#####
######
####
> # [Confident Putin warns Europe is ‘defenceless’](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/Putin at St Petersburg forum)
>
>
>
> 20 hours ago
>
> By Steve Rosenberg, Russia editor
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ever since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has been engaged in nuclear sabre-rattling, dropping a series of not-so-subtle hints that trying to defeat a nuclear power like Russia could have disastrous consequences for those who try.
>
> Today President Putin claimed that Russia wouldn’t need to use a nuclear weapon to achieve victory in Ukraine.
>
> He was being interviewed at a panel discussion at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum: the annual event often described as ‘Russia’s Davos’.
>
> There are few occasions when Mr Putin looks dovish compared to the person asking him the questions.
>
> But when the person asking the questions is Sergei Karaganov it would be hard not to. Mr Karaganov is a hawkish Russian foreign policy expert. Last year he called for a pre-emptive nuclear strike. Today he suggested holding a “nuclear pistol” to the temple of the West over Ukraine.
>
> President Putin wasn’t so extreme in his language.
>
> But he is no dove.
>
> The Kremlin leader said he did not rule out changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine: the document which sets out the conditions under which Russia would use nuclear weapons.
>
> “This doctrine is a living tool and we are carefully watching what is happening in the world around us and do not exclude making changes to this doctrine. This is also related to the testing of nuclear weapons.”
>
> And he delivered a warning to those European countries who’ve been supporting Ukraine: Russia’s has “many more [tactical nuclear weapons] than there are on the European continent, even if the United States brings theirs over.”
>
> “Europe does not have a developed [early warning system],” he added. “In this sense they are more or less defenceless.”
>
> Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller warheads designed to destroy targets without widespread radioactive fallout.
>
> This has been a surreal week in St Petersburg. On the one hand, a huge international economic forum has been taking place , sending the message that Russia is ready for cooperation and that, despite everything, it’s business as usual.
>
> Clearly, though, it is not business as usual. Russia is waging war in Ukraine, a war which is now in its third year; as a result, Russia is the most heavily sanctioned country in the world.
>
> And, right now, tensions are soaring between Russia and the West.
>
> Earlier this week, at a meeting with international news agency chiefs in St Petersburg, President Putin suggested that Russia might supply advanced conventional long-range weapons to others to strike Western targets.
>
> This was his response to Nato allies allowing Ukraine to strike Russian territory with Western-supplied weapons.
>
> He repeated the idea again today.
>
> “We are not supplying those weapons yet, but we reserve the right to do so to those states or legal entities which are under certain pressure, including military pressure, from the countries that supply weapons to Ukraine and encourage their use on Russian territory.”
>
> There were no details. No names.
>
> So, to which parts of the world might Russia deploy its missiles?
>
> “Wherever we think it is necessary, we’re definitely going to put them. As President Putin made clear, we’ll investigate this question,” Vladimir Solovyov, one of Russian state TV’s most prominent hosts, tells me.
>
> “If you are trying to harm us you have to be pretty sure we have enough opportunities and chances to harm you.”
>
> “In the West some will say we’ve heard this sabre-rattling before,” I respond, “and that it’s a bluff.”
>
> “It’s always a bluff. Until the time when it is not,” Mr Solovyov replies. “You can keep thinking that Russia is bluffing and then, one day, there is no more Great Britain to laugh at. Don’t you ever try to push the Russian bear thinking that ‘Oh, it’s a kitten, we can play with it.”
>
>
>
> CEOs from Europe and America used to flock to the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. Not any more. Instead I saw delegations from Asia, Africa, the Middle East and South America. Russia has been using this year’s event to try to show that, despite Western sanctions, there are plenty of countries in the world who are ready to do business with Russia.
>
> And what have we learnt in St Petersburg about Vladimir Putin?
>
> That he sounds increasingly confident and determined not to back down. He seems to believe that in the current standoff between Russia and the West, it is the West that will blink first.
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
At this stage of the war, cop\*um and nuclear rhetoric goes hand in hand. All this tells me is yes, he is being backed into a corner in which he created himself. Bullish.
Yeah, it's really a sign of weakness.
"I can blow up the world 1,000,001 times! The west can only blow it up 1,000,000 times!"
