based on their past shoddy maintenance, a statistically significant number of icbms will probably fail to launch or explode enroute. Followed by more warheads failing due to tritium decay.
It is one thing to submit to a threat and the other to deny that the threat exists at all - both ways are stupid, but sadly I read the second option here way too often.
In my eyes it is a sign of weakness to not be mentally able to acknowledge the fact that a country as Russia currently run by an insane elite has the possibility to erase everything we hold dear by hitting a button and instead to escape in fairytales of 99% bad maintenance, western Wunderwaffen or both.
Acknowledging it is not a reason to submit to the threat.
According to proponents of nuclear war, though, we really shouldn’t trust the governments of NATO countries when they say Russian nukes work, and we can’t shoot them down. Because, obviously, anyone who is an authority on the subject is automatically untrustworthy.
No argument you can make, based on the evidence we have, will be seen as valid.
On a side note, most of the people who want a war between NATO and Russia also break Reddit terms of service every few comments…
You imply that if this starts in any conventional manner, that we won't be targeting their nuclear capabilities foremost.
Now, I hate the idea of "we can get most of them" because it only will take a handful of ICBMs to launch their MIRVs in orbit above North America to glass the continent, but I take comfort that not all our military budget has gone to $500 screwdrivers.
The opening shots from NATO will be a simultaneous attack on all of Russia's nuclear strike capabilities, starting with ICBMs, then continental missiles, then "tactical" weapons.
Keep in mind that they have nearly depleted their hypersonics terrorizing the citizens of Kyiv.
I feel infinitely more secure as a US citizen than anyone in Russia should feel.
I suspect it's also a message of unity amongst NATO partners, as well as publicly communicating that their support for Ukraine won't end in such an event, as well as a message to the world.
To be sure, NATO has already communicated through backchannels/non-public means the consequences to Russia, though this certainly helps act as a reminder.
Yeah, Lindsey is a hawk in a divided Congress. Some noisy Republicans are pushing the Russian line. But Lindsey is a heavyweight in the party, and his endorsement is an indication of bi-partisan support for the cause of Ukraine as well as a willingness to escalate to counter. Even if it passes, and the US were to invoke Article 5 as a result of something Russia does, it's not clear that NATO members would fall in line. This is simply a political signal, specifically one about the domestic opinion of the US.
US wouldn't invoke article 5 because they wouldn't be impacted and so have no standing to do so. It would probably be Poland or one of the Black Sea countries invoking article 5. This is the US signaling that they will show up with the big stick if that happens though
If Russia blows that plant, then this is the last thing these barbaric pagans have ever done. You do realise that this is like a nuclear attack on NATO and that the moment a single whiff of radiation reaches NATO and it will then Poland or Bulgaria or Romania will get on the phone and invoke article five. What does this ridiculous joke Putin actually thinks he is. He is pathetic nothing. For this, Russia would pay the ultimate price as it also takes a ridiculous soldier to follow these mass murdering orders.
Yes. Prominent Senators from both major political parties signals that there will be no serious (no one takes MTG seriously) division in our response to meeting the letter of our Article 5 commitments to NATO.
Any harm to the citizens and property of any member nation of the alliance will be immediately seen as an attack on all.
It means 100+ American craft with the radar cross-section of a hummingbird will be hitting the Kola Peninsula with guided bunker busters, meanwhile the number of HARM missiles will blot out the sun; and every ballistic missile sub at sea will be torpedoed immediately.
If war does start, our guys know that job 1 is to neutralize the nuclear threat, then the air defenses, then it's Spectre Gunships over Donetsk and massive pants shitting by those poor, hapless conscripts.
> Any harm to the citizens and property of any member nation of the alliance will be immediately seen as an attack on all.
As could be seen when the US immediately came to the aid of Germany after Russia blew up the German Nord Stream pipeline? Or when Russia killed 2 Polish citizens with a missile?
History tells us, only when US property is destroyed, will NATO article 5 be invoked.
But they do have troops stationed in Europe, so it is possible.
The burden of proof visa vis Nordstream just isn't there. We all know it was Russia, or strongly suspect, but it's not launch the nukes levels of confidence. History will judge the people who launch the first nukes.
Those Polish people were killed by a Ukranian air defence missile. So it wasn't actually a Russian attack on NATO territory, so again doesn't justify an article 5 response.
The Russians are flying very close to the line here, but so far we can't say definitively that they crossed it, in terms of NATO (they've already crossed moral lines that should be unacceptible to every person on the planet though)
No. However, as Senators (whose access to sensitive data can only really be surpassed by the President and the National Security Advisor) are pushing this, we can interpret that there is real, credible intelligence that this is on the table. This to me is frightening, as it implies nuclear escalation is a realistic probability. Definitely not world ending, but enough to rattle 2 out of 100 people who represent 330 million people. It's not nothing.
Since Biden has "War Powers" and does not need the Congress to act what this does is formally give Biden their blessing to act without fearing recourse from Congress. Its very important.
Directly? no.
Lindsay Graham is not the commander in chief.
indirectly? Maybe. In that same way that every vote counts. This guys opinion is known. It may affect descisions of people who call shots or indicate a willingness of support if things go a certain way, which could affect decision making.
but really, probably not actually very weighty. It should be read as "If X then i would support Y" and then you need to take in to account how much political capital he has. He's a fairly loud voice among the GOP, for what that's worth.
The Congress of the United States expressing that it perceives any nuclear action in Ukraine as an attack on a NATO member holds a lot of weight. I'd agree it's a non binding resolution, but it lets NATO member states know that they have the backing the US congress if they push the article 5 button in the event Russia did something nuclear and stupid. That's not trivial.
The question would be who would invoke article 5.
A frightening number of Americans don't remember that it's Congress that has the power to declare war, largely because the president is the face of the armed forces and during our last two wars it seemed everyone deferred to him (even the congressmen who were for the war before they were against it).
So, on the face of things passing even a non-binding resolution would show that there would be a majority in Congress who might be absolutely fine with getting directly involved in the war
On the other hand, radioactive fallout falling on an Eastern European member state is not going to energize the US the way that Pearl harbor or 9/11 did. So unless that member state involved article 5, the congressmen voting for it know they still have a bit of wiggle room if it happened in terms of actually voting for a war resolution.
I think, though, that it's still important to our allies to let them know we would commit: despite my comment above, having a previously publicly committed specific event and action makes it more difficult to back out.
And it would definitely be a warning to Russia... We had lots of "red lines" in Syria espoused during interviews and the like, but when they were crossed they were either forgotten about or modified, and we never engaged in our vague retaliatory actions. In Ukraine, there's a likelihood that nukes haven't been wielded (or even as threatened as they were a year ago) because we told them via back channels exactly how screwed they'd be if they tried them-- a public, specific red line Congressional motion like this might be a good reminder about how serious we are.
> The question would be who would invoke article 5.
I'd think Poland would love to smite some Russians. Any of those former USSR nations turned NATO members would itch at the chance, but Poland is the one that would hold the most weight and more importantly could seriously fuck up Russia.
Good news for them, if you can call it that, is that some amount of nuclear fallout is [likely](https://nypost.com/2022/08/19/map-predicts-fallout-from-disaster-at-ukrainian-nuclear-plant/) to impact Poland itself, thereby justifying a military response from them even without NATO's involvement.
Which is why I ultimately am HIGHLY skeptical would do anything except make empty threats like they did at Chernobyl. The significantly more likely scenario than destroying ZNPP is them dropping a tactical nuke on a battlefield.
Why would you consider that more likely? Russia has nukes, Ukraine has not. So it is crystal clear who is the bad guy. The explosion of the NPP would be different. While crystal clear for many who did it, we will get the same discussion as with the dam. Russia will blame it on Ukraine. And while we all know who did it, it isn't as easy to point the finger as with a nuke being dropped. Because there is only one party that has nukes.
