Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Should we be worried about war

952 replies

Seasidesand76 · 19/11/2024 11:45

Seen a lot in the news about Ukraine using USA missiles against Russia. I've been thinking more along the lines that it won't start a WW3 and will resolve at some point without the UK getting directly involved in war. But there seems to be more and more tension and threats of an all out war recently.

Should we be worried about WW3? I haven't been prepping or anything but does make me wonder if I should start getting a few days worth of food in case. At the same time I don't want to go down the prepper hole and start getting over the top.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
MissConductUS · 19/11/2024 16:26

notimagain · 19/11/2024 14:06

There’s a view that Putin is trying to build/rebuild the old Russian empire/construct a Warsaw Pact #2.

If true then logically that puts Poland and the Baltic states next on the list, but pragmatically even if Ukraine fell tomorrow I don’t think the Russian Army will be in anything like a fit state to take on Poland for many years (and of course NATO membership comes into play).

TBH I have to say I lived through the 80s and was in the military for a chunk of that decade in a front line role ….now that was interesting at times. Despite what the Doomsday clock supposedly says ATM I’m really not getting feeling this as close to some sort of “edge” as some think…but then again I don’t get to read/hear the interesting stuff anymore..

I think they'll target one of the smaller states, like Estonia or Latvia before they attack Poland. Poland is spending a lot of resources rearming and training its military and will be a tough nut to crack. I agree that after the fighting ends in Ukraine, it will take Russia at least three years to reconstitute its army.

I also served in the military in the late 80's and early 90's and agree that tensions were much higher then than they are now. The Soviet Union was a much more formidable adversary than Russia today, particularly after the losses in Ukraine.

Artistbythewater · 19/11/2024 16:26

Overtheatlantic · 19/11/2024 16:24

Stop acting like you have an inside track. It’s embarrassing.

i agree it is very embarrassing for Russia. This has been terrible for them.

SoiledMyselfDuringSomeTurbulence · 19/11/2024 16:28

Artistbythewater · 19/11/2024 16:25

I wonder why you are so keen to keep saying Russia will attack the UK. Almost like you are trying to scare people. The problem is no one cares about Russia and their rag tag army any longer. They are incapable of defending themselves much less start any more wars this decade. If they want to incinerate themselves so be it.

It's a bit sus.

Hillsmakeyoustrong · 19/11/2024 16:29

@SummerFeverVenice Russia will not directly attack the UK, they would lose too many allies. Including China. Putin would not dare. He is full of shit.

tobee · 19/11/2024 16:29

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:01

I am getting increasingly concerned at the US and U.K. engaging in clearly provocative sabre rattling and abusing Ukraine as a proxy for their militaries testing their weapons against Russia in combat conditions. The US has clearly supported Israel attacking Iran in retaliation for Iranian proxies attacking them. Russia could read the UN room and decide they can skip right to attacking the U.K. for using Ukraine as a proxy.

Russia is more likely to attack the U.K. to make a statement than to attack the US directly. We should stop being the US’ sidekick on this, imho. They aren’t going to save us, but they will be happy to sell us weapons to defend ourselves and make more $billions doing so.

No

notimagain · 19/11/2024 16:30

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:14

They are plug and play for most part. You can swap out conventional war head for nuclear war head on most missiles. They haven’t had missiles prebuilt and in silos that then get serviced since the 90s.

Yes, but nevertheless many of the components “ rot” for want of a better expression and so all owners have to indulge in routine maintenance which takes effort and comes at a cost, doesn’t matter whether you plug and play it or ship whole devices back to the Russian equivalent of Burghfield.

All that said I’m not for one moment saying you can assume the Russian arsenal would not work at all, but there is far more to keeping these things viable than simply catering for the half life of Plutonium.