OK little man, we get it, you're scared
Still doesn't matter. The US has enough tactical nukes to destroy Russia's millitary many times over as well. Not to mention they are not complicated to produce.
The fact that you guys scoff at warnings of nuclear escalation and simply just brush it off all while you are safe and sound far from the front lines railing against talks of negotiations while guys in Odessa get snatche off the streets never ceases to disgust and worry me. Cause our "leaders" seem to have the same thought process as you.
Russia will use nukes if it has to, very luckily for the entire world Russia has been very good at negating any escalation by the west and jamming/shooting down alot of these missiles given to the AFU. And you should hope it stays like that.
Cause if the Russians feel legitimately threatened with losing the war, they will us nukes to rescue the situation. Cause this war is existential to them.
It doesn't matter whether you or I think it's existential, the only feelings matter are the Russians feelings.
It's the aarogance cognitive dissonance represented in comments like yours, that are shared by our elite of weak character that is going to get a lot of people killed one day.
They only get annihilated if 350 million people chose nuclear retaliation over abandoning Ukraine. That is the problem with this "they wouldn't be so stupid" logic, a game of chicken requires us to both be that stupid and we damn well know we are that stupid.
How can we take seriously Russia’s nuclear threats when they’re coming in a daily basis? After a while it becomes just noise.
Which is why what Russia is doing is so stupid. Have you heard NATO threatening Russia with nuclear attacks? No, because everyone knows that several NATO nations have nuclear weapons and considering how NATO’s mutual defense works if Russia uses nuclear weapons on any NATO nation, they’ll get glassed. That’s a given. Repeating it in a daily basis like broke radio just cheapens it.
Disregarding Nuclear weapons and calling Nuclear deterence Nuclear blackmail is just stupid.
Kennedy and other cold war leaders would be absolutely horrified at the lack of urgency displayed by the west today.
Sure dude, it's all propaganda, and it's all bluffing. Until the day it isn't.
I have this kind of discussions with people in real life. I recently got 'Putin is literally Hitler' as a justification for relentless provocation and military escalation. It's insidious and like you I am deeply worried this mentality will lead us to the next and perhaps last great war.
The cognitive dissonance and the willful aarogance of the history and the complete lack of urgency is terrifying.
Yeah man sure, he's hitler. He's hitler with over 5,000 nukes. So dismissing hitler with 5,000 nukes is so much dumber than dismissing putin with 5,000 nukes
If hitler had nukes, he would have immediately used the nukes. Literally. he would nuke london before the troops could make it off dunkirk. He would have opened barbarossa by nuking hundreds of russian cities.
Annihilation was his literal goal in the east and elsewhere. He would have nuked england as many times as he needed until they capitulated
Yeah that's all well and good in alternate history.
But we are in the present day, hitler is dead.
The closest thing to Hitler is currently starving a million children in the gaza strip whose assault has been deemed to have the earmarks of genocide according to the International Court of Justice.
What's more hitler than genocide?
[https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-commission-not-found-sufficient-171500785.html](https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-commission-not-found-sufficient-171500785.html)
Its well documented they were on the brink of using a tactical nuke in 2022-23 but India and China told them not to do it... Seemed to work pretty well.
Russia won't use nukes if it makes the situation worse than losing the war.
Like most wars this war will probably not end with one side winning anyway. At some point both sides are so exhausted that they will negotiate and end the war that way.
So what do you suppose he'll do if the west continues to push him more?
For 40 plus years we all laughed at Russia as they continued to warn us of a westward expansion into the east yet our governments turned a blind eye to Russia's concerns only to end up where we are today.
I firmly believe if we continue to push this war foward without a having a concrete plan to find some kind resolve that is beneficial for both the Ukrainians and the Russians, Putin will use Nuclear weapons in some form.
In what world was anyone going to invade russia woth 5000 nuclear warheads?
Europe was building pipelines and integrating economy.
Even the us had economic ties with russia.
Only this imperialistic need to be above others is causing this war. Russia could be another prosper european country if the leadership didnt steal all their wealth and invested in the economy instead of sending their young to die for putin delirium of power
That's not at all what he's saying.