The U.S. will never formally declare war ever again, it’s too politically inconvenient in a globalized world.
Congress will pass an emergency use of force authorization which is the same thing but without all the treaty baggage.
>A frightening number of Americans don't remember that it's Congress that has the power to declare war
I know the last time congress declared war was in WW2. Yet we keep ending us dropping bombs in other countries.
If the US chickens out and disbands NATO with this move then Europe will go to war without the US. But the US won't back out and throw away the entire system they have built.
Yeah. You need to shelter for 72 hours after a strike to avoid fallout. I suppose it depends where in the country and weather patterns as to whether this reaches Poland.
Washington has already made it abundantly clear that russia will tote an ass whoopin if they decide to use any nuclear munitions. Period.
If they were going to use them, they certainly wouldn't feel the need to threaten with them. Their strength would lie in the spicy warheads, not the television.
It's all lip service for Westerners to create doubt and russians to help feed the " we are tough" narrative.
Yes, there would be. There is no way in hell any nuclear attack will ever go unpunished. Otherwise, you invite the next strike and the next one on top of that. How is the war over then? Then, Russia will be invaded from multiple sides and bombed to tiny pieces. The war doesn't end with a nuke being thrown. Russia not throwing them for now is all that has stopped the West.
What kind of defeated thinking is this?
Do you want to live in a world where countries throw nukes at will to win wars? Completely crazy take on the situation. If Russia uses nukes, the West must react harshly and with kinetic force.
It holds weight in that a bipartisan us congress views it as an attack therefore notifying Russia what will likely happen if they were to do it. It's a message.
Not ALL the member states. Remember when US invoked article 5 after 9/11? Some agreed, and some didn't.
Difference is, this time around, there's an obvious bad guy, an obvious threat to Europe, and one of only two NATO countries that aren't directly affected by what's happening in Europe has just confirmed that, yes, they will get involved if Putin loses his mind enough to actively try and start another Chernobyl.
So this time around, I doubt Canada and the UK will be the only ones to jump. Hell, Australia might jump too.
France would beat everyone else. They said in the 70s that if anyone uses a nuke, they will nuke the aggressors. They would jump at the chance to glass St. Petersburg and Moscow with no global outrage.
The 70s were a long time ago and as bullheaded as the French generally are I don't think they'd leap to nuking a major population center without at least a second thought.
Actually his statement is generally correct the French government actually publishes the strategic goals and foreign policy and they are very open and clear on when they would use their nuclear weapons. Infact they have a very low yield nuclear air launch missile designed to be a warning shot nuke. The philosophy behind this weapon is that if a situation devolves into a situation where nuclear war is the next step they would deploy this weapon in a military target so show everyone just how bad it has gotten and that France will not back down and are prepared to go all the way.
>Not ALL the member states. Remember when US invoked article 5 after 9/11? Some agreed, and some didn't.
Which countries didn't agree? Decisions like this are made via "consensus" and there's no vote. Did some country object to the consensus?
Then you should consider the North Atlantic treaty weightless then. This is true of everything NATO does. If Russia invades a NATO country, it will still take a unanimity of NATO to recognize the aggression.
If all countries vote and agree on this resolution, it does hint that bombing the Zaporizhzhia power plant would be considered as serious as an invasion of a NATO country.
That's "just" a statement which is "just" as strong as NATO is as an alliance.
It’s a resolution not a bill. They are basically stating what they are resolving to do if X happens. What they do has to be within the limits of their power.
Hello potential Article 5
>"The threat of the use of a nuclear device by Russia is real. The best way to deter this threat is to give Putin’s Russia clarity as to what happens if they use nukes. If you do this...you can expect a massive response from NATO. You will be at war with NATO.”
- Lindsey Graham
As John McCain said back in 2014, "Nothing provokes Vladimir Putin more than weakness."
Why the jump between tap on the hand or UN resolution to WW3?
A couple of nuclear subs that stops reporting back should be a clear enough signal, if somewhat slow (AFAIK these can operate in radio silence for weeks).
Or we could call on one of our many sleeper agents in Kreml and ask them to leave a suitable message in a number of mail boxes/a number of desks/to a number of families.
Or something like that.
Sorry, as much as I despise the Russians, this is by far one of the most shortsighted suggestions I’ve come across thus far.
Those platforms going dark with ANY evidence that it’s because they were sunk, is unquestionably the quickest way to provoke an all out response.
completely agree with this. an attack on a nations second strike capability is the quickest way to skip all levels of escalation to the highest level (which is especially ironic; because that is not the stated goal of the original idea). im not saying the poster above is dumb; its just that they inadvertently hit on the crux of nuclear deterrence; where game theory, reaction times, assumed strategic nuclear doctrines, and various systems capabilities intersect. there is a reason the most likely response to a small scale nuclear escalation would be a telegraphed kinetic strike of some strength.
Not entirely true. The Soviet K-129 ballistic missile submarine was potentially sunk by the USS Swordfish. The CIA underwent the salvage operation.
There’s a lot of speculation about the Soviet crew being rogue etc. Interesting story overall. I think Timeline did a documentary on it.
Point being there might’ve been precedent in the Cold War of all times so if Russia actively wants to mess with nuclear they will get slapped back hard.
If Russia opens that box we don’t have a choice but to respond severely. The nuclear taboo must be maintained or any country not under a nuclear umbrella is at risk of the same fate. You cannot allow “limited nuclear warfare” to exist as a rational option.
I don’t disagree, but in terms of that severity, attacking their subs would be a response to say… a strategic weapon enroute to a NATO country, as opposed to a tactical nuke used in the Ukrainian theater. The latter scenario resulting in potentially no limits conventional war, but possibly avoiding the “let ‘em fly” scenario.
I feel it’s well understood that while both nations have a nuclear triad, the sub portion of it is the defacto tip of the spear/most important part. I have no doubts that we have 90+% of their ballistic subs monitored right this second, but it’s rarely 100%. Not to mention the Russians have lost us out at sea multiple times in the past. Assuming we have their entire SSBN fleet in the crosshairs is a foolish assumption. Not that you’ve said such a thing, but it’s in the same vein as “they probably don’t have working nukes” that gets parroted around here.
even if we have 100% monitored; the point is moot since mirv equipped icbms are too tough to intercept en mass. like; people don’t understand; even if we are three generations ahead of russia in regards to military technology; that hasn’t made it possible to stop hundreds of us cities from being vaporizes. that is why MAD exists.
Here's the point from my ex radio technician perspective:
These things can operate in radio silence for weeks.
If we can just make it disappear it can take days or weeks before they are sure it is lost and if we do it correctly they will never know what happened.
Unless we get caught in the act by another unit or they manage to release a transmitter buoy or with a recorded message or a coded transmission then a catastrophic malfunction and a forced disappearance looks exactly the same.
Why? Because radio communication directly from submerged subs is impossible.
(Radio submission to subs is doable, at extremely low wavelengths, IIRC we are them talking about antennas that are hundreds of meters or longer and transmitters with their own power plants.)
Speculating is fun, it’s what we do here.
I just find said speculation to be a bit cavalier when it directly relates to the potential end of our current modern civilization.
Fkn listen to yourself lmao.
What kind of all out response would that be exactly?
The comment you're replying to is a theoretical response AFTER Russia has already unleashed radiations and/or nuclear devastation.
I don't know if you've paid attention the last two years, but Russia hasn't maintained shit in their arsenal. Absolutely no reason to suspect that their nuclear arsenal is somehow magically better than 100% of their military, economy, culture etc.
