• Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian soldiers with HIMARS, a Ukrainian commander said.
  • He said Ukraine targeted them as soon as it got permission to use allied weapons across the border.
  • Military experts say Ukraine’s ability to use Western-supplied weapons in Russia is aiding its fightback.
  • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This was done on purpose so the crisis didn’t escalate. There’s no world police to prevent Russia from nuking everyone. It’s better for outside actors to focus on de-escalation anyway.

    Also, Putin is not doing this because of Ukraine. I mean that’s part of it, but he is doing it for domestic appeal. He wants to appear tough to Russian citizens. Two situations allow that: beating Ukraine easily, and losing to NATO forces. He knows NATO will not risk invading Russia, so he’s in no real danger from the second one.

    NATO is intentionally not intervening because it makes Putin look weak domestically. Russia has created their own problem and the war will not end until the people of Russia demand it.

    • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The only thing that modern diplomacy teaches nation states today is that they need to get nukes as quickly as possible

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Nukes are good, but in fact full arsenal, from home-produced small mortars to MRBMs, and a standing military. Actually, if possible, all the means of power projection the big guys have. Including even proxy militants. Because the big guys back up their words with the blood of the small guys anyway.

        • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          You’re speaking about the means of which to project military power on the ground with direct action, I’m talking about the nature of nuclear weapons as a deterrent and how that changes the way soft and hard power is applied.

          Nukes make it so that no direct combat need ever take place, look at NK or the inverse where we are applying sanctions against Iran for a current parallel.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            It requires very rigid discipline to threaten your enemy with MAD. The more tasks you can solve without testing your own faction’s discipline, the better. If every parking place argument gets to threats of nuking the opponent, because you can’t threaten anything else, either eventually you’ll have to use MAD for such a small cause, or you’ll step back on that and then there’ll be something a bit more important over which you’ll threaten MAD.

            And so on, until MAD is in practice useless for you.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        No it doesn’t. The US especially has spent a ton of money building up countries it has defeated in war.

        The prime minister decides that their only course of action is to declare war on the United States. Expecting a quick and total defeat (since their standing army is tiny and equipped with bows and arrows), the country confidently expects to rebuild itself through the largesse that the United States bestows on all its vanquished enemies

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mouse_That_Roared