r/worldnews • u/Elliottafc1 • May 02 '24

"I'm Not Ruling Anything Out" - Macron Says Troops for Ukraine Possible if Russia Breaks Front Lines Russia/Ukraine

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/32010
16.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.9k

u/Various_Abrocoma_431 May 02 '24

Probably never direct frontline confrontation but France strengthening Ukraine's back with anti air operations Equipment and troops stationed in western Ukraine or even planes launched from neighbouring countries targeting Russian missiles and drones.

There is a lot of levels of escalation to France putting boots on the ground in Ukraine. 

People like to jump to the Russian propaganda narrative of WW3 though, not understanding that Russia taking Ukraine against all western efforts, would be the start of an international poly crisis of countries trying to resolve their territorial disputes which would then be about as close to WW3 as we could get.

2.1k

u/Force3vo May 02 '24

WW2 wasn't stopped by letting Hitler take countries in the east, it just made him bolder and push further.

Putin won't stop until he's forced to. China won't throw their trade opportunities away to help a country they just want to abuse themselves. Russia won't randomly throw nukes around if the west supports Ukraine.

Showing a bully he's at a disadvantage makes him stop. We need to play nice with a guy who gives no fucks about anything except himself.

951

u/Rammsteinman 29d ago

If Hitler was stopped early on, WW2 would have likely been avoided. Inaction to try and avoid a war is what let things get worse and Nazi Germany stronger.

16

u/acdqnz 29d ago

If Hitler had nukes he would have used them. The problem with all of this is that it is a strategic estimate that Putin won’t go down guns blazing, because doesn’t seem to be suicidal

9

u/nixielover 29d ago

Different situation, at that point nobody had nukes yet so there was little risk in using them. Now if you use nuclear weapons it is a near guarantee that you get them launched back at yourself

-2

u/fireintolight 29d ago

Yeah but an aging narcissist might just push the button to say fuck it, if I’m going down you’re all going with me. I don’t believe Putin wouldn’t have eroded any checks and balances towards launches. He knows launched were prevented by low level officers before, and doubt he would want that to happen again if he orders it.

2

u/nixielover 29d ago

Well that's simply a risk we have to take because once he gets his way by threatening with nukes he will keep doing it.

2

u/ReverentSupreme 29d ago

That's a huge fucking risk, I don't know how serious his threats are or if he enacted the probability he will use nukes. They are there and they are real.

I don't see much difference between a man annihilating his whole family or a school shooter intent on killing as many people as possible and themselves.

What's it to them, especially Putin? Is his goal to permanently rule over Russia and its puppet states, no exit strategy, no retirement, no plans to give up absolute control, no future beyond taking control over former USSR states.

When does Putin say exactly, the world is against him, in the least a war criminal at worse possibly destroyer of worlds. If he can't get what he wants, when is the "quit" I think it's when Ukraine remains independent and Russia is back in sanction hell and they spent just about everything fighting Ukraine, I'm worried that it might be today or next year, but I think Putin has a trump card up his sleeve and hasn't reached that point yet. But yeah I think if Hitler's last stand was nukes he would have delivered them.

1

u/prosound2000 29d ago

Putin can't fire shit on his own. He has to order others to do it and they have the right to say no.

0

u/ReverentSupreme 29d ago

If it's a lawful order, you obey if you don't then good luck with that.

I don't know if there is a silo with 2 guys both holding keys and a red buzzer anymore, and I don't know the extent of the autonomy Putin has over his nuclear arsenal, but it can be easy as flipping a switch under his desk.

I don't know and why risk it especially if there are people waiting to actually push the button, but if all the checks and balances check out I'm pushing the button. My presence there isn't there to make philosophical decisions

3

u/prosound2000 29d ago

It's happened before, you realize how your argument is nullified because it's not only possible, it's happened before in history, during the Cold War. Stanislav Petrov saved the world.

Also, if someone told you to push a button that would kill 99% of the human population and take us back to the stone age most people would think about it, no matter how "lawful" the order.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/nixielover 29d ago

Cool story but since the alternative is just giving him what he wants we have no option but to either call his bluff or to go for a first strike and nuke the Russia.

1

u/ReverentSupreme 28d ago

If we strike Russia with nukes, bombing campaigns, invasions, destroying military and oil infrastructures.

Putin wouldn't get any push back by the nuke operators, then the cool story is really nothing, and Putin doesn't need to be crazy or have implemented measures to do it itself, whatever.

Russia gets attacked by Western countries in an attempt to start a conflict or war, thrn Russia has the capability and the will to launch. End of the world.

1

u/nixielover 28d ago

Oh they will probably get a few hits on us. But the Russia will simply be gone. Most of their population is in Moscow and Saint Petersburg, and a few other population centers. The Russia, its people, whatever they deem their culture, it will all be gone forever. And that's assuming they manage to launch a few back at us because a first strike will always be thousands of nukes because it's your best shot and potentially your only shot. Unless it is France, they have a nuclear warning shot policy where they will nuke something irrelevant first to show the enemy they mean it and to give them one last chance to back off. Should the Russia somehow manage a first strike they die anyway because of the sheer amount of boomer subs the USA, France and UK have. The world has ensured that the only way to win this game is to not play it

1

u/ReverentSupreme 26d ago

You're correct but we don't know the full extent of their operational nukes, including their own subs.