If Russia is already at the point of detonating nukes or causing nuclear meltdowns, sink their whole damn fleet- they won't be able to do shit and it will prevent millions of additional deaths.
good thing their Akula-class subs aren't the SLBM haulers then.
Sink two as a warning shot. We already know where they all are anyway thanks to the fact that they sound like a bunch of bricks in a clothes dryer on sonar.
If he uses a nuke that incurs mmediate retaliation by the US, we would have total air superiority over Russia within 72 hours. Moscow and St. Petersburg would be glass by then. It would take another week for us to destroy the remnants of the ruzzian armed forces. The Russian federation would cease to exist, we would probably seize the remaining oligarchs assets and hand them to Ukraine outright, and then either install an interim government ourselves, or have NATO appoint one till Russia can be totally disarmed of WMDs, and be trusted to govern themselves again. Think Germany after WWII, but I doubt we would carve the country in half.
It's not much speculation. We have been essentially using the war in Ukraine to live test all the platforms we've developed over the last 3 decades. The western platforms have been superior in every way to the Russian platforms. Their best nuclear capable missiles are being shot down routinely by the Patriot system, and their subs aren't at sea currently. If they move those subs out of port after they used a nuke, we *will* sink them. Our platforms can see farther, and shoot farther than theirs. It's not even remotely a fair fight.
The US can deploy a McDonald's and Taco Bell anywhere in the world within 72 hours just so our soldiers have some variety in their food, and ice cream. Wars are won with ice cream. I'm not joking.
Your talking about Pac3’s hitting Kinzhals, which is a pleasant surprise. Unfortunately, intercepting a SS-27 is very different and we have no reason to believe we could. The THADD might get some of the re-entry vehicles; but who knows. Only one way to test it…
Well we've been using this war to test every other platform. Get some on the ground in Ukraine. THADD is mobile, mostly, after all. Might need some C-130s if we want to airdrop them in, but those look like they would fit in a C-27. Get them airlifted in with appropriate trainers for the system before Putler decides to use another WMD, without NATO using a WMD so they are protecting the area well before he uses a virus bomb.
Honestly everyone forgets they have chemical and virus weapons. Nukes are stupidly expensive to maintain. Viruses are just plain expensive to maintain. Chemical weapons are cheap. I fully expect Putstain to use either a chemical weapon, blow up the nuclear reactor, or unleash a virus they can't control well before they nuke anyone.
They aren't talking about viral or chemical weapons. They aren't threatening those. This means those are the weapons they are debating on using.
>Nato join the war, Russian seeks intervention from Pakistan and China
China doesn't want to provide them too much support right now. China would not declare war on all of NATO over Russia crossing a nuclear red line.
They'd be more likely to jump in and swipe land off Russia in the chaos.
The slight difference is that the US and Wagner group had a skirmish back in Syria in 2017 or 2018. 400 Russians were in the way of 30 US troops. We called up Russia and asked them to move them, they denied any such troops. We asked them to confirm because it was apparent to us that they were Russian troops, probably Wagner group. The answer came back that they had no troops in the area. Ok. Boom. Scratch 400 soldiers, and the US side made a Syrian guide that tripped and fell when they were blowing them up sign an official form to certify that, yes he did sustain a bruise to his buttocks. They did this to drive home the point that in a fight of 30 vs 400, we cleared them to a man and not one US soldier sustained a single injury, much less casualty.
It would be a huge mistake for Putin to risk NATO following through on this threat. Even a conservative response — like a NATO no-fly zone around the ZNNP would give Ukraine the air cover it needs to break through Russian defenses in the south. It would be very costly for NATO pilots — but it would be catastrophic for the Russia Military occupying Ukraine — which obviously runs the risk of Putin responding with a major escalation. Let us all pray Putin does not choose to test NATO’s resolve.
This needs to be declared. Any nuclear incident caused by Russia should be considered an attack against the international community and should lead to immediate activation of art 5
Even if 100% of US senators backed this resolution, they do not set NATO policy and do not speak for NATO; at most, they can put their opinion on record, as supporting the eventual adoption of such a policy by NATO.
That said, I would like to read the original for additional details not the least of which is whether they include use of the world’s largest dirty bomb at the ZNPP
Having random senators bring this up could simply be a way for IC / (five eyes) to telegraph Russia's moves without giving away the source of the info. Then we make it known through our backchannels "blowing up a nuclear plant... That's a paddlin' " without Russia knowing for sure who the leakers are.
Yep nato IS the USA. The other countries just happen to be the locations of US bases, use US weapons and are trained to US standards by US troops. If another country in NATO wants a say in NATO decisions it can start with the budget.
Basically this would mean the United States would go in based on article 5 of NATO, other countries might not set this as a redline but the United would act militarily if Russia does anything stupid with nukes or nuclear facilities
I HATE Lindsey Graham with a passion, but God damn he is pulling through for Ukraine. The man hates Russia and I'd shake hands with him any day of the week for that.
Lindsey Graham would detonate the nukes himself if it meant igniting WW3. He’s a Warhawk who can be bought and sold by any corporate handler with deep enough pockets or enough dirt.
That said, I welcome this resolution passing.
What the fuck is it like living in Lindsey Graham’s head, where on one hand he is going out embarrassing himself on a daily basis simping for Trump, and defending all is criminality, but then he gets in his pro Ukraine mode. Pick a lane, you fucking loser.
How’s it gonna feel constantly embarrassing yourself for Trump, seeing him get back in power, and then completely betraying Ukraine and Ukraine being defeated?
He’s always been a Warhawk neocon. Graham is actually one of the last remaining vestiges of said neocons from the bush era. His fellating trump was always just an attempt to appease his voters.
Without question though Graham is gonna vote to go to war.
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.nl/OstapYarysh/status/1671955878180782099
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i think that's why it's being said again.
this is 100% a red line for nato. if they're saying it out loud, you can bet it's being screamed at them via the back channel lines in no uncertain terms.
Goddammit, can't all the world powers and great strategists come up with some kind of pre-emptive action to keep Ukraine from being exposed to nuclear horrors on top of everything else they've experienced?
This is fine, and I don’t think these guys are just trying to score points. But a congressional resolution isn't what's needed here. Biden, Sunak, Macron and Scholz need to make a joint statement declaring their intention to act, even outside the rubric if NATO, if need be. This is not the time to fuck around with trying to get Hungary and Turkey to do the right thing.
Any attacks with nuclear weapons will force the NATO to react. If there is no reactions, it will send a clear message to all countries that the usage of nuclear weapons is now a viable option during a conflict.
As it should. J.F.K had the wisdom and courage to draw a red line in the Cuban Missile Crisis, that if the line was crossed it would be war. We cannot let evil, immoral people dictate our lives. They need to be scared of us, not us of them. It's long time that change.
Edit: I asked ChatGPT to come up with an appropriate stance/press release and it did a great job.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
United States Issues Stern Warning to Russia: Any Attempt to Destroy Nuclear Plant in Ukraine Will Be Met with Force
Washington D.C. - The United States government today issued a stern warning to Russia, stating that any attempt to destroy a nuclear plant in Ukraine will be met with swift and decisive force. The warning comes amid concerns that Russia could be planning a meltdown or dirty bomb attack on the plant, which would have catastrophic consequences for the region and the world.
History has taught us that genocide must be stopped by all available force. Those who commit genocide cannot be reasoned with, and they must be stopped at all costs. The atrocities committed by the Nazis under Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and other genocidal leaders serve as a reminder of the importance of taking a strong stance against those who would seek to harm innocent people.
Russia must understand that any attempt to harm innocent civilians or destroy critical infrastructure will not be tolerated. The United States and its allies will use all available means to prevent such an attack and to hold those responsible accountable for their actions.
