The Russian president says it would "significantly change" the nature of the Ukraine conflict and amount to "nothing less than direct involvement of NATO countries".
It wouldn't surprise me if this were in fact true, but if you or @yogthos@lemmy.ml can point me to where you saw this, I would really appreciate being able to read about it. Regardless of what heinous crimes against humanity and all life on earth that the US would actually perpetrate in a large scale nuclear war scenario, I was under the impression that their nuclear posture and targeting strategies are "highly classified" and even though they don't have any NFU policy, they still at least pretend it's about deterrence.
Devil's advocate: Some military plans might be more of a thought experiment or training exercise or black swan event prepping than a serious we totally gonna do this. For example, there are plans to invade Canada, plans for zombie invasions, etc..
Now to unadvocate for the devil, the "Zombie" plan can be recycled to apply for reacting to a US citizen led communist revolution, or mass rioting against Imperial interests, the "Nuke everyone but the US" plan might be useful if the US suddenly finds itself to be the last non-socialist country, etc..
Trying to find articles on this on Yandex and DuckDuckGo and not finding anything although my search terms are probably subpar. Some stuff about how it'd only take 100 nukes to destroy almost all human civilization though.
I don't think they'd have enough, China and Russia are very large and globally there are at least 10,000 cities (with at least 50,000 inhabitants at an average population density of 1,500 people per square kilometer)
I recall reading how the US has nuked primed to hit the Global South in case of a nuclear war just so that they don't make it.
Yeah wasn't it something like, they want the US to be the center of rebuilt civilisation, so they'd nuke everything else, including their allies..
It wouldn't surprise me if this were in fact true, but if you or @yogthos@lemmy.ml can point me to where you saw this, I would really appreciate being able to read about it. Regardless of what heinous crimes against humanity and all life on earth that the US would actually perpetrate in a large scale nuclear war scenario, I was under the impression that their nuclear posture and targeting strategies are "highly classified" and even though they don't have any NFU policy, they still at least pretend it's about deterrence.
It was an article someone posted in a comment on here, It'll be somewhere in my saved so I'll try to find it.
In the meantime I'll just blindly believe it because it sounds like something that they would do.
Devil's advocate: Some military plans might be more of a thought experiment or training exercise or black swan event prepping than a serious we totally gonna do this. For example, there are plans to invade Canada, plans for zombie invasions, etc..
Now to unadvocate for the devil, the "Zombie" plan can be recycled to apply for reacting to a US citizen led communist revolution, or mass rioting against Imperial interests, the "Nuke everyone but the US" plan might be useful if the US suddenly finds itself to be the last non-socialist country, etc..
Trying to find articles on this on Yandex and DuckDuckGo and not finding anything although my search terms are probably subpar. Some stuff about how it'd only take 100 nukes to destroy almost all human civilization though.
We must not allow a mineshaft gap!
Wtf
All of us who are saying WTF have seriously underestimated American depravity.
I don't think they'd have enough, China and Russia are very large and globally there are at least 10,000 cities (with at least 50,000 inhabitants at an average population density of 1,500 people per square kilometer)
You don't have to hit the cities, you just have to destroy food production capacity.