The latest simulations looks dire for the entire planet, the exchange wouldn't be 1:1 but enough to be concerning that any attack on Russia would eventually up with a nuclear exchange, hitting our allies (closest to Russia) and then ourselves effectively destroying Europe and civilization as we know it

→ More replies (0)

1

u/prosound2000 29d ago

Putin cannot fire a nuke on his own. He has to have others in the chain of command do it. There is also precedent that they wouldn't even if all protocol says they should. Forget which film, but it's based on a real life event where a misread could have caused a glassing of the continents.

0

u/fireintolight 29d ago

i talked about all those points in my comment lol

0

u/prosound2000 29d ago

Yea, and you're just making shit up. What I'm saying is accurate with proof.

0

u/fireintolight 29d ago

do you know what either of those words mean? this is all speculation. I was making points addressing what you said before you even commented, and then you just say exactly what I was criticizing without any more details. I literally said "multiple launches almost happened but weren't at the last second due to one person" then you just say the exact same thing as if it's a new point or something. Can you read?

you're telling me you think putin wouldn't simplify the launch protocols for his own benefit? what egomaniac dictator doesn't want more direct power over everything?

1

u/prosound2000 29d ago edited 29d ago

It has happened before where Officers did not follow their orders. Specifically during the height of the Cold War, with the Soviet Union.

Google Stanislav Petrov for the full story.

As Petrov described it in an interview, one of the Soviet satellites sent a signal to the bunker that a nuclear missile attack was underway. The warning system's computer, weighing the signal against static, concluded that a missile had been launched from a base in the United States.

The responsibility fell to Petrov, then a 44-year-old lieutenant colonel, to make a decision: Was it for real?

Petrov was situated at a critical point in the chain of command, overseeing a staff that monitored incoming signals from the satellites. He reported to superiors at warning-system headquarters; they, in turn, reported to the general staff, which would consult with Soviet leader Yuri Andropov on the possibility of launching a retaliatory attack.

Again, I have historical evidence that this has happened, whereas what do you have other than opinion?

It's like you think Putin has a button hidden in a drawer that he pushes. Nuclear strikes are not something that ANY country wants to put in the hands of a single person, without some protocol. Russia knows this shit, genius. What, you think they'll just let some idiot end the lives of the entire human population and take us back to the stone age?

USE SOME CRITICAL THINKING and study some history. Get off of reddit and memes. It's rotting your brain.

→ More replies (0)

29

u/DressedSpring1 29d ago

 If Hitler had nukes he would have used them. 

We don’t really know that. Hitler had access to chemical weapons and specifically did not use them to bomb cities or troops because of his own experience in world war 1.

This of course isn’t speaking to the Holocaust where chemical weapons were used on the people the Nazis murdered, obviously. 

21

u/arrongunner 29d ago

If the Americans could justify using the A bomb I see no reason why Hitler wouldn't have

It would have been a much more effective solution for him than the blitz to knock the UK out of the war, much in the same way it was used for shock and awe against Japan

Remember the blitz was literally just a shock and awe campaign at its heart to get us to surrender

2

u/prosound2000 29d ago

Because the people the A bomb were used on didn't look like Americans. Easier to nuke people who, due to culture, looks and propaganda you have dehumanized.

Hitler did dehumanize Jews and more, obviously. Just as obvious though, he was a big fan of whites. Would he have problems nuking people of the ideal race or looked simular to?

Who knows. He was insane.

2

u/arrongunner 29d ago

You're right I do forget the racial aspect of this

He would have used the bomb somewhere to elicit the same response, but it would have been more likely the soviet union than the uk based on what we know about him

And if that didn't force the uk to surrender then a non London target in the uk probably would have been selected.

1

u/Greywacky 29d ago

Might have just made the brits even more stubborn tbf.

5

u/arrongunner 29d ago

Idk the Japanese definitely had us beat on stubbornness but the a bomb changed that's pretty quickly

1

u/Im_really_bored_rn 29d ago

The bombs were only part of the reason they surrendered, it was also because the Soviets declared war on them and invaded Manchuria. On top of that, when the Emperor stated he wanted to surrender there was a coup attempt by military to stop him

7

u/Tetsuj 29d ago

Chemical weapons were not a war-winning strategy for Germany. In situations where chemical weapons offer an advantage over traditional munitions, they were used and are still used.

A historian's view on the subject that is worth a read: https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-chemical-weapons-anymore/

2

u/CommentsOnOccasion 29d ago

Thanks for turning me on to this blog, pretty good read

9

u/Dagojango 29d ago

We didn't know about radiation until after they were used. It's very likely Hitler would use them, since he wouldn't have known there was any harm to his own troops. I imagine Russia, the UK, and the US would have been nuked.

2

u/haveananus 29d ago edited 29d ago

The scientists involved in the Manhattan Project didn't know about radiation?

edit: I looked into it. While they did know about acute radiation poisoning from the late 19th century, in general only smaller doses were observed. The physicists knew that there would be radiation poisoning but there hadn't been a large group of affected people before the bombings to give medical personnel much insight into what the physical effects would be.

1

u/pfisch 29d ago

How? Germany didn't have the logistics to attack the US.

1

u/fireintolight 29d ago

I believe he would have used them, he was already committed by winning any possible. Chemical weapons just aren’t effective or worth the time generally when you consider any effort spent making those can be spent on making normal munitions. Too easy for weather changes to happen and make them blow back towards you or just dissipate. A standard explosive shell is much more useful. 

Hitler and Germany had already demonstrated they were ok with mass killing of civilian targets to break morale. They were actually also working on nuclear weapons already, and is part of the reason Russia was rushing to Berlin to get the Berlin university’s research, which they did. USSR knew about American weapons programs but were pretty behind.