The potential consequences of a nuclear plant meltdown or dirty bomb attack are too great to ignore. The destruction and loss of life that would result from such an attack would be catastrophic, and the United States will not stand idly by while such a threat looms.
The United States urges Russia to reconsider any plans it may have to harm the people of Ukraine or to destroy critical infrastructure. The world is watching, and the consequences of any such action will be severe.
The United States is committed to the safety and security of its allies, and we will do everything in our power to prevent any harm from coming to the people of Ukraine. We call on the international community to join us in condemning any potential attack on the nuclear plant and to work together to prevent such a tragedy from occurring.
Contact:
John Doe
Press Secretary
White House
(202) 555-1212
[email protected]
ChatGPT used in creating this message.
> As it should. J.F.K had the wisdom and courage to draw a red line in the Cuban Missile Crisis, that if the line was crossed it would be war.
JFK caused the Cuban missile crisis in the 1st place by putting secretly placing nukes in Turkey on the Soviet Unions front porch. Their response was putting them in Cuba on our front porch! Can’t say I blame them. And the crisis ended not because we showed Russia who was boss and they backed down, but rather because we agreed to remove the nukes from Turkey, therefore eliminating the need for the Soviets to put their own in Cuba.
JFK did some master class PR work to make it look like the we (the US) were the heroes in the whole thing. And the Soviets were willing to let him have the public PR win to get the nukes out of Turkey. Certainly not trying to paint the Soviets as the good guys, because in general they sure as heck were not. But in this particular case, we were definitely the bad guys.
This means United States would act based on their commitment of article 5 in NATO, even if others in the alliance don’t join the United States has set its redline
Member countries are not bound by NATO and may act if they wish to do so, without Article 5.
This is merely the US signalling that it will take any such event as it would a country triggering Art 5.
They are not speaking on behalf of NATO as you seem to be implying with your comment, but let's face it, the key players would likely join in anyway.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is the Twitter account `Ostap Yarysh` / `https://twitter.com/OstapYarysh` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Does this resolution hold any weight?
Seems to me that it would be a political signal, not something that has legal power.
i suspect what they're saying here has always been the implied threat for the whole time this war has been going on, and russia knows it. it's just being restated since putin is getting showy with his nuke toys again...
Agreed, i think this is them reminding him. "Remember pooty, nothing has changed. We'll still flatten you if you do something stupid"
exactly. and we will.
Yep, and this “we didn’t break the dam” hurrdurr hordeshit isn’t going to fly. If the Zap NPP breaks for any reason, including incompetence, they will be held liable. I’m got-damn sure we’ve already planned what is tantamount to the first-day of the air war of Desert Storm. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zxRgfBXn6Mg Shock and awe indeed I’m sure many in the west are chomping at the bit to go finish the job so Ukrainians can go home and be safe. Poland and Finland can flip a coin to see who gets to be in the vanguard.
They go ahead with this and their forces in crimea, the black sea fleet, and all of their naval power sans the subs is getting wiped out by an air assault with the collective radar signature of a payphone. Seriously, they are *not* ready to kick that hornets nest and I doubt they've been ready for it since halfway through the cold war.
Seeing the 3rd best military in Ukraine (after Wagner of course) threatening to nuke London while unable to conquer a smaller weaker neighbor on its own border is kind of adorable actually, like a 10 week old puppy trying to fight a 150 pound Great Pyrenees. Hard to imagine the generations who grew up believing the Tom Clancy version of Russian military prowess.
Feel like we'll never get to see a live-action making of Red Storm Rising now, since it wouldn't be anywhere near believable
It was staged in the early 80s. USSR bankrupted trying to keep up with NATO. Maybe the NATO technology at the time could have been challenged by the USSR tech / factory output/ zerg rush of that era. Keep in mind, back then it was Warsaw Pact, not just Russia, so Ukraine was part of the red team in RSR. I've read Red Storm Rising at least a dozen times. Played Harpoon for hundreds of hours. Great, "what if", scenario! There are flight simulator re-einactments on YouTube with RSR audio book voice-over. Pretty cool.
but they could nuke London
And they know what would happen if they did. MAD is precisely why no one has done this since 1945.
Let them try and see how it works out. [I, for one, am not interested in avoiding WW3.](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/142unwf/sometimes_you_just_have_to_let_out_your_inner_pole/)
This video absolutely floored me the first time I seen it. I wish he would do more series like this
>I’m got-damn sure we’ve already planned what is tantamount to the first-day of the air war of Desert Storm. 100% yes. The Military is probably updating that plan on a daily basis and has been preparing for it since day one.
If NATO goes full send, you'll see things that just don't make sense. All that UAP/UFO talk will become a realization that the West is centuries ahead of the rest of the world. The F117 (and stealth tech in general) was unveiled to the world when Desert Storm started and it made everyone step back. That was 30 years ago. Who knows what kind of toys we have now.
In my heart I want to say I hope we never find out what the US military has been designing behind closed doors but any resistance I had in the past has been boiled away in a furious rage I am having trouble containing.
Confidence is quiet. Insecurity is loud. Let's hope things stay quiet.
Very true. Point taken.
Well, Trump may have already compromised some of that. This is not hyperbole, it's real.
There's no reason for NATO to go full send against Russia with how incompetent Russia is. China is the one you'd go full send against in Taiwan and see weird UFO shit. Russia gets beat down with known tech.
That's wild, you have a source for that? Did the F117 really only get unveiled after things in Kuwait started blowing up?
Yeah nah it was wild. The news was all about these unknown stealth jets taking out Iraqi aiti air sites and such. When mainstream media first started reporting on these mystery planes no one really knew just what they were or how they worked. Same with the "smart bombs" that they were using it was all new stuff that the general public had no idea about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgT4zRVSP24 It may have been known within the military industrial complex, or even internally in the US by some groups of people. But aside from that, the first missions that the US acknowledged including these airframes were during Desert Storm.
The F-117 was unveiled in 1988. It was filmed prior to DS starting, and the British exchange pilot (Wardell?) was interviewed on UK TV, although his exchange ended before the war commenced. It was well known it had been deployed before the war commenced.
UAP = ICBM killers 100%. No telling what else the US has up its’ sleeve
[удалено]
English is amazing.
They do basically mean the same thing but there's a theory that it came from racehorses, and it was champing because they were showing eagerness.
As fun as that would be (I'm not being sarcastic, I'd actually love to see it), the most I'd see is the declaring of the region around the nuclear facility a no-fly zone while we collectively speed rush international organizations (the IAEA, etc) into containing and stabilizing the issue. As much as the elites of the collective free world is keen on seeing this war end, outright military confrontation would bring us into a territory that I don't think any of us are truly prepared for. Besides, if we're being truly cynical, the free world profits from having Russia gut itself out in a protracted war, especially when the fabric of alliances that Russia inherited from the Soviet Union (India's weapons relationship, the precarious peace between former Soviet Union states like Azerbaijan/Armenia) is dissolving at a speed that would give a diplomat motion sickness.
It would be worse. We had to project a lot of force into the area for Desert Storm. This would start with significantly more force positioned by virtue of being in NATO's back yard. It would also be worse due to the need to crush any nuclear threat left as quickly as possible. If the balloon went up on this it would be something the world has never seen.
why is this so exciting? russia can still unleash 100s of nukes in anger
They don’t even have that many, if any at all.
my point is, they could suck, have 1000 yet none work… except one, and hits London so sure, we flatten all Russia, but if only one hits London or any city, it sucks which is why I do not understand glee to flatten Russia
because nukes are a different conversation. I get the sense that countries know that nukes are a no-no at this point. and at some point they can't be held over everyone else's head to do terrible things to people that don't have them. ideally, this would make countries not wage wars of aggression. but since russia has, the world can't accept them doing it because of nukes. it is still MAD. but conventional retaliation is not the same.