GlassHeart1 · 19/11/2024 16:30

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:01

I am getting increasingly concerned at the US and U.K. engaging in clearly provocative sabre rattling and abusing Ukraine as a proxy for their militaries testing their weapons against Russia in combat conditions. The US has clearly supported Israel attacking Iran in retaliation for Iranian proxies attacking them. Russia could read the UN room and decide they can skip right to attacking the U.K. for using Ukraine as a proxy.

Russia is more likely to attack the U.K. to make a statement than to attack the US directly. We should stop being the US’ sidekick on this, imho. They aren’t going to save us, but they will be happy to sell us weapons to defend ourselves and make more $billions doing so.

My view too ☹️

XWKD · 19/11/2024 16:32

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:08

I am talking about a direct attack, yes, I thought I made that clear.

Attacking the U.K. directly would be “stupid” in what way? Our military is woefully inadequate to go toe to toe with Russia btw. The odds of attacking us are objectively much higher than the odds of attacking the US.

Especially with President (Defund NATO) Trump incoming.

More likely, Russia would attack and then EU and US would condemn the attack but then publicly tell us not to counter attack to avoid further escalation…

It would be stupid because the risk of Russia being annihilated would be extremely high.

In a nuclear war it doesn't matter how good your army is. Nuclear war would be fought using missiles.

LivinInYourBigGlassHouseWithAView · 19/11/2024 16:36

I have started to think it may well be headed in that direction. It looks like Russia is not trying to take out the underseas data cables in the baltic sea between countries near them that recently joined NATO, Sweden, Finland, Lithuania....

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/europeans-hint-at-possible-russian-sabotage-as-undersea-cables-damaged/ar-AA1umaA5

MSN

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/europeans-hint-at-possible-russian-sabotage-as-undersea-cables-damaged/ar-AA1umaA5

MistressoftheDarkSide · 19/11/2024 16:37

Well if nuclear annihilation doesn't sort out the alleged problem of over-population the anti-abortionists are stepping up to deal with it by trying to strip away our rights as the US has done.

Difficult to feel anything other than the world is fucked in every direction ATM. Honestly I'm too old for this shit.

Currently exercising my right to identify as a cat.

hazelnutvanillalatte · 19/11/2024 16:37

princesspadam · 19/11/2024 12:19

I can't give this any head space
Are you all SAHMs???

I'm worried about stuff I have a minute bit of control over

And yet you still have capacity to comment shite on MN .. shouldn't you go back to splitting the atom

Onlyonekenobe · 19/11/2024 16:39

US warheads have been dropping in the Middle East and surrounding nations for years, on and off.

Iranian and Russian Saudi-funded warheads have been dropping in a number of countries around the Middle East and surrounding nations for years, on and off.

Similar has been going on, on and off, across central Africa for years.

There are a small number of players, who use other countries and their populations as their battlegrounds and foot soldiers (because an American or European or Russian life > other peoples's lives).

WW3 has been raging for years, in multiple ways, in multiple places. Ask yourself why you're worrying now.

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:40

XWKD · 19/11/2024 16:32

It would be stupid because the risk of Russia being annihilated would be extremely high.

In a nuclear war it doesn't matter how good your army is. Nuclear war would be fought using missiles.

So you are saying if Russia attacked, we would use a nuclear weapon? I think that would be stupid of us,

fatphalange · 19/11/2024 16:41

I'm not going to worry myself about prepping and getting into apocalyptic survival mode, if it comes to WW3 then I should imagine we'd all be in for a swift end! I don't think it will happen in the near future anyway.

Miniopolis · 19/11/2024 16:42

onwardsup4 · 19/11/2024 15:21

Your soooo busy but just had to take time to reply with a shitty comment 🙄

Shhhh! She’s busy with her busy important job!

LifeExperience · 19/11/2024 16:43

When I was an elementary school girl in the Washington, DC area in the 1960s, our teachers would have us do nuclear war drills, where we knelt down in front of our lockers and put our hands behind our heads. We were told it was to protect us from nuclear fallout, but when I got older I realized that it was really to identify our incinerated remains using the locker numbers. Fun times!