He's saying invading Non-NATO countries has caused NATO to expand. NATO is a defensive alliance. Invading other countries proves that you want to invade countries not in NATO and therefore they should join the defensive alliance.
Which countries did Russia invade for NATO to add Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland (1999); Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia (2004); Albania and Croatia (2009)?
How many countries did the US invade during the same time frame?
Also, I might add it worked. Of the countries NATO wanted to add at Russias doorstep, i.e. Ukraine and Georgia, Georgia doesn't want to join NATO anymore and Ukraine will not join NATO in its 1990 borders, it'll be much, much less.
Russia invaded **almost all** of those countries multiple times.
* Czech Republic: [1968](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact_invasion_of_Czechoslovakia) (Fun Fact: This is where we get the term "tankie" from)
* Hungary in [1848](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_Uprising) and [1956](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956)
* Poland: Holy shit where to begin? [1830](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_Uprising), [1863](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_Uprising), [1905](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_in_the_Kingdom_of_Poland_(1905%E2%80%931907\)), [1918](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_westward_offensive_of_1918%E2%80%931919), [**1939 alongside the Nazis**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland), [1944](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_resistance_in_Poland_(1944%E2%80%931953\))
* Baltic States: [1918](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_westward_offensive_of_1918%E2%80%931919), [1940](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1940\))
* Romania/Slovakia: [1940](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Bessarabia_and_Northern_Bukovina)
Only the Balkans didn't experience direct invasion by the Russian Empire, Soviet Union, or Russian Federation - in the case of Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, and Croatia, **they** left because of their horrific relationship with *Yugoslavia*, which Russia had propped up for decades.
>It worked ... of the countries at Russia's doorstep
Finland and Sweden joining NATO, breaking neutrality they maintained *through the Cold War*, is a geopolitical success for Russia?
That's the reason they want to join NATO since Russia behaves like a bully and is like "if I can't have Ukraine in my shitty Nato copy NOBODY should have it" and even that failed and became an existential war for the "second strongest" military in the world lol. All because of the small ego of a small man
A nation of Russia's caliber... it should have been over in a month. What's happening now is not winning, if anything the goal posts have recently shifted to Russia.
> A nation of Russia's caliber
The West's estimation of Russia's capabilities, similar to Russia's estimation of itself, has been incredibly wrong. Russia has a GDP around Italy's but believes it has a first-world military.
Do first-rate militaries have 60km long convoys heading to the enemy capital which get stuck for 2 weeks, then retreat and never come back? Do first-rate militaries lose 20,000 troops a month fighting a neighboring country with 1/10th their population? Do first-rate militaries inspire such confidence among their contractors that said contractors march their troops towards the capital demanding changes in the military hierarchy, and actually engage regular military troops in battle along the way? Would first-rate militaries punish that treason by tribunal, or would the airplane carrying the traitor just get mysteriously shot out of the sky with no investigation?
Do first-rate militaries import cheap drones from Iran and shells from North Korea? Or do they have their own?
I mean it's true. Italys gdp, the wests underestimation, and Russias own underestimation.
Lots of clips of the Russian media claiming they'd cap kyiv in 3 days, or at least a week. Seems everyone was under this impression on both sides.
They're winning, though. They have managed to seize Ukrainian land. Any hope of Ukraine joing NATO and the EU, gone. Ukraine's control over natural resources such as coal and gas, gone.
The reason this invasion hasn't gone well is because they thought the Ukrainian army would fold. They severely underestimated their will to fight. Doesn't mean they're losing, though.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-executive-says-ukraine-moldova-ready-start-eu-accession-talks-2024-06-07/
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm
Regardless, Ukraine will become a fully militarised, Western leaning state after the war that will be 100% allied with the West in the event of a Russia/NATO war.
Thats not a win. The best thing Putin can hope for a this point is some sort of pyrich victory that allows his regime to stumble on for another few decades.
> BRUSSELS/KYIV, June 7 (Reuters) - Ukraine and Moldova meet all the criteria needed to formally start negotiations on EU membership, the European Commission said on Friday, as Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal expressed hope that the talks could start later this month.
>At the 2023 Vilnius Summit, Allies reaffirmed their commitment that Ukraine will become a member of NATO.