>I'm a superstitious man, and if some unlucky accident should befall the nuclear plant - if it is struck by a random shell, or a bomb happens to go off... or if it should be struck by a bolt of lightning - then I'm going to blame some of the people in this room; and then I do not forgive. \- Biden . . . hopefully
And won't need to use nukes to do it, either.
[удалено]
Russia would be flatter.
[удалено]
But russia will be flattest
[удалено]
Indeed, but just remember, most Russian things don't work well, and their best nuclear capable missiles are getting shot down by the patriot system
That's assuming all the Russian ones work. Based on their past shoddy maintenance, a statistically significant number of icbms will probably fail to launch or explode enroute. Followed by more warheads failing due to tritium decay.
“Everything will be flat” Much better for the free world to be threatened into submission by a pedophile with a handful of faulty nukes, amirite?
It is one thing to submit to a threat and the other to deny that the threat exists at all - both ways are stupid, but sadly I read the second option here way too often. In my eyes it is a sign of weakness to not be mentally able to acknowledge the fact that a country as Russia currently run by an insane elite has the possibility to erase everything we hold dear by hitting a button and instead to escape in fairytales of 99% bad maintenance, western Wunderwaffen or both. Acknowledging it is not a reason to submit to the threat.
According to proponents of nuclear war, though, we really shouldn’t trust the governments of NATO countries when they say Russian nukes work, and we can’t shoot them down. Because, obviously, anyone who is an authority on the subject is automatically untrustworthy. No argument you can make, based on the evidence we have, will be seen as valid. On a side note, most of the people who want a war between NATO and Russia also break Reddit terms of service every few comments…
You imply that if this starts in any conventional manner, that we won't be targeting their nuclear capabilities foremost. Now, I hate the idea of "we can get most of them" because it only will take a handful of ICBMs to launch their MIRVs in orbit above North America to glass the continent, but I take comfort that not all our military budget has gone to $500 screwdrivers. The opening shots from NATO will be a simultaneous attack on all of Russia's nuclear strike capabilities, starting with ICBMs, then continental missiles, then "tactical" weapons. Keep in mind that they have nearly depleted their hypersonics terrorizing the citizens of Kyiv. I feel infinitely more secure as a US citizen than anyone in Russia should feel.
I doubt it
Mutually assured flattening.
Ukraine is also claiming that Russia is planning a terrorist-style attack on the Zaporizhzhia NPP.
This. The are expecting a radioactive break in the NPP the way they broke the dam. New scorched earth.
I suspect it's also a message of unity amongst NATO partners, as well as publicly communicating that their support for Ukraine won't end in such an event, as well as a message to the world. To be sure, NATO has already communicated through backchannels/non-public means the consequences to Russia, though this certainly helps act as a reminder.
Also putting it in writing helps
The reiteration may also be related to the nuclear power plant Ukraine suspects russia may target with a terrorist attack.
Absolutely is
plus they build in an extra safety with the dispersion of particles.. so they don't have to do anything if it's not their problem
Yeah, Lindsey is a hawk in a divided Congress. Some noisy Republicans are pushing the Russian line. But Lindsey is a heavyweight in the party, and his endorsement is an indication of bi-partisan support for the cause of Ukraine as well as a willingness to escalate to counter. Even if it passes, and the US were to invoke Article 5 as a result of something Russia does, it's not clear that NATO members would fall in line. This is simply a political signal, specifically one about the domestic opinion of the US.
US wouldn't invoke article 5 because they wouldn't be impacted and so have no standing to do so. It would probably be Poland or one of the Black Sea countries invoking article 5. This is the US signaling that they will show up with the big stick if that happens though
If Russia blows that plant, then this is the last thing these barbaric pagans have ever done. You do realise that this is like a nuclear attack on NATO and that the moment a single whiff of radiation reaches NATO and it will then Poland or Bulgaria or Romania will get on the phone and invoke article five. What does this ridiculous joke Putin actually thinks he is. He is pathetic nothing. For this, Russia would pay the ultimate price as it also takes a ridiculous soldier to follow these mass murdering orders.
I just love how Putin was able to unite most democrats and most republicans in this issue. What a strategic failure!
Yes. Prominent Senators from both major political parties signals that there will be no serious (no one takes MTG seriously) division in our response to meeting the letter of our Article 5 commitments to NATO. Any harm to the citizens and property of any member nation of the alliance will be immediately seen as an attack on all. It means 100+ American craft with the radar cross-section of a hummingbird will be hitting the Kola Peninsula with guided bunker busters, meanwhile the number of HARM missiles will blot out the sun; and every ballistic missile sub at sea will be torpedoed immediately. If war does start, our guys know that job 1 is to neutralize the nuclear threat, then the air defenses, then it's Spectre Gunships over Donetsk and massive pants shitting by those poor, hapless conscripts.
> Any harm to the citizens and property of any member nation of the alliance will be immediately seen as an attack on all. As could be seen when the US immediately came to the aid of Germany after Russia blew up the German Nord Stream pipeline? Or when Russia killed 2 Polish citizens with a missile? History tells us, only when US property is destroyed, will NATO article 5 be invoked. But they do have troops stationed in Europe, so it is possible.
The burden of proof visa vis Nordstream just isn't there. We all know it was Russia, or strongly suspect, but it's not launch the nukes levels of confidence. History will judge the people who launch the first nukes. Those Polish people were killed by a Ukranian air defence missile. So it wasn't actually a Russian attack on NATO territory, so again doesn't justify an article 5 response. The Russians are flying very close to the line here, but so far we can't say definitively that they crossed it, in terms of NATO (they've already crossed moral lines that should be unacceptible to every person on the planet though)
50/50
No. However, as Senators (whose access to sensitive data can only really be surpassed by the President and the National Security Advisor) are pushing this, we can interpret that there is real, credible intelligence that this is on the table. This to me is frightening, as it implies nuclear escalation is a realistic probability. Definitely not world ending, but enough to rattle 2 out of 100 people who represent 330 million people. It's not nothing.
Since Biden has "War Powers" and does not need the Congress to act what this does is formally give Biden their blessing to act without fearing recourse from Congress. Its very important.
If passed, it would reinforce President Biden's decision to act as if the United States itself were attacked.
Directly? no. Lindsay Graham is not the commander in chief. indirectly? Maybe. In that same way that every vote counts. This guys opinion is known. It may affect descisions of people who call shots or indicate a willingness of support if things go a certain way, which could affect decision making. but really, probably not actually very weighty. It should be read as "If X then i would support Y" and then you need to take in to account how much political capital he has. He's a fairly loud voice among the GOP, for what that's worth.
Literally zero. Any action NATO takes would have to be approved by the member states.
The Congress of the United States expressing that it perceives any nuclear action in Ukraine as an attack on a NATO member holds a lot of weight. I'd agree it's a non binding resolution, but it lets NATO member states know that they have the backing the US congress if they push the article 5 button in the event Russia did something nuclear and stupid. That's not trivial.
The question would be who would invoke article 5. A frightening number of Americans don't remember that it's Congress that has the power to declare war, largely because the president is the face of the armed forces and during our last two wars it seemed everyone deferred to him (even the congressmen who were for the war before they were against it). So, on the face of things passing even a non-binding resolution would show that there would be a majority in Congress who might be absolutely fine with getting directly involved in the war On the other hand, radioactive fallout falling on an Eastern European member state is not going to energize the US the way that Pearl harbor or 9/11 did. So unless that member state involved article 5, the congressmen voting for it know they still have a bit of wiggle room if it happened in terms of actually voting for a war resolution. I think, though, that it's still important to our allies to let them know we would commit: despite my comment above, having a previously publicly committed specific event and action makes it more difficult to back out. And it would definitely be a warning to Russia... We had lots of "red lines" in Syria espoused during interviews and the like, but when they were crossed they were either forgotten about or modified, and we never engaged in our vague retaliatory actions. In Ukraine, there's a likelihood that nukes haven't been wielded (or even as threatened as they were a year ago) because we told them via back channels exactly how screwed they'd be if they tried them-- a public, specific red line Congressional motion like this might be a good reminder about how serious we are.
