Long-range missile approval would put NATO - including UK and US - 'at war' with Russia, Putin warns
news.sky.com
The Russian president says it would "significantly change" the nature of the Ukraine conflict and amount to "nothing less than direct involvement of NATO countries".
    • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
      0·
      2 months ago

      I’m getting vaporized if I stay where I am currently 🥰

      Nuclear power plants, military logistics, rail hub, military bases, airports, governmental apparati, chemical industry, weapons manufacturing plants…

      I’m getting turned to dust by multiple warheads in the first strike : (

  • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    2 months ago

    If NATO approves it, Russian will probably fire more than enough missles on Ukraine, far more then last time. NATO havs no limit if its about sacrificing human life to achieve their goals.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      0·
      2 months ago

      I think this will almost certainly go beyond Ukraine. The best case scenario is that Russia will transfer advanced systems like hypersonic weapons and s400s to Syria, Iran, and Yemen. The worst case scenario is that Russia may conduct a strike directly in a NATO country. Putin previously said that the options Russia was considering included this eventuality, and he doesn’t bluff as far as I know. If he’s making such a statement publicly now, it means Russia already has a response prepared.

      • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
        0·
        2 months ago

        And I remember here a few weeks ago, many comrades here thought that Russia or China exporting weapons to anti-imperialist states would be a bad thing.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
          0·
          2 months ago

          I’m sure more won’t hurt. I think AD and EW systems and might actually be more impactful. Russia has been very effective at jamming western guided munitions, and their AD may be able to take out even stealth jets. This would basically put an end to any air campaigns by Israel and the US in West Asia.

      • KrasnaiaZvezda@lemmygrad.ml
        0·
        2 months ago

        I guess they could also do something like destroying GPS satellites or undersea cables as well, which might be a better approach if they don’t want to kill anyone in NATO countries while hurting them considerably.

        I don’t see many chances of the US backing down of striking Russia by use of Ukraine, specially as they likely accept their own propaganda that Russia won’t or can’t do anything, so we unfortunatelly might know soon enough.

        • anarchoilluminati [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          0·
          2 months ago

          I don’t see many chances of the US backing down of striking Russia by use of Ukraine, specially as they likely accept their own propaganda that Russia won’t or can’t do anything, so we unfortunatelly might know soon enough.

          I could be wrong, and of course if it did happen it would happen with different motives, but deescalating in Ukraine is why I’m hoping for Trump to win. I don’t want more people to die over this NSDAP NATO bullshit.

          • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
            0·
            2 months ago

            I seriously doubt trump will de-escalate in Ukraine. Not only is he incredibly incompetent (he spent most of his time while president watching fox news and such), but he is also very impressionable and opportunistic.

            • anarchoilluminati [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              0·
              2 months ago

              True on both counts but I do think both points would drive him to push Ukraine to accept a peace deal which he would think makes him look great but in reality just gives Putin what he wants. Between NATO and Nazis, I’m not opposed to giving Putin what he wants at this point.

          • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
            0·
            2 months ago

            While a Kessler syndrome wouldn’t be pretty, recent studies determine that it wouldn’t be as devastating or impacting to space flight or missions as has been previously thought, and would clear up relatively fast or easily.

            Still wouldn’t be recommended to try, though

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
              0·
              2 months ago

              Right, it’s mostly just bad PR. I do expect Russia would do this in case of a direct conflict with NATO though. Western weaponry is very dependent on satellites, while Russian weapons tend to use laser guidance for targeting. So, losing satellites would be far worse outcome for NATO.

  • SpaceDogs@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    2 months ago

    I love the double standard of NATO being able to freely supply Ukraine with weapons and inteligência, but when Iran gives Russia missiles suddenly it’s a problem. Cool. I’d rather not have my death certificate prematurely signed…

    • KrasnaiaZvezda@lemmygrad.ml
      0·
      2 months ago

      but when Iran gives Russia missiles suddenly it’s a problem

      Not even that. They probably just invented it to try to use this as an excuse as there isn’t even any evidence of that.

  • CyberMonkey404@lemmy.ml
    0·
    2 months ago

    You mean more so than actual NATO troops on the ground, direct feeds and targeting data from drones, missiles and naval drones that require approval to be armed and fired?