- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmygrad.ml
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmygrad.ml
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Let's be honest: they already are. They are only limiting themselves to fighting with ukrainian soldiers.
We're all going to die because of Banderite Nazis, huh?
I guess we get to find out if the libs really want to start WW3.
seriously, Kamala is more dangerous to starting WWIII than Trump.
Kamala out here saying "I will ensure America always has the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world."
Trump is willing to fellate Putin to keep the peace, but Kamala might not?
I meant fellate him metaphorically (I mean who knows, maybe he does it for real too), the problem isn't sexuality, but that a "leader" would bend over backwards for an adversary.
Funnily enough, didn't Trump suggest that because Harris is a woman, anyone world leader can just sleep with her to get whatever they want? I might remember wrong.
There's no real difference, you're still using fellatio as a metaphorical example of a bad thing.
kamala is committed to allowing the world to burn to maintain the empire, trump is too, both will arm ukraine at the end of the day
Trump doesn't really need the US empire to stand, he'll be just fine in Russia or China considering he cozied up to both Putin and Xi when he was in office.
Most geopolitically coherent liberal, the guy who did tariffs on China and insisted on calling COVID the China virus ”cozied up to Xi”.And of course he needs the US empire to stand, all his wealth is tied to it.
Never said he was consistent about... well, anything, really.
As for his wealth - nobody but him and maybe a select few individuals know if his net worth is even positive. He might be better off escaping the US and taking a big fat paycheck from any of the foreign dictators he's sold state secrets to.
The Westoid brain cannot comprehend not having a designated enemy state
Obama "cozied up" to Putin and Xi while in office, because it's called fucking geopolitics. Xi and Obama got along pretty swimmingly from my recollection. It's almost like having trading partners and settling geopolitical beefs with negotiation is a fucking better idea
Remember, China Bad started only in about 2016. There was much more rapprochement between China and the West prior to that, why the fuck do you think we sent our manufacturing to them?
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
This whole "we will make appropriate decisions based on this" open ended answer Putin always gives makes libs consistently think he will always back off when they press him. So far they've been right but eventually they won't be.
Serious question though where do I run to if nuclear war does break out. Western world will be seriously fucked over, my thinking is steal a boat and go somewhere but I dunno. South america? Where's going to have the most food security in the event of a serious war?
My fallback plan is to become high warlord of the wasteland, preferably with some sort of armored train. I just need to work on my cult of warboys
Yeah I don't want to rely on that, the food situation will be so bad that there will be an impossible amount of death to deal with. Tens of millions will starve.
I'm just not equipped to deal with that, I'm not sticking around for it. I'm getting out before calorie deficit makes it harder and harder to get out. The longer anyone delays the decision to get away the less likely they'll be able to, in the aftermath of bombs being dropped nobody is going to care that I stole a small yacht and they're incredibly easy to just take.
I don't think I would last a long boat trip in a resource collapse situation, I can't stand fish, I don't even like meat. I don't even know where I would get meds from, long term, especially in remote locations.
I don't look forward to what the nuclear war will be like, would be cool if our politicians stopped chasing after it.
I'd be taking 2-3 weeks worth of food too so the supplies situation would be ok. Need to get to the destination in that amount of time though.
Can probably stretch out supplies to double that if absolutely necessary. 7500km at 10 knots is a 17day trip. Biggest problem here seems to be fuel though, 1500km on a full tank seems to be max range, that only gets me to Portugal. Assuming I can refill there (big assumption) I could then get to Tenerife, then St Louis, then Cabo Verde, then the hardest part of the way to Brazil.
Probably try to figure out a way to get considerably more fuel on-board at the earliest point possible in order to skip any of these stops and the danger of not being able to refuel.
Boat seems best option here, I don't think any airports will still exist after nukes drop. My main concern is whether or not the ports with the boats will still exist or whether they all get hit because they're ports which seems like a valid target to me. This entire plan is fucked if that happens. There will be no escape. I'd have to cross the channel and cross a nuclear irradiated Europe, I don't think that's going to work. I doubt I'd even be able to cross the channel due to radiation.
If it does work, can sell the boat at the other end of the journey which should help with surviving there long enough to find work.
Keep in mind there are nuclear weapons now that intentionally make tsunami, so even boats (in port) might get wasted, not to be negative- this is making me want to consider hijacking some big ship like a tanker or bulk carrier.
I haven't really thought about big ships. Not sure where to even start with that. Surely the ports with the big tanker ships would absolutely be targeted?
Dealing with crew would be a nightmare too without guns and I don't know anything about managing a large ship? You'd need the crew. Supplies would be a nightmare. Also the crew of surviving tanker ships are probably going to be pretty well aware of the usefulness of their ships.
South America and Australia/NZ
Show
Regions in green mean food consumption can support the current physical activity in that country; regions in yellow are calorie intake that would cause people to lose weight, and only sedentary physical activity would be supported; and regions in red indicate that daily calorie intake would be less than needed to maintain a basal metabolic rate (also called resting energy expenditure) and thus would lead to death after an individual exhausted their body energy reserves in stored fat and expendable muscle.
Tg refers to the teragrams of soot injected into the atmosphere modelled
Australia and NZ are going to be involved in the war. Australia will 100%. I find it hard to believe NZ won't get hit too.
South America seems best bet. Unlikely to get nuked. If NZ doesn't get nuked I'd probably pick that just because I'd be able to adapt there quicker.
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.
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.
