These people are out of their minds.
I thought Ukraine had given up their nukes?
They never had them. They were just storing Soviet nukes they couldn’t use themselves.
Those wasn’t their nukes, and they did, no chance of something like that being kept in secret for so many years during so much political voltas.
I can’t imagine Russia would ever allow this to happen.
My thoughts exactly. I think the article is a way to pressure Trump, because it’s a well-known fact Trump gets a lot of his info and opinions from the media.
Absolutely, the neocons are in a panic that their favorite pet project is about to lose funding.
It’s funny how there’s a power struggle between the anti-China and anti-Russia bourgeoisie in the US. Anti-China actually makes material sense, if I was a “captain of industry” in the US I too would be afraid of China’s rise and economic power. Anti-Russia and pro-UA doesn’t make any sense at all, it’s just vibes.
My understanding is that majority of neocons do see China as the main threat. However, there was a debate on whether the US should take on China directly or try to shape the battlefield first by breaking apart Russia. The line of thinking that Russia provides China with a shield in the west and the resources China would need to withstand western blockade is legitimate. The cardinal mistake was underestimating Russian capabilities. The faction that won the debate thought they just had blow hard enough and Russia would collapse. At that point they’d get to Balkanize it and surround China with hostile puppet regimes from the west. That’s now backfiring in a spectacular fashion.
The problem is that US manufacturing is dependent on China so that instead of building domestic factories to supply them, companies will just pay the tariffs and pass the costs onto the consumer.
I think they’re hoping that people won’t buy the products, forcing companies to shut down or find new suppliers. This would cause a dip and ideally a rebound. The problem is that the people in the US and their infrastructure cannot survive a dip. The US is overspending, something’s got to give, and I’m guessing they’ll continue cutting aid to everyone but Israel.
On top of that, as we saw with Russian sanctions, it’s very difficult to enforce such things effectively. For example, Chinese could just build factories in Mexico, or sell stuff through third parties. This becomes very difficult to track, especially when trade is being done increasingly outside the dollar. So, the US is guaranteed to lose this game of whack-a-mole trying to enforce their tariffs.
Ultimately, the selection pressures of capitalism favor companies that can generate more profit than their competitors. I also don’t see customers giving a fuck where their stuff is made. Especially given that the economic situation is not looking all that great. People will buy stuff that’s cheapest to save money.
I also don’t see customers giving a fuck where their stuff is made
Exactly. They are counting on people’s patriotism, but feelings of nationalism can’t pay the bills.
They’ll kill everyone else if they don’t get what they want. Definitely sounds like people we should be trying to placate /s
NAFOs are, predictably, finding a way to make this insane declaration into Russia’s fault. “Just leave Ukraine and nothing will happen” when we all know that no one builds a nuke without intending to use it.
They are trying to be Isn’real but unlike those psychopaths, they have no teeth to back up their barking.
How does the average Mark Hamil think this is going to turn out?
Imagine something absolutely fucking stupid and it’ll be even dumber than that.
I doubt they could
If you read the paper, it states that kyiv is not interested in building nukes itself.
It was written by a Ukrainian think tank that stated that kyiv could build a bomb if it wanted using its remaining nuclear reactors. The report was then given to the Ukrainian government.
It’s nothing serious.
It was written by a Ukrainian think tank that stated that kyiv could build a bomb if it wanted using its remaining nuclear reactors. The report was then given to the Ukrainian government.
And then published in one of the most respectable and globally-circulated newspapers. It’s like when “sources” leak info to the press, it’s normally done on purpose to get that info out there. To me, this article reads like a threat; if the US stops the aid, Ukraine will be forced to make a nuclear weapon.
And then published in one of the most respectable and globally-circulated newspapers.
This wouldn’t be first nor 1000th time when Times is uncritically reposting nonsense from UA sources.
It seems to be a part of an effort to influence Trump to not to turn off the tap. Another one: Boris Johnson says British troops may have to go to Ukraine if Trump cuts support
I expect we are going to see more doomer predictions regarding the US stopping the funding. All of these articles are literally aimed at Trump. I’m pretty sure he started getting briefings as the president-elect, and that includes media/news briefing. If you want an example of how important the media/news is to Trump, his declared Secretary of Defense pick is Peter Hegseth, a “political commentator for Fox News since 2014 and co-host of Fox & Friends Weekend from 2017 to 2024,” Trump watched Fox & Friends religiously while he was president. to the point that the hosts addressed him personally several times.
“Nuclear bomb”, “British troops in Ukraine”, these are all escalations, and against Trump’s stated goals of ending the war quickly.
Liberals are freaking out cause Trump is filling his cabinet with “pro-RU” (but really, anti-UA and anti-war and NATO-skeptic).
This is “The Times”, not “Time”. This is a right wing rag that isn’t respected by anyone.
None of that means that it isn’t a right wing rag that gets laughed it. Is it “more reputable” than the Sun? Probably. That doesn’t change the fact that it’s an utter joke.
Yes. but it is most likely part of Trump’s daily news briefing.
Granted, 4chan is probably part of his briefing too. I don’t give him any credit to choose non-fascist news sources.
Plus i mean its 1 bomb and as soon as they use it Russia turns them into glass. Makes more sense to not use it. Its more valuable as leverage than as a weapon.
The threat of MAD is somehow a greater deterrent than MAD itself.
This is, by definition, not MAD
Explain yourself?
The M and A in MAD stand for “mutually assured”, where is the confusion?
With regards to Ukraine: IHave69xibucks is right. A nuke is more useful as leverage than an actual weapon. Russia will absolutely be more generous to Ukraine during negotiations should Ukraine develop a nuke. 1 nuke in Moscow wouldn’t bring down the whole country, but it’s not nothing either.
Hence the threat of MAD is used as a valuable tool for leverage during negotiations. Might as well have a nuke to scare Russia into attenuating their strikes and force them to agree to more of Ukraine’s demands.
China, Russia, and the US don’t nuke each other because of the threat of MAD. That’s why they try to strike each other through proxies. Even if the proxies were to land direct strikes on Beijing, Moscow, or Washington, it’s a risk they’re willing to take bc the risk of MAD is zero in that regard.
They’re still going to hit each other and even aim for their capitals and heads of states when it gets bad enough, they’ll just do it through proxies so they don’t have to worry about MAD.
It’s the proxies that are going to deal with the assured destruction, after all.
That’s what I meant by the threat of MAD is a bigger deterrent than MAD, bc they’re still going to strike each other through those proxies.
A single nuclear strike on a large territory cannot stop Russia. Kyiv should have been given up.
deleted by creator