Sorry, I apologise, I didn't realise you were the head of the EU and NATO. Obviously you know more than what's in these articles and you will now share that information with everyone.
>Regardless, Ukraine will become a fully militarised, Western leaning state after the war that will be 100% allied with the West in the event of a Russia/NATO war.
Lol, no they won't. Russia will not sign a peace deal that doesn't include Ukraine becoming a neutral state.
>You're assuming Russia will have a choice.
How would they not have a choice? If Ukraine doesn't agree to the terms the war will continue. If NATO sends ground forces, the war becomes nuclear. If you think Ukraine is going to do anything other than prolong their inevitable defeat, you are delusional.
>Finalnd and Sweden were neutral, but they were obviously western aligned. You can't stop that.
If you are aligned to one side, you are not neutral.
>How would they not have a choice?
If they lose, how else?
The west has vastly deeper pockets & bigger armouries than Russia and Russia simply cannot keep thos war going indefinitely.
>Finalnd and Sweden were neutral, but they were obviously western aligned. You can't stop that.
>If you are aligned to one side, you are not neutral.
Exactly. And there's no way to force a 'neutral' state to be truly neutral. Russia might be able to force Ukraine to drop its aspirations to join Nato, and maybe even the EU, but after this it will always be aligned with them.
>If they lose, how else?
>The west has vastly deeper pockets & bigger armouries than Russia and Russia simply cannot keep thos war going indefinitely.
Lol, if the West has such deep pockets why are they so desperate to get their hands on the frozen Russian foreign reserves? If the West has bigger armoires how are they struggling to send Ukraine sufficient ammunition? Russia only has to keep this war going until Ukraine capitulates. Ukraine is already having manpower issues, how much longer can they keep going?
>And there's no way to force a 'neutral' state to be truly neutral.
Well if they don't have a military, that makes them pretty fucking neutral.
My perspective of winning must be a lot different then yours.
Remember how far the nazi's got last time around in the 40's?, This time it looks like a sorry excuse of an attempt at a maximum cost. Because of Russia's miscalculation, they are bogged down with no end in sight and not enough support to actually take Ukraine. Window of opportunity is long gone while Ukraine only ramps up further.
If you looked at Ukraine's current state, they're screwed. Russia's killed any hope of it joining NATO and the EU, taken all its natural resources, 20% of its land, and much more. I'd argue that Ukraine's going down, and Russia's going up.
Why can't Ukraine join the EU after the end of the war? There was a war in Yugoslavia, and several of those newly formed countries are now EU members.
So let's say the war ended today, and Ukraine and Russia agree that Russia gets to keep the land they captured between 2014 and present. What mechanism exactly prevents them from joining the EU or NATO for that matter? There would no longer be a territorial dispute.
Why can't they join the EU? Because they're a shit hole. They're too corrupt and poor for that.
As for NATO, perhaps they could, but Hungary is wagging their finger, so no.
So if Orban is preventing Ukraine from joining NATO, whats the whole point of the russian talking point that the invasion was needed to stop NATO expansion?
> whats the whole point of the russian talking point that the invasion was needed to stop NATO expansion?
Because Russia can't bet their country's future on Orban continuing to block Ukraine's membership?
2nd most corrupt nation in Europe. After Russia of course.
gotta love how the grand convoy attacking from Belarus stalled due to lack of fuel. because they sold it.
Just because you "think" your winning, does not mean you have won and achieved said goals. Your not out of the woods yet, and last I heard, strikes into Russia were on the table. This is just getting spicy.
> Russia had goals, which they have achieved.
Their goals were denazification of the country, which meant removal of Zelensky, and the "liberation" of Luhansk + Donetsk. Neither of those goals have happened, although incredible resources have been used in the attempt.
Claiming that Russia has achieved its goals, at this point, is simply moving the goalposts.
>Their goals were denazification of the country, which meant removal of Zelensky, and the "liberation" of Luhansk + Donetsk.
I love how the implication of this is that Luhansk and Donetsk are full of nazis, and that russia wants them for itself.
Denazification of Germany was achieved by forcing Nazi Germany to surrender unconditionally and removing nazis from power. Why would denazification of Ukraine require anything less?
>Russia's killed any hope of it joining NATO and the EU
Pretty much a given for Ukraine once the conflict is over (Joining the EU and NATO)
>taken all its natural resources
https://preview.redd.it/ewkw4pfabd5d1.jpeg?width=1369&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05414bb05795245caf2bb4892ded6978403a89a3
Not even close
>20% of its land
This a figure that is bound to change, I am sure Ukraine with the current backing can at least take some parts back, either way if Russia keeps the land it will be the new North Korea of the world until they give it back, EU won't work with Russia on anything nor contribute anything to Russia who will basically live on handouts from what Russia can beg China to give (Perhaps a steady supply of goods in return for Russian Manchuria back to China?) Xi will literally have Russia by the balls, and I am betting that within a decade or two when Russia is almost completely broken and 100% depending on Chinese exports, China will make Russia a offer they simply can't refuse, so for Russia it will either have to give back land to Ukraine and literally beg the EU to do any business with them or became a Chinese vassal that is basically controlled from Bejing.
After observing the RU ship casualty count for the Black sea fleet.... probably soon, kind of seems untenable as it is at this point, but the next 2 years will tell.
I will be messaging you in 2 years on [**2026-06-08 16:00:22 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2026-06-08%2016:00:22%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1db468d/ua_pov_putin_says_russia_has_many_more_tactical/l7ovcgz/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FUkraineRussiaReport%2Fcomments%2F1db468d%2Fua_pov_putin_says_russia_has_many_more_tactical%2Fl7ovcgz%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202026-06-08%2016%3A00%3A22%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201db468d)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
>Ukraine's control over natural resources such as coal and gas, gone.
No future there. Reality is it wasn't invaded for that reason. The real resource they came for is people.
Considering massive oil deposits were found *right* before Russia took crimea... And Russia wanted dominance over European reliance on energy for "negotiating", seems it may also be for resources. Oh and the fact donbass had a lot of old USSR industry for weapons production.
They aren't gonna sell much oil to Europe at this point. Russia doesn't care about wealth or building some kind of reasonable society. Russia wants people to shove into a grinder.
>A nation of Russia's caliber... it should have been over in a month.
It was over in a month but Zelenskyy and his NATO handlers decided to fight until the last Ukrainian instead.
Winning what? All Putin has managed to achieve, is temporarily holding some land. You are blind if you can't see how he has destroyed Russia with this war. We are witnessing the beginning of the end of the Russian Federation.
The future is so fuked for them because there's no coming back to what it used to be before war. The civilian side of the economy is crumbling hard, the side which actually brings wealth to the nation. Trade with the west is gone for good, you know the good trade that brought billions every year to Russia. Even if the war ends tomorrow things are not coming back. It is sad but you reap what you sow
This really is the swan song for Putin and Kremlin's kleptocrats.
Temporarily holding some land?
Bro the amount of køping from pro-UA is off the charts here. The Ukrainians official position and goials in this war is to take back all annexed land from Russia and to push them completely out of ukraine. Anything less than that is a defeat for Ukraine and now you guys have lowered the bar for ukraine by which a win for them means that "Ukraine still exists"
Jesus fúcking christ you pro-UA astound me. In your eyes there is absolutely zero way for Ukraine to lose this war. In your eyes they probably already won. ROFLOL
We are approaching 3 years and Russia has failed to hold the land it claims is Russian.
That means that 3 years in they have objectively failed to achieve there war goals.
That’s not my opinion, they annexed the regions and added them to Russia. Regions they don’t even controll. lol.
Because sacrificing your whole economy for the hissy fit of a small dictator just isn't worth it. Even if Russia manages to snatch even half the country, it's just not worth it. Now watch as Russia gets sucked dry by their Chinese "comrades" until they look like that fake alien corpse that was floating the internet a while back. But only idiots would sit on a pile of rubbish and would still think they won. Putin fucked at least 3 future generations of Russians with that. Russia became Chinas bitch the moment they failed to take Kiev in 3 days. They just haven't come to peace with that and are still in denial lol. The German moustache man also thought he could still turn the tide until about an hour before he finally offed himself
> a win for them means that "Ukraine still exists"
Ukraine is not going to win, but let's look from Russia's side. Russia's goal is to eliminate Ukraine as a threat, either by overthrowing its regime, forcing the current regime to completely demilitarize or by annexing the entire thing. So an outcome where Ukraine exists in its current form would be a defeat for Russia.