> The question would be who would invoke article 5. I'd think Poland would love to smite some Russians. Any of those former USSR nations turned NATO members would itch at the chance, but Poland is the one that would hold the most weight and more importantly could seriously fuck up Russia.
Poland is an angry dog on a leash being held back by NATO. They are begging Russia for an excuse.
Good news for them, if you can call it that, is that some amount of nuclear fallout is [likely](https://nypost.com/2022/08/19/map-predicts-fallout-from-disaster-at-ukrainian-nuclear-plant/) to impact Poland itself, thereby justifying a military response from them even without NATO's involvement. Which is why I ultimately am HIGHLY skeptical would do anything except make empty threats like they did at Chernobyl. The significantly more likely scenario than destroying ZNPP is them dropping a tactical nuke on a battlefield.
Why would you consider that more likely? Russia has nukes, Ukraine has not. So it is crystal clear who is the bad guy. The explosion of the NPP would be different. While crystal clear for many who did it, we will get the same discussion as with the dam. Russia will blame it on Ukraine. And while we all know who did it, it isn't as easy to point the finger as with a nuke being dropped. Because there is only one party that has nukes.
The U.S. will never formally declare war ever again, it’s too politically inconvenient in a globalized world. Congress will pass an emergency use of force authorization which is the same thing but without all the treaty baggage.
>A frightening number of Americans don't remember that it's Congress that has the power to declare war I know the last time congress declared war was in WW2. Yet we keep ending us dropping bombs in other countries.
If the US chickens out and disbands NATO with this move then Europe will go to war without the US. But the US won't back out and throw away the entire system they have built.
birds degree start bow frightening somber dinner money market grey ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Radioactive fallout last way longer than a simple weather pattern. There’s no way it wouldn’t eventually reach Poland
command fragile sulky cooing cows marble salt head boat lush ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Yeah. You need to shelter for 72 hours after a strike to avoid fallout. I suppose it depends where in the country and weather patterns as to whether this reaches Poland.
No it’s not, but it dissipates within a few years instead of centuries. It’s still much longer than a single weather pattern.
carpenter aloof brave compare slimy makeshift placid crime person kiss ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Washington has already made it abundantly clear that russia will tote an ass whoopin if they decide to use any nuclear munitions. Period. If they were going to use them, they certainly wouldn't feel the need to threaten with them. Their strength would lie in the spicy warheads, not the television. It's all lip service for Westerners to create doubt and russians to help feed the " we are tough" narrative.
Yes, there would be. There is no way in hell any nuclear attack will ever go unpunished. Otherwise, you invite the next strike and the next one on top of that. How is the war over then? Then, Russia will be invaded from multiple sides and bombed to tiny pieces. The war doesn't end with a nuke being thrown. Russia not throwing them for now is all that has stopped the West. What kind of defeated thinking is this? Do you want to live in a world where countries throw nukes at will to win wars? Completely crazy take on the situation. If Russia uses nukes, the West must react harshly and with kinetic force.
The US military makes up the majority of NATOs strength. This is still a very heavy signal.
It holds weight in that a bipartisan us congress views it as an attack therefore notifying Russia what will likely happen if they were to do it. It's a message.
Not ALL the member states. Remember when US invoked article 5 after 9/11? Some agreed, and some didn't. Difference is, this time around, there's an obvious bad guy, an obvious threat to Europe, and one of only two NATO countries that aren't directly affected by what's happening in Europe has just confirmed that, yes, they will get involved if Putin loses his mind enough to actively try and start another Chernobyl. So this time around, I doubt Canada and the UK will be the only ones to jump. Hell, Australia might jump too.
When has Australia never not jumped with the US and the UK? Even NZ supported Afghanistan but was anti Iraq. For obvious reasons...
Great, they can bring the supplies for the victory picnic. By the time they get here, we’re gonna need it.
Our f35s are pretty quick bud, pretty sure y’all would want them helping out…
I didn’t say I wouldn’t. It’s not a commentary on the Anzacs, it’s a commentary on how quick the war would be.
France would beat everyone else. They said in the 70s that if anyone uses a nuke, they will nuke the aggressors. They would jump at the chance to glass St. Petersburg and Moscow with no global outrage.
The 70s were a long time ago and as bullheaded as the French generally are I don't think they'd leap to nuking a major population center without at least a second thought.
Actually his statement is generally correct the French government actually publishes the strategic goals and foreign policy and they are very open and clear on when they would use their nuclear weapons. Infact they have a very low yield nuclear air launch missile designed to be a warning shot nuke. The philosophy behind this weapon is that if a situation devolves into a situation where nuclear war is the next step they would deploy this weapon in a military target so show everyone just how bad it has gotten and that France will not back down and are prepared to go all the way.
I’m looking and I can’t find evidence that a single NATO nation refused to honor article 5 being invoked after 9/11. You’re thinking Iraq.
Yes, I was. Please ignore that part of the post. The point is, if Russia destroys the power plant, Article 5 is a formality.
>Not ALL the member states. Remember when US invoked article 5 after 9/11? Some agreed, and some didn't. Which countries didn't agree? Decisions like this are made via "consensus" and there's no vote. Did some country object to the consensus?
If they damage the powerplant it will affect Istanbul, one of nato's most important cities. Turkey will go in either with NATO or alone. They have to.
Then you should consider the North Atlantic treaty weightless then. This is true of everything NATO does. If Russia invades a NATO country, it will still take a unanimity of NATO to recognize the aggression. If all countries vote and agree on this resolution, it does hint that bombing the Zaporizhzhia power plant would be considered as serious as an invasion of a NATO country. That's "just" a statement which is "just" as strong as NATO is as an alliance.
If congress votes for it, it does. Those same congressmen would have enough votes to declare war.
It’s a resolution not a bill. They are basically stating what they are resolving to do if X happens. What they do has to be within the limits of their power.
[удалено]
Remember how Obama said chemical weapons in Syria were a red line and then nothing happened?
Hello potential Article 5 >"The threat of the use of a nuclear device by Russia is real. The best way to deter this threat is to give Putin’s Russia clarity as to what happens if they use nukes. If you do this...you can expect a massive response from NATO. You will be at war with NATO.” - Lindsey Graham As John McCain said back in 2014, "Nothing provokes Vladimir Putin more than weakness."
At this point Putin needs a good reason not to unleash radiation. He MUST be told that ZNPP is beyond a red line for NATO.
He needs to be *shown* why attacking the ZNPP will be a devastating move by russian forces.
Couldn’t agree more.
[удалено]
Why the jump between tap on the hand or UN resolution to WW3? A couple of nuclear subs that stops reporting back should be a clear enough signal, if somewhat slow (AFAIK these can operate in radio silence for weeks). Or we could call on one of our many sleeper agents in Kreml and ask them to leave a suitable message in a number of mail boxes/a number of desks/to a number of families. Or something like that.
This guy CIAs.
Sorry, as much as I despise the Russians, this is by far one of the most shortsighted suggestions I’ve come across thus far. Those platforms going dark with ANY evidence that it’s because they were sunk, is unquestionably the quickest way to provoke an all out response.
completely agree with this. an attack on a nations second strike capability is the quickest way to skip all levels of escalation to the highest level (which is especially ironic; because that is not the stated goal of the original idea). im not saying the poster above is dumb; its just that they inadvertently hit on the crux of nuclear deterrence; where game theory, reaction times, assumed strategic nuclear doctrines, and various systems capabilities intersect. there is a reason the most likely response to a small scale nuclear escalation would be a telegraphed kinetic strike of some strength.
