Submitted by lloyd705 t3_10m2taw in explainlikeimfive
deaconsc t1_j63n53m wrote
Reply to comment by alexmin93 in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
Not the one you replied to, but hey, I can say what I worry about =)
We deliver modern tanks. Russia starts losing and Putin allows the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the Ukraine armed forces.
The US said they will retaliate over such usage. Let's say they will do what they promised and destroy the fleet in the area with conventional means only. This is an act of war of a NATO country (and major NATO player) against Russia.
ANd I fear that the retaliation of Russia will be the usage of strategic nuclear weapons against the European NATO countries as a response to the attack of the US.
alexmin93 t1_j63oa6m wrote
So you believe putin's tales about his nuclear Wunderwaffe? With or without nukes, russia loses VS NATO in any scenaro. US has a better alternative to any conventional AND nuclear weapon russia can field.
steruY t1_j63pts9 wrote
If you're naive enough to believe none of thousands of nukes in Putin's hands work, then you're really leaving in a bubble. "A better alternative" doesn't matter as a single nuke detonating is already millions of deaths.
alexmin93 t1_j63rp6f wrote
Ofc they have working nukes. The thing is - NATO has more and better nukes.
steruY t1_j63t9qa wrote
Well, that's not exactly the means of defense we're talking about. But ok, anyway, I stopped worrying
alexmin93 t1_j63vh0b wrote
NATO has better missile defense as well. It can't intercept all or even majority of russian nukes but it shifts balance in NATO balance even more
steruY t1_j6416b7 wrote
>all or even majority of russian nukes
...which means a wipeout of dozens of millions of people still. No need for nukes to be dropped ether way.
[deleted] t1_j6526aj wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments