To be worried about Russia's retaliations on the West?

[fedupfufu]

There was an LBC listener who called in and said that Russia will nuke the UK first as retaliation for giving Ukraine fighter jets. It wasn't too long ago that fighter jets were considered off the table by the US and the UK. There were also two people on an episode of Joe Rogan's podcast discussing this. The powers that be just seem intent on bringing us closer to nuclear Armageddon. Sometimes it seems like nobody will do anything until it's too late.

We're not that important or interesting is precisely the reason why we would be a good target for a nuclear strike.

It would be foolish for the Russians to attack America directly. If they launched some nuclear weapons in our direction instead, it would show America that they are serious about using them, but wouldn't necessarily lead America to retaliate. NATO be damned, member states will still look after their own interests, and a Britain destroyed by nuclear weapons is no longer a useful ally.

While I think it's unlikely the Russians will target us, probably less than a 10% chance this year, the fact that we'd only be able to reply in a very limited way (one nuclear sub out on patrol could target Moscow perhaps but the response would be nothing compared to what the Russians could target us with) means we'd be a much safer target than if they went to American territory.

Whilst it's tempting to hope the Russians will launch nuclear weapons upon Poland or Finland, purely from a Russian point of view that doesn't make much sense because geographically those countries are much closer to Russia and there would be a greater risk of radioactive fallout being carried back to Russia.

Also, those countries have large, sparsely-populated areas. That's another key "benefit" of attacking the UK, it's much more crowded.

Like you I'd prefer it if the war was kept on the fringes of eastern Europe, but don't think that our insignificance will protect us.

Whilst it's tempting to hope the Russians will launch nuclear weapons upon Poland or Finland

erm ..... that's a sentence that makes you blink.

Personally I hope it won't happen to anyone.

I think indoctrination is a fair word to use. The state doesn't control all the media so tightly for no reason.
I dont hold a grudge against the Russian people, what dissent their is gets punished quickly and severely.

I'm stuck by reports from early in the war (there's 10 years potential incarceration right there in one word!) of Russian soldiers thinking they were fighting nazis and would have Ukrainian citizens greeting them with flowers.
Instead they find the citizens supporting the supposed nazis who they have strong historical reasons to hate and think of as less than human.
Dehumanisation has always been a core part of deliberately enabling atrocities.

Desensitisation is a part of all military training everywhere and its up to commanders to contain that. Instead the culture in Russian military command has been encouraging it, torture, rape, battle field executions of the injured with axes!

It's difficult to see it as anything other than medieval.

I'm not naive and I'm aware of many cases of atrocities by Western forces in other conflicts and have no doubt similar are being conducted by Ukrainian forces but nothing, NOTHING that compares with openly executing deserters on video with a sledge hammer with absolutely no condemnation or consequences.

Wow!!

Surely I've seriously misunderstood that or @MojoMoon has muddled their intention?

While I think it's unlikely the Russians will target us, probably less than a 10% chance this year, the fact that we'd only be able to reply in a very limited way (one nuclear sub out on patrol could target Moscow perhaps but the response would be nothing compared to what the Russians could target us with) means we'd be a much safer target than if they went to American territory.

You're missing that a nuclear attack on the UK would trigger NATO's Article 5, and any NATO member could retaliate on your behalf. I believe US nuclear doctrine in a case like this would call for a coordinated retaliatory attack from both a US sub and a British sub.

Pretty sure the French would be more than a little miffed as well

I'm more worried about Russian interference in elections, and influencing public opinion via social media and radio phone-ins.

@Dotjones

While I think it's unlikely the Russians will target us, probably less than a 10% chance this year, the fact that we'd only be able to reply in a very limited way (one nuclear sub out on patrol could target Moscow perhaps but the response would be nothing compared to what the Russians could target us with) means we'd be a much safer target than if they went to American territory.

Disregarding NATO's response, I think you're misunderstanding just how devastating a Trident-carrying sub's arsenal is. There's often (but not always) only one out on patrol because no more is required to do the job.

Each sub has 8-16 Tridents, each Trident has 5 separate missiles in it which can be individually directed to their own targets. Each of the these 5 missiles is at least 8 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb.

One sub could inflict many hundreds of times the devastation that Hiroshima suffered in one go. Russia could be pretty much wiped out without any other weapons even being fired.

Definitely not me hoping for a nuclear attack on Poland or Finland.

I'm just here pointing out that nowhere else in Europe is going "ooh poor UK, first in line of Russia attacks, glad it's not me".

Lots of Brits just assume that the UK must be front and foremost of everyone's minds. Our media makes it sound as if we are the main player in global events but we really aren't.
We've given them some arms - but relative to the size of our military forces, not loads. Ukraine's European neighbours have contributed a lot more relative to the size of the countries and militaries.

The Baltic States have the most to be scared of - perhaps would be good if people were more aware of that rather than grumbling about the very minor disruptions the war has caused us so far or panicking that Putin really is focused on targeting their particular bit of Middle England.

totally agree with you there @MojoMoon

And you, @Thelnebriati. I think this is actually going to be the biggest problem, long term.

Agreed.

The misunderstood need for "balance" in views is partly to blame for getting the Russian shills in the media so much.

"So we've heard lots of evidence of war crimes from a range of sources and that killing civilians is bad so for balance, let's now hear from someone who denies all the evidence is real via the medium of strawman arguments and whataboutery and thinks even if it was real, killing civilians is ok actually"

Thank you for the explanation, I'm glad I misunderstood.

I agree, our importance and influence has been in decline for a while, more so in the last few years.

Hah, read that and thought I'm certainly not hoping so!

Good work again people, dealing with the trolls, glad I missed the Hitler apologist.

But But But Hitler only wanted to send the Jews on holiday to Madagascar

It really did sink to new lows that thread.

@Dotjones
The moment Russia started loading its nuclear silos' the USA would do the same, once even launch sequence began, the USA et al would do the same, neither side would know who or what the targets were... it would be mass annihilation.

Maybe consider that whatever Putin threatens, there are wise heads on both sides... eg the Yanks told Russia in advance of Bidens visit & doubtless Sunaks etc etc... no one wants a region conflict to go Nuclear, we'd all die sooner or later, inc Putin and those around him.

Now pls go back to reading whatever you read and think before you come out with "UK has a 10% chance of being targeted by the Russians" because UK have promised 14 tanks or might give 2 out of date Tornado's

(Euro fighter requires all manufacturing countries to agree to export, wont happen)

Biggest threat to Europe/UK is that Russia might still win in Ukraine.

@Alexandra2001

Biggest threat to Europe/UK is that Russia might still win in Ukraine.

I cant agree with that more strongly

Rose, curious how you got Fluffy banned. What did you say to mn?

I wonder whether mn can see where Fluffy is posting from .ru? Or using VPN?

Agreed. More weapons to the pump!

I argued on the Ukraine thread that Russia has the man power, raw materials and the industry to produce relatively dumb but still deadly weapons forever more, some people don't get it.
Russia can sustain this war for many years & the west doesn't seem to have the same industrial processes....yet.

..and thats before China and what they might supply Russia.

xxxx knows how it will end but there wont be much of Ukraine left in the east when it does.

OP of course Russia wont Nuke the UK or anyone else, they don't need too.

@blueshoes I just reported a bunch of the messages saying they were clearly a bot and mn messaged me to say they had banned them.

They will probably come back under a new name but definitely worth reporting if we think someone is a troll or bot.

Great job to everyone that called them out on it.

Thanks, Rose. Will do that.

For all believing Russian citizens are poor souls in the trap.
www.levada.ru/en/2022/04/11/the-conflict-with-ukraine/ - that is the only reliable info from Russia. Russians still have access to Youtube and independent media (opposite to, for example, Turkey). Sure, it might be a bit more difficult to access these media than pre - war, but there is this option.
Middle class (its millions of people!) enjoyed european lifestyle and holidays, public schools in the UK. They really do know there are other ways.
Russian decedents in several EU countries openly say that Russians may have regrets how it played out but they en masse have imperial mind set and it hasn't change a year ago.

I don't know how many Russians you know, or where you get your information but I don't think much of this post is entirely accurate.

I see you couldn't be bothered to check the link.
Levada Center is the only reliable research center in Russia.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_of_Moscow here you can read about the media.
There is a difference between opposing Putin and opposing russian nationalism.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56181084 - that is Navalny, who only recently has change his position on Ukrainian borders. Not to mention that there is a lot of indications that Navalny is a Putin's man.
My private connections with Russia are irrelevant.