No point worrying, OP.

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:43

notimagain · 19/11/2024 16:30

Yes, but nevertheless many of the components “ rot” for want of a better expression and so all owners have to indulge in routine maintenance which takes effort and comes at a cost, doesn’t matter whether you plug and play it or ship whole devices back to the Russian equivalent of Burghfield.

All that said I’m not for one moment saying you can assume the Russian arsenal would not work at all, but there is far more to keeping these things viable than simply catering for the half life of Plutonium.

These components you mention aren’t part of the nuclear warhead. That’s what I am saying. They can be put on a brand new shiny missile. Things have moved on a lot to what you are remembering.

PinkribbonBonnBonn · 19/11/2024 16:45

I'm buying my head in the sand . It's not a problem until it is

K4fkaesque · 19/11/2024 16:47

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:40

So you are saying if Russia attacked, we would use a nuclear weapon? I think that would be stupid of us,

And you think Russia will magically fly over the rest of Europe to attack the UK with conventional forces (which they don't have spare)? An attack that would bring the rest of NATO down on them like a ton of bricks?

You are either extremely naïve or have some other motive.

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:49

SoiledMyselfDuringSomeTurbulence · 19/11/2024 16:25

No you didn't actually. Your post completely failed to acknowledge that they've been attacking the UK for years. That's why it needed to be pointed out.

And what's left to amp up is more cyberattacks, more targeted stuff on our own soil. This is what's actually realistic and what we need to be preparing for.

I did actually specify a direct attack, when you said I had not.

Now you are saying I did not acknowledge “indirect attacks”- which is true and I said as much- but that isn’t what you initially objected to (see above)

Assassination of intelligence operatives and cyber attacks are examples of indirect attacks, and I am saying there is a limit to “amping” this up.

maddening · 19/11/2024 16:50

thesatsumabutter · 19/11/2024 12:42

Food insecurity is a given in the future regardless of war

Which makes the government's attack on farmers even more crazy

K4fkaesque · 19/11/2024 16:50

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:43

These components you mention aren’t part of the nuclear warhead. That’s what I am saying. They can be put on a brand new shiny missile. Things have moved on a lot to what you are remembering.

Oh yes, the nuclear warhead is the simple bit. You basically get a bit of plutonium and hit it REALLY hard with a brick.

That's why all the countries have nuclear bombs but no missiles to put them on...

ByMerryKoala · 19/11/2024 16:51

Alphaalga · 19/11/2024 13:27

Sounds like the sort of head-in-the-sand arfing that prefaced all other wars.

Well, you terrorise yourself with visions of apocalyptic wars (the horrors of which can apparently be thwarted with a cupboard full of tins) decimating your mental health and the cascade of physical consequences that follow, while I get on with living my life peacefully.

It's amazing to see how many people are enthusiastically encouraging posters to doom spiral their way to misery.

SummerFeverVenice · 19/11/2024 16:52

K4fkaesque · 19/11/2024 16:47

And you think Russia will magically fly over the rest of Europe to attack the UK with conventional forces (which they don't have spare)? An attack that would bring the rest of NATO down on them like a ton of bricks?

You are either extremely naïve or have some other motive.

I am not as confident in NATO protection once Trump is in office. Without the US, NATO is less powerful than Russia.

And btw Russia can “magically” fly to the U.K. without ever going over any European airspace. They have already practised this a few times with warplanes and submarines.

I don’t have any motive, I am answering the OP by saying I am concerned. We are in a vulnerable position rn.

StandingSideBySide · 19/11/2024 16:54

Being prepared for those just in case times isn’t just about war.

You could get Ill and not be able to shop, or there could be snow. All sorts of things.
I always have extras in, yes even lots of toilet roll🤣.

If you have the space it’s worth doing.

PS Where are you @icecreamscoops ( if you’re ok to say ). Happy with basic longitude and latitude 🙃