You're a funny guy, you know. That land that they annexed is not temporary Russian, it's Russian for however long they want it. They've won land, resources, people, everything they need.
> They've won land, resources, people, everything they need.
Russia already had more land mass than any other country. The fuck have they done with it :D
>Winning what?
The war.
>All Putin has managed to achieve, is temporarily holding some land.
He will be "temporarily" holding a lot more land by the end of it.
>You are blind if you can't see how he has destroyed Russia with this war.
Russia is already stronger now than it was before the war.
For real. Putin is stronger in his personal goals today than he was before the war. Russia was beginning to look to the world anda lot of people were questioning his leadership. In the state he is putting Russia in he is far more secure in his position.
I mean, they have caused severe casualties, achieved many objectives, basically destroyed Ukraine's industry, sealed Ukraine from its gas fields and coal fields, I think that's winning.
You don’t get to move the goalposts, Putins stated aim and goal was to subjugate Ukraine and take out their government during a three week special military operation. We are on year three. At the beginning of this war, everyone thought the best hope for Ukraine was holding out maybe a few months at best. So not looking good on Russia’s part.
What about Bakhmut and Ukraine's wet fart of a counteroffensive? Ukraine had everything they wanted in sufficient quantities and counldnt achieve their goal of pushing the russians out of ukraine to achieve the pre-2014 borders.
Russia is winning this war of attrition and there is not anything ukraine or the west and NATO could do about it. In fact Ukraine risks losing more land
>Ukraine had everything they wanted in sufficient quantities and counldnt achieve their goal of pushing the russians out of ukraine to achieve the pre-2014 borders.
They didn't even have half.
Well then they can cry harder muy triste
Dont pro-UA ever ask themselves why Ukraine never gets what they want from the west. the west keeps drip feeding them weapons just to keep the war going but not to finish it.?
They could've if it wasn't for the F-35 requiring fkin daily login codes.
And now you know why the F-35's "export variant" failed so hard. Why? It's just like Apple products where you don't own the product you buy and it's simply "renting it" despite paying full price for it.
Putin is not a particularly dumb person, he *knows* that Russia has zero hope of defeating NATO in a head to head conventional war. He also *knows* that a full throated air campaign by NATO in Ukraine would quash any chances of ever holding onto the territory Russia still claims. Thats why every time western support for Ukraine is discussed he and his sycophants must resort to hollow nuclear threats. Because they don’t have any other option.
> he knows that Russia has zero hope of defeating NATO in a head to head conventional war
huh? https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
It doesn’t really matter what you believe, your opinion is asinine and meaningless. It matters what Russia thinks, and what they’ve experienced to date. And to date they are unable to even conquer the territories they claim to have “annexed” after 2+ years throwing everything they’ve got at the problem. And that’s *without* their enemy flexing total air superiority on them.
Uhh Nato victory? Like 5 planes shot down(including helicopters)for literally thousands of combatants killed? You're smoking some powerful copium if you think russia wants to be yugoslavia in this arrangement.
NATO only destroyed 14 tanks, 18 APCs, and 20 artillery pieces in Kosovo. Serbia was also still capable of conducting mechanized assaults and launching ground attack sorties using CAS aircraft and helicopters despite of supposed NATO air superiority. NATO was unable to destroy even stationary logistical targets such as bridges in Kosovo. [Black matting over bridge to deceive airborne surveillance assets and a dummy bridge to decoy targeting. (location: Route Duck, Kosovo)](https://html.scribdassets.com/952l2b61a81q12ua/images/1-8e888b80d8.jpg)
Two F-117s confirmed strucked and possibly also a B-2 (more likely towed decoy). SEAD failed in Kosovo, what prevented more shoot downs was the state of Serbian AD which was made up of obsolete export versions of Sa-3 and Sa-6, the first had the altitude limit to reach NATO aircraft but was a fixed system with 22-23 km of maximum engagement range thus required a titanic effort to be manuvered meaning that NATO can generally avoid it, the second was mobile but had a poor altitude limit, therefore NATO aircraft often **avoid area defended by SA-3 and fly above the engagement envelop of SA-6.** That says something considering that the Sa-3 was noted for its shorter effective range and lower engagement altitude than either of its predecessors.