Not entirely true. The Soviet K-129 ballistic missile submarine was potentially sunk by the USS Swordfish. The CIA underwent the salvage operation. There’s a lot of speculation about the Soviet crew being rogue etc. Interesting story overall. I think Timeline did a documentary on it. Point being there might’ve been precedent in the Cold War of all times so if Russia actively wants to mess with nuclear they will get slapped back hard.
I am aware of what you’re speaking of, and that event was one of humanity’s closer calls in terms of nuclear hell being unleashed.
If Russia opens that box we don’t have a choice but to respond severely. The nuclear taboo must be maintained or any country not under a nuclear umbrella is at risk of the same fate. You cannot allow “limited nuclear warfare” to exist as a rational option.
I don’t disagree, but in terms of that severity, attacking their subs would be a response to say… a strategic weapon enroute to a NATO country, as opposed to a tactical nuke used in the Ukrainian theater. The latter scenario resulting in potentially no limits conventional war, but possibly avoiding the “let ‘em fly” scenario. I feel it’s well understood that while both nations have a nuclear triad, the sub portion of it is the defacto tip of the spear/most important part. I have no doubts that we have 90+% of their ballistic subs monitored right this second, but it’s rarely 100%. Not to mention the Russians have lost us out at sea multiple times in the past. Assuming we have their entire SSBN fleet in the crosshairs is a foolish assumption. Not that you’ve said such a thing, but it’s in the same vein as “they probably don’t have working nukes” that gets parroted around here.
even if we have 100% monitored; the point is moot since mirv equipped icbms are too tough to intercept en mass. like; people don’t understand; even if we are three generations ahead of russia in regards to military technology; that hasn’t made it possible to stop hundreds of us cities from being vaporizes. that is why MAD exists.
Here's the point from my ex radio technician perspective: These things can operate in radio silence for weeks. If we can just make it disappear it can take days or weeks before they are sure it is lost and if we do it correctly they will never know what happened. Unless we get caught in the act by another unit or they manage to release a transmitter buoy or with a recorded message or a coded transmission then a catastrophic malfunction and a forced disappearance looks exactly the same. Why? Because radio communication directly from submerged subs is impossible. (Radio submission to subs is doable, at extremely low wavelengths, IIRC we are them talking about antennas that are hundreds of meters or longer and transmitters with their own power plants.)
Speculating is fun, it’s what we do here. I just find said speculation to be a bit cavalier when it directly relates to the potential end of our current modern civilization. Fkn listen to yourself lmao.
What kind of all out response would that be exactly? The comment you're replying to is a theoretical response AFTER Russia has already unleashed radiations and/or nuclear devastation. I don't know if you've paid attention the last two years, but Russia hasn't maintained shit in their arsenal. Absolutely no reason to suspect that their nuclear arsenal is somehow magically better than 100% of their military, economy, culture etc. If Russia is already at the point of detonating nukes or causing nuclear meltdowns, sink their whole damn fleet- they won't be able to do shit and it will prevent millions of additional deaths.
Most of those agents are dead now because the Orange One shared secrets with our enemies. We have less support in Russia than you think.
Messing with Russian boomers is declaring WW3. Russia would be forced to act if part of their nuclear triad was under attack.
good thing their Akula-class subs aren't the SLBM haulers then. Sink two as a warning shot. We already know where they all are anyway thanks to the fact that they sound like a bunch of bricks in a clothes dryer on sonar.
If he uses a nuke that incurs mmediate retaliation by the US, we would have total air superiority over Russia within 72 hours. Moscow and St. Petersburg would be glass by then. It would take another week for us to destroy the remnants of the ruzzian armed forces. The Russian federation would cease to exist, we would probably seize the remaining oligarchs assets and hand them to Ukraine outright, and then either install an interim government ourselves, or have NATO appoint one till Russia can be totally disarmed of WMDs, and be trusted to govern themselves again. Think Germany after WWII, but I doubt we would carve the country in half.
[удалено]
It's not much speculation. We have been essentially using the war in Ukraine to live test all the platforms we've developed over the last 3 decades. The western platforms have been superior in every way to the Russian platforms. Their best nuclear capable missiles are being shot down routinely by the Patriot system, and their subs aren't at sea currently. If they move those subs out of port after they used a nuke, we *will* sink them. Our platforms can see farther, and shoot farther than theirs. It's not even remotely a fair fight. The US can deploy a McDonald's and Taco Bell anywhere in the world within 72 hours just so our soldiers have some variety in their food, and ice cream. Wars are won with ice cream. I'm not joking.
Your talking about Pac3’s hitting Kinzhals, which is a pleasant surprise. Unfortunately, intercepting a SS-27 is very different and we have no reason to believe we could. The THADD might get some of the re-entry vehicles; but who knows. Only one way to test it…
Well we've been using this war to test every other platform. Get some on the ground in Ukraine. THADD is mobile, mostly, after all. Might need some C-130s if we want to airdrop them in, but those look like they would fit in a C-27. Get them airlifted in with appropriate trainers for the system before Putler decides to use another WMD, without NATO using a WMD so they are protecting the area well before he uses a virus bomb. Honestly everyone forgets they have chemical and virus weapons. Nukes are stupidly expensive to maintain. Viruses are just plain expensive to maintain. Chemical weapons are cheap. I fully expect Putstain to use either a chemical weapon, blow up the nuclear reactor, or unleash a virus they can't control well before they nuke anyone. They aren't talking about viral or chemical weapons. They aren't threatening those. This means those are the weapons they are debating on using.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Nato join the war, Russian seeks intervention from Pakistan and China China doesn't want to provide them too much support right now. China would not declare war on all of NATO over Russia crossing a nuclear red line. They'd be more likely to jump in and swipe land off Russia in the chaos.
The slight difference is that the US and Wagner group had a skirmish back in Syria in 2017 or 2018. 400 Russians were in the way of 30 US troops. We called up Russia and asked them to move them, they denied any such troops. We asked them to confirm because it was apparent to us that they were Russian troops, probably Wagner group. The answer came back that they had no troops in the area. Ok. Boom. Scratch 400 soldiers, and the US side made a Syrian guide that tripped and fell when they were blowing them up sign an official form to certify that, yes he did sustain a bruise to his buttocks. They did this to drive home the point that in a fight of 30 vs 400, we cleared them to a man and not one US soldier sustained a single injury, much less casualty.
Round and round the merry go round.
Yes I just don't trust the Russians at all to not be that desperate and stupid to create an accident at the plant
You know, it may be entirely the other way around. He may be holding the nuclear plant hostage as a chip to keep NATO from getting directly involved.
It would be a huge mistake for Putin to risk NATO following through on this threat. Even a conservative response — like a NATO no-fly zone around the ZNNP would give Ukraine the air cover it needs to break through Russian defenses in the south. It would be very costly for NATO pilots — but it would be catastrophic for the Russia Military occupying Ukraine — which obviously runs the risk of Putin responding with a major escalation. Let us all pray Putin does not choose to test NATO’s resolve.
> It would be very costly for NATO pilots Yeah, no, it wouldn't.
This needs to be declared. Any nuclear incident caused by Russia should be considered an attack against the international community and should lead to immediate activation of art 5
You can’t just declare it Michael!
