!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
I think they weren't ever going to use them because they know they would get nuked in turn. Once it became clear the bluff wasn't working, makes you look weak to use a threat and not follow through.
Plus many of them are so poorly maintained they likely wouldn't launch anyway. Missiles have a lot of upkeep
While this may well be true, Russia has so many nukes and nukes are themselves so destructive that it's kinda cold comfort even if 90% of them fail
Comrade what do with many ICBM no longer function?
I have a best solution we take derelict submarine insert many warhead call it Poseidon. Is glorious Soviet superweapon Dah.
Yep. Mutually Assured Destruction.
Some countries will use the threat of nuclear war to get what they want. But what they want often involves still being alive afterwards. Putin, like the rest of the leaders of countries with nuclear arms, knows that a nuclear strike demands a nuclear response. There is no other option and unfortunately the whole world suffers as a result.
Although I don't think pootin cares about his people and wont care if they get killed.
He may care about himself but he is a old man now with nothing left.
He should at the very least care about the oligarchs in the country who are reliant on the Russian people to build and maintain their wealth. There's no wealth without people.
My understanding is China reminded them of their policies on nuclear escalation.
Care to remind us?
The threat wasn't to attack. It was more of a warning, saying that if NATO was to step onto Russian soil he would use them.
Nuclear weapons are basically a defensive weapon. You never aim to use them but you have them as a deterrent. No country wants to mess with it or test whether a nuclear nation would use it
To do so is suicide, both to call their bluff or to use the weapons. So you get into a state where militarily no one can do anything (except wage a war in a country that doesn't have nuclear weapons).
That's kinda the purpose of nuclear weaponry. To use then it's basically game over for everyone everywhere.
saying that if NATO was to step onto Russian soil he would use them.
Did he use those exact words? Last I recall he said if the existence of Russia was in jeopardy.
you get into a state where militarily no one can do anything (except wage a war in a country that doesn't have nuclear weapons)
ok, I got it. Give every country nuclear weapons and then there is nowhere to wage war.
The proviso of this is that all the countries involved are led by sane, (reasonably) rational leaders. It also breaks down if they get into the hands of non-governmental forces. If they get into the hands of someone willing to act irrationality, a lot of people will be very screwed.
Interestingly, Ukraine was once a nuclear power. They had a significant chunk of the USSR's arsenal. They decommissioned them, due to safety concerns. Part of that deal was protection from invasion (both from Russia and NATO). I suspect they now regret giving up their nukes.
Well military yes. You still have economic and cyber wars and colour revolutions (upsetting the locals to raise up against the power). Which honestly you're seeing more of.
Don't worry, the powers will always find ways to innovate.
MAD.
If Russia uses nukes what is stopping other atomic powers from hitting Russia?
I always loved this acronym, because while it means Mutual Assured Destruction, which is a given in a world with numerous nuclear-weaponry-equiped nations, it's clear that someone who thought they could just send out nukes and not get any in return is literally madder than a hatter.
I'll go ahead and venture another guess I don't see mentioned yet. It was one of many stall tactics he's employed, hoping to drag things out while the West (specific groups at least) grows weary of paying for proxy war.
Honestly I suspect the countries supporting Ukraine are the ones dragging it out. Russia is getting it's military destroyed.
Five digit numbers of armored vehicles gone, around a thousand aircraft, incredibly expensive and irreplaceable military equipment in flames, and many men never coming home.
Russia is hurting because of this war, so from a certain cold-hearted utilitarian perspective the war is a good thing. Someone living somewhere like Latvia, and old enough to remember how badly the Russians treated them during the USSR, would see their military getting destroyed as a blessing even if they were sad to see the Kremlin leaving a trail of bodies through Donbas.
People act like Russia can just keep on fighting because of it's larger population, but it was having serious demographic trouble before this even started. Whereas Ukrainians have a just cause, and they're defending their homes and families.
Because they are no longer scared of losing.
They stopped the counteroffensive and the west is cooling on the whole support for Ukraine thing. They think they can win this now.
And unless we do something, they could very well be right.
And actually, nukes are part of the reasons we won't do much. Not only western nations aren't keen to send their kids dying in Ukraine. But Russia has nuke. A nuclear power engaging an offensive inside the territory of another nuclear power is a big risk of nuclear escalation. Remember the missile crisis in Cuba ? US officers considered a preemptive nuclear strike.
Nuclear power fight each other by proxy. See how NATO provide weapon to Ukraine, or how Wagner mercenaries attacked french troops in Africa.
I am starting to heavily consider the option that this account is a bot. Look at his history
Every post is a question starting 2 days ago. There are some replies. Hmm... worth considering.
I didn't know. Seems to be a teenager interested in computers and feels they are fighting a war against bots.
You did not guess right
This is a statement a bit would make.
(Reading your post history, was very not bot like. Stay safe out there.)
You did not guess right
P.S. LOOK AT HIS HISTORY!!!! OoOoOoOh...
bot is when asking questions
The Boy Who Cried "Wolf."
Ever heard it?
If I remember correctly it was always the clown Medwedew who threatened to use nuclear weapons and throw them on London or some other bullshit, but never Putin directly
Read "The Butter Battle Book" by Dr. Seuss....
Haha! Pooted
He finally got an accurate inventory and found out all of the delivery systems and most of the nukes had required components sold off by the commanders