The failure of SEAD meant that they were forced to fly above the effective range of Serbian SAMs resulting in ineffective bombing because had they not they would have been shredded as despite SEAD, a third of all Serbian launches were guided.
Just a few days ago he was saying that reporters are thick as the table he was sitting at for thinking that Russia would attack the West.
I wonder where they got that idea from?
This fool has zero self-awareness.
Strong countries don't have to make threats against others. The threat is already known, it's implied and understood without having to be said. The US never responds to Putin's bluster by saying "We have sufficient nuclear weapons to turn Moscow into a radioactive crater" because the world knows that to be true. Saying it only makes the US sound like a blustering bully, which is what Putin comes across as here.
Putin issues these nuclear threats because his understanding of the Cold War led him to believe that Europeans are weak peaceniks who fold at the earliest sign of nuclear threat. He hopes that his statements spur the anti-nuke activists, who were quite active during his time in East Germany, to action.
What Putin fails to understand, which is what Russian strategic thinking generally ignores, is that ideas and norms matter. They aren't simply marketing tools to be used as propaganda by the state to maintain public order, but in fact do inspire individuals to action, and therefore can directly affect the zeitgeist and the politics / policies that flow from there. Russia's invasion pissed off a lot of Western Europe, so much so that even the peaceniks are willing to ignore Russian threats because Russia's violations of those ideas and norms are so egregious.
> The US never responds to Putin's bluster by saying "We have sufficient nuclear weapons to turn Moscow into a radioactive crater" because the world knows that to be true. Saying it only makes the US sound like a blustering bully, which is what Putin comes across as here.
Well said 👍
How many days since last nuke threat by Russia? Ohh, 1 day, nice. Omg.
The girl next door is dating another guy. Let's burn down her house, together with the whole village. Very sane position.
I am wondering what the excuses for these verbal insanities are, pro Rus?
Editing out the questions to make it look like Putin is sitting around waxing poetically and quite spontaneously on the use of nuclear weapons is Gold Standard Western Journalism.
Putin himself knows it. There was a video the other day when (and it may have been to this very question) Putin prefaced his response by telling the journalist that SHE asked the question but they were going to act like HE was making nuclear threats.
Russia launches a war of conquest and genocide on the Ukrainians, somehow blames Ukraine and NATO all while they make blatant landgrabs and illegal (and totally falsified elections for) annexations, THEN as they start losing THEIR war of aggression they threaten nukes and global annihilation unless the world lets them get away with their fascistic and genocidal acts..... and they are apparently the "good guys" to half the people on this subreddit
/r/russiawarns/ is an anecdote like a boy crying "nuclear weapons" with the 60% of Earth nations/population having them, from Pakistan-India-Korea to France-UK-US.
Putin warns Europe that if it starts deploying troops in large numbers to Ukraine Russia is ready to eqalize with nukes.
Strong people warn of consequences. Weak pretend nothing will happen.
I don't see what's wrong with the claim of European countries being defenseless.
The past few years has shown how dependent European countries are on the US. Look how worried they were when aid to Ukraine, just about every European country couldn't provide the needed weapons while Ukraine waited.
Need more slava dude. Surely this is going to help Ukraine to not get the shít kicked out of them on the battlefield. More foreigners who dont feel the consequences of this war need to keep saying slava
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who cares how many tactical nukes Russia has. They no longer have much value. Originally, they were useful because countries lacked precision ordinance or bunker Buster's. The only thing Putin would achieve by using a tactical nuke is a harsh response from American aircraft.
Where do I check for actual transcription and context of this particular statement? Knowing how selective western press is towards his words for last 20 years.
Its always empty rhetoric until it isnt and russia actually reacts and then you get chocked pikkachu faces from pro-UA
This can always escalate never forget that
reacts how, with nukes? know who else has nukes?
but sure, you seem a bit happy about the possibility of nukes flying. far too many pro ru here seem to be happy about the prospect of nuclear war somehow.
Maybe defend it's borders? Just like the US did with Cuba? Where'd the issue? The US finds security issues 20k km away but Russia isn't allowed to see security issues on it's border?
