• iByteABit [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s the thing though, as long as common sense still exists and neither party is willing to use nukes aside from threats, they still have to fight the US with all the other means. That means that the US will have to cope with multiple fronts at once as the war spreads out in the world, and there must be a tipping point where they just can’t handle them all anymore.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 months ago

      So far the only actual red line that was laid out by Russia was Ukraine joining NATO, and when that line was crossed we got the war. Pretty much all the other red lines have come from the west, like when the US said they wouldn’t send missiles, tanks, F16s, and so on because it would be a dangerous escalation. Then the west would cross their own red lines, and say that see nothing bad happened.

      Russia’s statement on long range strikes into Russia is the second red line that was actually stated by Russia, and I don’t think it’s a bluff either.

    • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I think the most likely response from Putin would be to arm the Houthis/Ansarallah with advanced anti ship missiles, along with selling Iran advanced weaponry. Russia has lots of these missiles in storage, Ukraine has no navy that can be targeted with them. If NATO wants to open Pandora’s box and give advanced weaponry for long range strikes to a proxy in Ukraine, Russia can absolutely do the same thing in the Middle East.

    • birdcat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      but what if isreal starts nuking (honestly the only [word not found] i can see doing it), who else will follow and nuke who?