Don't worry, the cast of the Thick Of It reboot are on it:
Show
It would be kind of crazy and sad if the world somehow avoided WW3 and nukes flying in the cold war,
....but it all came to fruition with two capitalist countries beefing it out.
if anything i feel like thats way more likely, the socialists actually want good things to happen
On the one hand it would be hilarious to see america get absolutely washed in a war. On thr other hand it wouldn't be fair to all the people this would kill.
Indeed, also seems like a direct confrontation between US and Russia would almost certainly go nuclear.
I feel like mad still applies but this time we don't have the trust worthy ussr. Like, they multiple times didn't shoot when it woudl ahve been justified. Modern Russia would absolutely would press the button
Yeah, the situation is a lot more volatile today. I watched this interview with a prof at MIT researching nuclear proliferation, and what he says is absolutely harrowing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH7LT1bIdpY
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Stalin, on the other hand, would absolutely push the button
No he wouldn't. History shows us he values humanity moreso than acts of suicidal bravado.
It's worth noting that Fidel couldn't have pressed the button even if he wanted to, because the nukes were under the direct control of the USSR. At one point he did sendt a telegram to Khrushchev saying to launch the nukes if the US invaded Cuba, and IIRC Robert MacNamara later recounted that Fidel told him he would have approved of the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
It is suicidal bravado as evidence of your own comment of the suicidal bravado of Fidel's willingness to plunge the world into nuclear hellfire were he in charge of nuclear armaments and not the Soviet Union.
Yeah Putin doesn’t have much time left on this earth. I think he is going to ruin it for the rest of us on his way out.
I mean the winning play is always to wait out the US. Whatever he ends up doing to destroy the US is a good in a global context. Just like, it would suck to have to be in the cool part of the history book
The United States Empire doesn't have much time left on this earth. I think they are already into the process of ruining it for the rest of us on their way out.
Given Russia's performance in the war so far sadly for you I don't think the US getting washed is in the cards
It looks like they dug in and are just letting us grow weak over time. Which is a method consistently shown to beat the us.
They are already at war, Russia just don't atack them and they don UA flag before attacking Russia.
can you imagine how awesome it would be if russia starting poisoning the CEOs of the companies that make the weapons of war that get given to ukraine?
would be glorious. please, russia, start offing the CEOs of lockheed martin and raytheon etc.
We'll meet again. Don't know where. Don't know when. But I know we'll meet again, some sunny day.
Join the "Nothing Ever Happens" faction, you'll sleep easier at night if you do.
Well, kids - have a taste of what it was like to be a child of the Cold War. A few months ago I watched "The Day After (1983)". Here's the sequence of the bombs going off - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iyy9n8r16hs&t=3454s
A comment
I think this movie needs to be re-aired by every major network * NOW * so America can be reminded. 2 generations later - people forget.
Here's some stuff about Reagan and the movie.
US President Ronald Reagan watched the film more than a month before its screening on Columbus Day, October 10, 1983. He wrote in his diary that the film was "very effective and left me greatly depressed" and that it changed his mind on the prevailing policy on a "nuclear war". The film was also screened for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. A government advisor who attended the screening, a friend of Meyer, told him: "If you wanted to draw blood, you did it. Those guys sat there like they were turned to stone."
In 1987, Reagan and Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which resulted in the banning and reducing of their nuclear arsenal. In Reagan's memoirs, he drew a direct line from the film to the signing. Reagan supposedly later sent Meyer a telegram after the summit: "Don't think your movie didn't have any part of this, because it did."
During an interview in 2010, Meyer said that the telegram was a myth and that the sentiment stemmed from a friend's letter to Meyer. He suggested the story had origins in editing notes received from the White House during the production, which "may have been a joke, but it wouldn't surprise me, him being an old Hollywood guy." There is also an apocryphal story which claims that, after seeing the film, Ronald Reagan said: "That will not happen on my watch."
Honestly I don't trust today's libs and reactionaries to be moved by films warning about a nuclear holocaust. A lot of them see media like this and think "Wow that's so cool! I would get to kill my neighbors and minorities to become a warlord!"
Fascism is a nihilistic death cult. I expect them to act accordingly. They won't hesitate to push the button because they will isolate themselves from violence. They'll make sure they have a nice, cushy bunker while the rest of us perish in nuclear hellfire. American exceptionalism isn't helping this, either. A lot of them really think America would win a nuclear exchange with very little damage done to the US.
'RIP to the rest of you, but I've watched Mad Max/played Fallout/read World War Z' mentality
Guy with a Trump 2024 sticker on the back and Mad Max decal on the front of his shitty, rusted out '90s Jeep Grand Cherokee drove past my house the other day.
In Reagan's memoirs, he drew a direct line from the film to the signing.
I'm pretty sure those were ghostwritten because Reagan would've been way too far down the path of dementia by then, no?
Reagan got a hearing aid in his first term. At that time - I thought nothing of it. I was young (ah) and he was old as fuck. But during his second term I must have watched or read something to make me wonder if it was actually an earpiece. Maybe I saw an SNL skit with that theme or I read some jokey article that mentioned the idea that he was being fed information because he was already losing his marbles. In any case - after he got his "hearing aid" I must have made an effort to watch one or two of his press conferences. That was a super-pain in the ass back in the day. No Youtube. No google. Even the Internet wasn't a thing yet.
Even though he was skilled at using humor for misdirection and reporters can be dumber than rocks - I was surprised that at times he really did look a bit lost. I had to wonder if the "hearing aid" was actually an earpiece and they were coaching him through the rough patches.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
