this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2025
369 points (94.7% liked)

World News

41132 readers
3920 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Denmark’s Defense Intelligence Service warns that Russia could launch a large-scale war in Europe within five years if NATO appears weak or divided, especially if the U.S. does not intervene.

The report outlines a timeline where Russia could attack a neighboring country within six months, escalate to a regional Baltic conflict in two years, and potentially engage NATO-wide by 2029.

The assessment comes as Trump pressures NATO members to increase defense spending and has suggested the U.S. might not defend allies who fail to meet financial commitments.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (4 children)

France and the UK’s nuclear arsenal is minuscule compared to the US stockpile.

And a lot of the nukes at NATO bases are on loan from the US, so if the US pulls out there will not be nearly as many bombs close to Russia.

Anyone insane enough to start a nuclear war may decide that absorbing a hundred or so nukes isn’t so bad when they have hundreds of Cold War era bunkers and thousands of their own nukes.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

France and the UK’s nuclear arsenal is minuscule compared to the US stockpile.

You only need a few.

And a lot of the nukes at NATO bases are on loan from the US, so if the US pulls out there will not be nearly as many bombs close to Russia.

Both UK and France have nuclear armed subs, those are all that matter.

Anyone insane enough to start a nuclear war may decide that absorbing a hundred or so nukes isn’t so bad when they have hundreds of Cold War era bunkers and thousands of their own nukes.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say even Putin doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in a bunker.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

I’m going to go out on a limb and say even Putin doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life in a bunker.

You say that, but that's literally the plan for all the tech bros and billionaires when climate change finally starts to slap. They have all the money and power to stop it from happening, but they'd rather just live out their last thirty years in a fucking hole.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

more than enough to cook russia. unfortunatley, europe will be wiped off the map too

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Anyone insane enough to start a nuclear war may decide that absorbing a hundred or so nukes isn’t so bad when they have hundreds of Cold War era bunkers and thousands of their own nukes.

Russian bureaucrats may think that about the rest of the population, but fortunately even they are not dumb enough to believe in having safety in those bunkers (time passes, things rot, materials decay).

So Russia really using nukes is for a situation where somebody making decisions believes there will be no retaliation.

Considering that throwing your friends and allies to the wolves has become a really common thing in modern world, just like plainly disregarding any kind of agreements or international laws or moral principles, I think such a situation is possible.

And with the cucked way France's foreign policy seems to work recently, and with the too realpolitik-style UK foreign policy, one might imagine a situation where both are not very active.

Also bureaucrats of various countries are class brothers. A bureaucrat, even a German or a French one, understands Putin and Xi better than somebody democratically elected. And Germany is traditionally (last 30 years I mean) friendly with Russia.

No conclusion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

The French strategy with nuclear bombs is not to wipe a country out of a map, but wiping out Moscow and Saint Petersburg (or New York and Washington DC for a USan example). The message is that you can kill us, but we will make sure that you are definitely crippled