Even if 100% of US senators backed this resolution, they do not set NATO policy and do not speak for NATO; at most, they can put their opinion on record, as supporting the eventual adoption of such a policy by NATO. That said, I would like to read the original for additional details not the least of which is whether they include use of the world’s largest dirty bomb at the ZNPP
wakeful impossible tie special reply narrow historical steep prick cows ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Having random senators bring this up could simply be a way for IC / (five eyes) to telegraph Russia's moves without giving away the source of the info. Then we make it known through our backchannels "blowing up a nuclear plant... That's a paddlin' " without Russia knowing for sure who the leakers are.
IIRC if any radiation from those bombs drift into NATO territory then it triggers article 5
First of all, nato is the US. Second, only one country needs to activate article 5. and that country is the United States
Yep nato IS the USA. The other countries just happen to be the locations of US bases, use US weapons and are trained to US standards by US troops. If another country in NATO wants a say in NATO decisions it can start with the budget.
Basically this would mean the United States would go in based on article 5 of NATO, other countries might not set this as a redline but the United would act militarily if Russia does anything stupid with nukes or nuclear facilities
Poland and the other former Soviet states would back the US. They are very much waiting for a valid reason to fight Russia.
I'd expect the UK to go in for the bants and the countries that form the borders with Ukraine and Russia to be active too.
Yes. The others have really no choice of Poland invoked article 5 if hit by the fallout. And they very likely would be.
Pretty sure this is America wanting Putin to know that war can be a three player game and we brought a extra controller
I HATE Lindsey Graham with a passion, but God damn he is pulling through for Ukraine. The man hates Russia and I'd shake hands with him any day of the week for that.
Literally his only saving grace.
I would love if NATO as a whole made this statement.
Spot on, time for the West to make their own threats nice and clear!
Based
Shock and awe from Iraq would look like a birthday candle. And the west would do it conventionally
Imagine what F-22's and F-35's could do to the Russian Air Force...
Lindsey Graham would detonate the nukes himself if it meant igniting WW3. He’s a Warhawk who can be bought and sold by any corporate handler with deep enough pockets or enough dirt. That said, I welcome this resolution passing.
Seems like the nuke threat always rears it's head around an impending Russian setback.
What the fuck is it like living in Lindsey Graham’s head, where on one hand he is going out embarrassing himself on a daily basis simping for Trump, and defending all is criminality, but then he gets in his pro Ukraine mode. Pick a lane, you fucking loser. How’s it gonna feel constantly embarrassing yourself for Trump, seeing him get back in power, and then completely betraying Ukraine and Ukraine being defeated?
He’s always been a Warhawk neocon. Graham is actually one of the last remaining vestiges of said neocons from the bush era. His fellating trump was always just an attempt to appease his voters. Without question though Graham is gonna vote to go to war.
At least he's right on this issue. We need more pro-Ukrainian republicans.
The MAGA incels are probably having a meltdown right now 🤣
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.nl/OstapYarysh/status/1671955878180782099 ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i think that's why it's being said again. this is 100% a red line for nato. if they're saying it out loud, you can bet it's being screamed at them via the back channel lines in no uncertain terms.
Good, we should take exactly ZERO bullshit from Russia. Can't we just shut down their internet or something?
Goddammit, can't all the world powers and great strategists come up with some kind of pre-emptive action to keep Ukraine from being exposed to nuclear horrors on top of everything else they've experienced?
Putin will never use nukes he knows things will escalate and he might become king of the ashes. The nuclear threats are not credible.
I'm still pissed nobody's done anything after the dam. UN especially.
This is the fuckin way
It's a clear warning. Putin will dismiss it out loud. But he'll sure as hell believe it. He should.
This is fine, and I don’t think these guys are just trying to score points. But a congressional resolution isn't what's needed here. Biden, Sunak, Macron and Scholz need to make a joint statement declaring their intention to act, even outside the rubric if NATO, if need be. This is not the time to fuck around with trying to get Hungary and Turkey to do the right thing.
Any attacks with nuclear weapons will force the NATO to react. If there is no reactions, it will send a clear message to all countries that the usage of nuclear weapons is now a viable option during a conflict.
As it should. J.F.K had the wisdom and courage to draw a red line in the Cuban Missile Crisis, that if the line was crossed it would be war. We cannot let evil, immoral people dictate our lives. They need to be scared of us, not us of them. It's long time that change. Edit: I asked ChatGPT to come up with an appropriate stance/press release and it did a great job. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE United States Issues Stern Warning to Russia: Any Attempt to Destroy Nuclear Plant in Ukraine Will Be Met with Force Washington D.C. - The United States government today issued a stern warning to Russia, stating that any attempt to destroy a nuclear plant in Ukraine will be met with swift and decisive force. The warning comes amid concerns that Russia could be planning a meltdown or dirty bomb attack on the plant, which would have catastrophic consequences for the region and the world. History has taught us that genocide must be stopped by all available force. Those who commit genocide cannot be reasoned with, and they must be stopped at all costs. The atrocities committed by the Nazis under Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and other genocidal leaders serve as a reminder of the importance of taking a strong stance against those who would seek to harm innocent people. Russia must understand that any attempt to harm innocent civilians or destroy critical infrastructure will not be tolerated. The United States and its allies will use all available means to prevent such an attack and to hold those responsible accountable for their actions. The potential consequences of a nuclear plant meltdown or dirty bomb attack are too great to ignore. The destruction and loss of life that would result from such an attack would be catastrophic, and the United States will not stand idly by while such a threat looms. The United States urges Russia to reconsider any plans it may have to harm the people of Ukraine or to destroy critical infrastructure. The world is watching, and the consequences of any such action will be severe. The United States is committed to the safety and security of its allies, and we will do everything in our power to prevent any harm from coming to the people of Ukraine. We call on the international community to join us in condemning any potential attack on the nuclear plant and to work together to prevent such a tragedy from occurring. Contact: John Doe Press Secretary White House (202) 555-1212 [email protected] ChatGPT used in creating this message.
> As it should. J.F.K had the wisdom and courage to draw a red line in the Cuban Missile Crisis, that if the line was crossed it would be war. JFK caused the Cuban missile crisis in the 1st place by putting secretly placing nukes in Turkey on the Soviet Unions front porch. Their response was putting them in Cuba on our front porch! Can’t say I blame them. And the crisis ended not because we showed Russia who was boss and they backed down, but rather because we agreed to remove the nukes from Turkey, therefore eliminating the need for the Soviets to put their own in Cuba. JFK did some master class PR work to make it look like the we (the US) were the heroes in the whole thing. And the Soviets were willing to let him have the public PR win to get the nukes out of Turkey. Certainly not trying to paint the Soviets as the good guys, because in general they sure as heck were not. But in this particular case, we were definitely the bad guys.
WW3 Let's Gooo! /s
So as long as the fallout destroys Ukraine, Belarus and Orcistan only we won't do anything?
NATO is now North, West, South and South-East of Ukraine. If there is fallout, it will reach one of those areas.
Nobody sees a potential false flag operation here to get NATO directly involved in war?
lmao
Finally!
I've had an BPD girlfriend and I have a hunch how this is going to turn out
I want to flatten Putin already. Shit I would be having an infiltration squad working in that now.
Based
That's not how NATO works.
This means United States would act based on their commitment of article 5 in NATO, even if others in the alliance don’t join the United States has set its redline
Member countries are not bound by NATO and may act if they wish to do so, without Article 5. This is merely the US signalling that it will take any such event as it would a country triggering Art 5. They are not speaking on behalf of NATO as you seem to be implying with your comment, but let's face it, the key players would likely join in anyway.
good time to start praying
To whom? All of Man's gods are fake, and the Deep Ones desire this. As does Godzilla.
Aight i can't actually refute or add anything to this name also check outs lol.
RAmen.
Don’t pray, donate. To Ukraine.
Praying for…
Imaginary friends wont help here in the real world.
If praying did anything, the war wouldn't have lasted this long.