EDIT: For clarification, I feel that the current situation on the ground in the war (vs. say a year ago) might indicate that an attack on Russia might not result in instant nuclear war, which is what prompted my question. I am well aware of the “instant nuclear Armageddon” opinion.

Serious question. I don’t need to be called stupid. I realize nuclear war is bad. Thanks!

  • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    what are the likely outcomes?

    Putin launches nukes, huge amount of civilians die, russian military is crushed within next few months. NATO wins at the cost of horrible loss of civilians killed by russian nukes. World economy shrinks considerably

    • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      So, this is the same analysis I read like a year ago. Do you feel that the current situation is not different enough now to indicate an alternate course of events?

      • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Do you feel that the current situation is not different enough

        Putin has the exact same number of nukes and ICBMs as before. This is the main factor, and I don’t see it changing any time soon