Russia will make changes to its doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons in response to what it regards as Western escalation in the war in Ukraine, state media quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov as saying on Sunday.

The existing nuclear doctrine, set out in a decree by President Vladimir Putin in 2020, says Russia may use nuclear weapons in the event of a nuclear attack by an enemy or a conventional attack that threatens the existence of the state.

Some hawks among Russia’s military analysts have urged Putin to lower the threshold for nuclear use in order to “sober up” Russia’s enemies in the West.

MBFC
Archive

  • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Fuck it, if that’s how we go that’s how we go.

    I think there are enough people with more brains than putler over there.

    I hope this does scare his Chinese and dkpr allies a bit though.

    This one barking Russian bitch is the reason so many flowers are growing?

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    In Putin’s eyes:

    Putin = Russia.

    So, “threatens the existence of the state” means “I might personally lose power over this”.

    It wasn’t that long ago troops marched towards Putin, and while he meant to teach the lesson “go against me and die” what he really taught everyone was “next time don’t negotiate and don’t believe anything I say”.

    All it takes is letting some fall guy with a personal grudge against Putin get close to him with a gun.

    Everyone gets to pretend that they didn’t want him dead, and the fall guy gets killed immediately after but got to settle his score first.

    Without Putin the focus goes back on making money, and Russia stops invading people and threatening nuclear Armageddon.

    The people around him are definitely considering if he’s worth more as a myth than a man at this point.

    • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Putin has no endgame.

      There is no timeline where he can step down and live peacefully.

      His one in a million is to conquer enough of Ukraine and somehow be allowed to keep it - but that’s not happening unless Donald wins the election.

      • ms.lane@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        Even if crooked Don wins the election, Ukraine now has a nice Kursk that will need to be traded back.

        The more Ukraine grabs now, the less Russia is able to claim if crooked Don gets back in.

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    The SECOND Russia uses nukes, it’s OVER. Russia’s entire existence ceases to exist, as EVERY country will nuke Russia. It won’t be WWIII.

    WWIII would imply two set of countries of roughly equal might, and each side has several countries fighting together.

    This would be more like EVERYBODY vs Russia. And they wouldn’t last more than a few days.

    • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      This would be more like EVERYBODY vs Russia.

      I do not share your confidence about that.

      Countries with nuclear weapons include China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and possibly Iran. And while I don’t think any of them want a nuclear war, if a nuclear war breaks out, I can imagine three or four of them siding with Russia.

      China might side with Russia simply because they’re sick of the US trying to hem them in militarily through the “island chain” strategy. The US has the entire coast of China surrounded by military bases, which could be used to cut of China’s trade routes, which is an existential threat to China because their economy is so dependent on exports.

      North Korea has a historical beef with the US, and Russia helped North Korea survive through a period when the US tried to starve them.

      India and Pakistan have a long running dispute over Kashmir, and if India backs the US, it’s possibly Pakistan will back Russia just to oppose India.

      And Russia and Iran have been solid military and economic allies for a while now, working together in recent conflicts in Syria and Iraq.

      • chingadera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        If their intelligence agencies are worth anything, they would understand that any action unless directly against Russia would be suicide not only for them but also us. Nukes are a losing strategy no matter what.

      • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        The US has the entire coast of China surrounded by military bases, which could be used to cut of China’s trade routes, which is an existential threat to China because their economy is so dependent on exports.

        What is it with you people?!?!

        “it’s not fair that the US DARES to talk to other countries anywhere near us!?!?”

        This is the exact same excuse putin used for invading Ukraine, because no country is allowed to make their own decisions on who they talk to unless Russia and China get a veto.

        We have power they cannot begin to comprehend, they need to learn a lesson from Putin, “Don’t start nothin, won’t be nothin”, because if there’s one thing the US is famous for, it’s ending wars definitively.

        • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          “it’s not fair that the US DARES to talk to other countries anywhere near us!?!?”

          I don’t believe that’s what I said.

    • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      We don’t need to nuke them even, we can just use conventional munitions to fuck up every military installation they have to rubble.

      And chuck a few Tomahawks at Kremlin to be sure

    • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      Unless the nuclear fallout is proven to effect a NATO ally and trigger Article 5, no one would give a shit if Russia nuked itself on its own territory. And no one other than the US can afford to unleash all of their their nuclear arsenal, costing billions of dollars and their only defense deterrence, in one go to light the powder keg and be left without nukes to defend themselves.

    • Sundial@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      The problem is Russia has the very real capability of really screwing up a good chunk of the world before they get wiped off the map. It’s kind of scary if im being honest.

      • odelik@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        Do they really?

        They made a lot of claims about their military capabilities. However their war with Ukraine has shown those to largely be lies propped up to hide that their oligarchs have emezzled the money.

        I’m starting to wonder how nuclear capable they actually are these days.

        • yeather@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Of all the things Russia has spent money on, I have no doubts they have kept most of their nuclear arsenal in working condition. Even if they spent $0 on their military they would find a way to keep the nukes in working order.

