EDIT: For clarification, I feel that the current situation on the ground in the war (vs. say a year ago) might indicate that an attack on Russia might not result in instant nuclear war, which is what prompted my question. I am well aware of the “instant nuclear Armageddon” opinion.

Serious question. I don’t need to be called stupid. I realize nuclear war is bad. Thanks!

  • NoiseColor@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Nato would completely overwhelm Russia, but not before nukes would fly from various places and hit major cities in the western world. In the retaliation, all of Russia would be destroyed, world in turmoil…

    • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I have some doubts that Russia’s nuclear weapons are even in operational order.

      maybe they try to launch them, and they just self-destruct inside their silos. or, they fly, but fall out of the sky still in Russia, or, they actually fly all the way to the destination, but fail to detonate.

      to be sure, this is not something that we should wager on. I just think it would be funny if it turned out that way. just a fun little daydream of imperialist fascist scum getting put in the ground where they fucking belong.

  • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s nearly impossible to mobilize a large force quickly, or covertly. There would be plenty of warning, especially if the US is involved because there’s an ocean in the way in either direction.

    If Western nations decide to attack Russia, I doubt the conflict will stay limited to Russia.

    • North Korea will probably support Russia militarily very quickly. They’re already supplying weapons, they have a close relationship, and they’re reasonably secure against counterattack because China would react very badly if NK were attacked directly.
    • Iran will join with Russia, but uncertain whether Iran will actually deploy its military in Europe (probably not), or take the opportunity to pursue their own goals in the middle east while the west is distracted.
    • China will probably play neutral for awhile, but continue to trade with Russia and sell them military equipment. China is circumspect, they won’t jump into a conflict for ideological reasons, though they’ll certainly quote ideological reasons in their propaganda. They will join the conflict when it benefits them and doesn’t present extreme risk. Most likely they will pursue their own goals in the south China sea (Taiwan, Malaysia, the Philippines) while the US is busy elsewhere.

    An attack from the West on Russia will balloon into a global conflict. It will be bad for everyone, even if it stays limited to conventional warfare.

  • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    what are the likely outcomes?

    Putin launches nukes, huge amount of civilians die, russian military is crushed within next few months. NATO wins at the cost of horrible loss of civilians killed by russian nukes. World economy shrinks considerably

    • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      So, this is the same analysis I read like a year ago. Do you feel that the current situation is not different enough now to indicate an alternate course of events?

      • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Do you feel that the current situation is not different enough

        Putin has the exact same number of nukes and ICBMs as before. This is the main factor, and I don’t see it changing any time soon