Most critically, if Russia used a nuclear weapon, the U.S. could use its naval power to hunt down and destroy a Russian nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine, the backbone of Russian second-strike capability.

The funny part about this is that this masquerades as "analysis" when it is the most obvious and trivial thing imaginable.

"Ah yes in time of nuclear war your navy should hunt their nuclear launching submarines, yes of course they could do that or they could all go fuck themselves drunk on the base watching Independence day II or Pearl Harbor while cosplaying as some pedophiles and raping teenage Japanese girls. Yes I suggest they could indeed go after their subs." :very-smart:

I don't know how to express but this seems tailor made to some random lib that literaly doesn't know anything about war or military but feels "intellectual" when he reads the most barebones and obvious stuff.

"Ah yes I understand war now, it seems when war navy fights enemy navy... Yes I wonder what will happen to big Russian planes? I guess airforce will fight airforce?" :blob-no-thoughts:

What if the U.S. and its allies destroyed Russian military units deployed to the Black Sea, Syria and Libya; cut all oil pipelines to Russia, and used their economic clout to threaten China, and other states conducting business with Russia, with an embargo?

My brother in Christ, do you remember what happened the last time America tried to wage economic warfare against China?

deleted by creator

Opinion editorial becomes more unhinged and divorced from reality by the day. They must just put out a writing prompt "write something crazy that could start nuclear war, like pretend you're 10 and putler took your juice box "

"journalist": we must show Putin we are ready to all die in a world ending nuclear exchange! :fedposting:

This fucking boomer was born in 1948, he grew up during the Cold War and he doesn't know about MAD or how nukes work

:horror:

Russia has no reserves beyond its mobilized forces; its units have dwindling morale; and those formations withdrawn from around Kyiv are trained to conduct armored, mechanized, and infantry operations and poorly suited for combat. Meantime, the Ukrainians are receiving heavier weapons from the West and have begun a counteroffensive around Kharkiv, which, if successful, will spoil Russia’s attack.

Ah yes, if the situation is so bad for the russians who are still dictating the pace of the war, what remains for the Ukrainians? Let's recap, their military bases, ammo depots, fuel depots, airbases, manpower gathering areas and various units are under constant shelling, they lost a fuckton of bases to simple Kalibr or Iskander missile strikes. It feels like it's them who have no reserves left... the russians despite their insanely bad logistics (evident in the first days of the war) still have the upper hand and I don't see the Ukrainians staging a Battle of Moscow-like counteroffensive to drive the russians off. Can they even launch something bigger than a small and local counterattack? they basically depend on the russians just bailing out of an area for logistical problems and (credit to where credit is due) strong resistence, but staying on the defensive is easy.. going on the offensive is something else.

Eh, I feel like westerners kinda forgot what a war between two developed countries really is. After all, they've been cheering for their side as they relentlessly bombed countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and so on, for years and without much opposition tbh. Their image of war is completely corrupted by what the US has done in Iraq or NATO in Lybia, "quick and decisive" strikes to destroy a big army armed with old soviet era tech from the 50s and 60s, without proper air support and/or air defenses, with a chain of command that basically is "the cousin of Saddam is now the Chief of Staff because family"....