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago
    Media Bias/Fact Check - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for Media Bias/Fact Check:

    MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United States of America
    Wikipedia about this source

    Reuters - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for Reuters:

    MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
    Wikipedia about this source

    Search topics on Ground.News

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-will-change-nuclear-doctrine-due-wests-actions-ukraine-official-says-2024-09-01/
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/

    Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

  • mindlight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Russia will make changes to its doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons in response to what it regards as Western escalation in the war in Ukraine, state media quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov as saying on Sunday.

    Oooh… Someone’s realized that a substantially smaller country with Jewish Nazis in the government is way more competent when it comes to specialized military operations?

    This is more a sign of desperation than a sign of either strategic military confidence or a booming economy.

    Moscow accuses the West of using Ukraine as a proxy to wage war against it, with the aim of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia and breaking it apart.

    Dude, you’re making yourself more important than you actually are. No one cares about you.

    Edit: if you’re quoting something, it’s kind of expected that you copy the correct quite… duh…

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Dude, you’re making yourself more important than you actually are. No one cares about you.

      Seriously. The West keeps legit forgetting the whole thing is even going on, and then waking up and sending $50 billion and then getting distracted again.

      The bravery of the Ukrainians and the 20:1 outmatchedness of the Russians in total industrial/technological capacity are responsible for the failure of the invasion. Not any kind of urgent priority or strong level of care on the Western side in any location west of Poland.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      a substantially smaller country with Jewish Nazis in the government

      What the fuck are you talking about?

      • mindlight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        How could you have missed that the only reason Russia started on their glorious 3 day special military operation was to liberate Ukraine from evil Nazi Jews ?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          Oh I see, I thought they were claiming the Nazis were in the military, not the government. I mean it was a bullshit pretext either way, but I misunderstood.

          • mindlight@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 days ago

            Why choose when you can have both?

            Russia have claimed both that the regime and parts of the military were Nazis.

  • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    If their nuclear bombers went airborne the second Ukraine troops crossed their borders people would’ve taken them seriously. It would’ve shown how serious they were. But here we are, weeks after the invasion onto Russian soil, and their strong man argument is changing a few words on paper. It’s not very impressive or convincing.

    • MaDMaX99@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Well the American fascists used nukes in Japan, that entitles other nations to use nukes if they want

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        /s?

        Nukes are such a terrifying weapon that after being used, the world collectively shit its pants and said “maybe we’ve gone too far”. Truman fired a general who suggested using nukes in the Korean War, and everyday military personnel stopped a misunderstanding from causing a nuclear exchange in the Cold War.

        Country X doing a shitty thing did not entitle countries A-Z to also do that shitty thing. If it was terrible of X to do it, it’s terrible when anyone else does it, and they don’t get a pass just because of how shitty X was.

        Edit: Oh my god you’re serious. What the fuck.

    • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      … if he isn’t a complete idiot…

      Hmm… Lol.

      On a serious note, a lot of people here seem to forget that any nuclear weapon hurts the entire planet and all of us in it. It is weird to see people who supposedly care about injustices suddenly go 100% in on devastating the ecosystem and mass murdering inocents (since you know, nuclear bombs are traditionally not used on military targets).

      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        It’s a bit more nuanced than that. Russia would immediately be at war with every other nuclear state, but there wouldn’t necessarily be retaliatory nuclear strikes unless Russia began firing missiles at nuclear states too. The video I linked is a from a Danish professor who describes really well the dynamics of misusing nuclear weapons.

    • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      It’s worse than that. Russia knows they can never use nukes preemptively, it’s why they have their policy.

      Russia is one of the most centralized countries in the world, everything revolves around Moscow, all political and economic power, all administration, without Moscow they know Russia is dead.

      The whole point of a nuke is that it eats cities, their paranoia that Moscow would be hit during the cold War was extreme, they put incredible amounts of money into air and missile defenses and demanded carve outs to the abm treaties specifically for Moscow.

      Because Russia isn’t a country, it’s an empire ruled from Moscow, and it Moscow was destroyed it would instantly cease to be a country.

      Basically, if things reached a point where Moscow’s control over the rest of Russia was at risk, that’s when you’d see them start to negotiate.

  • socsa@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Russia: nuclear terrorism is all we have left.

    Millennials: don’t threaten us with a good time.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Zoomers: Maybe we’ll finally get to eat some rich people for real.

      Alphas: Skibidi (Eh, they’re still young)

  • Coreidan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Oh no he’s gonna write something on a piece of paper!!

    Still too much of a little bitch to ever use nukes tho.

  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    I guess they’re relaxing the policy, since they’ve hinted previously that they viewed attacks on Russian territory to be a threat to the existence of Russia and would use nukes in response. But they didn’t.

  • portuga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Why do these guys allways look like their family is being held hostage or something?

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      They’re not being actively held hostage in that there’s no giant prison with all their families in it.

      They are being held hostage because of the implication. The whereabouts of their family is well known so are they going to toe the line? Of course, because of the implication.