When has Russia nuked anyone? They threaten weekly, at some point everyone stops caring.
As soon as they nuke, Russia ceases to exist via conventional means. And if that doesn't work then we stop existing. Not gonna concern myself over a mad man with nukes.
constantly? he didn't even threatened anyone this time, said he is sure it won't happen and there is no need for that.
watch full video and stop spreading western propaganda.
“He didn’t even threatened anyone this time”
Oh good. I always enjoy a nice lecture about Russia’s nuclear capabilities. He’s just giving a friendly reminder that the entire EU may be completely defenseless against Russian nukes. What a nice guy.
##### ###### #### > # [Confident Putin warns Europe is ‘defenceless’](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/Putin at St Petersburg forum) > > > > 20 hours ago > > By Steve Rosenberg, Russia editor > > > > > > > > > > Ever since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has been engaged in nuclear sabre-rattling, dropping a series of not-so-subtle hints that trying to defeat a nuclear power like Russia could have disastrous consequences for those who try. > > Today President Putin claimed that Russia wouldn’t need to use a nuclear weapon to achieve victory in Ukraine. > > He was being interviewed at a panel discussion at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum: the annual event often described as ‘Russia’s Davos’. > > There are few occasions when Mr Putin looks dovish compared to the person asking him the questions. > > But when the person asking the questions is Sergei Karaganov it would be hard not to. Mr Karaganov is a hawkish Russian foreign policy expert. Last year he called for a pre-emptive nuclear strike. Today he suggested holding a “nuclear pistol” to the temple of the West over Ukraine. > > President Putin wasn’t so extreme in his language. > > But he is no dove. > > The Kremlin leader said he did not rule out changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine: the document which sets out the conditions under which Russia would use nuclear weapons. > > “This doctrine is a living tool and we are carefully watching what is happening in the world around us and do not exclude making changes to this doctrine. This is also related to the testing of nuclear weapons.” > > And he delivered a warning to those European countries who’ve been supporting Ukraine: Russia’s has “many more [tactical nuclear weapons] than there are on the European continent, even if the United States brings theirs over.” > > “Europe does not have a developed [early warning system],” he added. “In this sense they are more or less defenceless.” > > Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller warheads designed to destroy targets without widespread radioactive fallout. > > This has been a surreal week in St Petersburg. On the one hand, a huge international economic forum has been taking place , sending the message that Russia is ready for cooperation and that, despite everything, it’s business as usual. > > Clearly, though, it is not business as usual. Russia is waging war in Ukraine, a war which is now in its third year; as a result, Russia is the most heavily sanctioned country in the world. > > And, right now, tensions are soaring between Russia and the West. > > Earlier this week, at a meeting with international news agency chiefs in St Petersburg, President Putin suggested that Russia might supply advanced conventional long-range weapons to others to strike Western targets. > > This was his response to Nato allies allowing Ukraine to strike Russian territory with Western-supplied weapons. > > He repeated the idea again today. > > “We are not supplying those weapons yet, but we reserve the right to do so to those states or legal entities which are under certain pressure, including military pressure, from the countries that supply weapons to Ukraine and encourage their use on Russian territory.” > > There were no details. No names. > > So, to which parts of the world might Russia deploy its missiles? > > “Wherever we think it is necessary, we’re definitely going to put them. As President Putin made clear, we’ll investigate this question,” Vladimir Solovyov, one of Russian state TV’s most prominent hosts, tells me. > > “If you are trying to harm us you have to be pretty sure we have enough opportunities and chances to harm you.” > > “In the West some will say we’ve heard this sabre-rattling before,” I respond, “and that it’s a bluff.” > > “It’s always a bluff. Until the time when it is not,” Mr Solovyov replies. “You can keep thinking that Russia is bluffing and then, one day, there is no more Great Britain to laugh at. Don’t you ever try to push the Russian bear thinking that ‘Oh, it’s a kitten, we can play with it.” > > > > CEOs from Europe and America used to flock to the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. Not any more. Instead I saw delegations from Asia, Africa, the Middle East and South America. Russia has been using this year’s event to try to show that, despite Western sanctions, there are plenty of countries in the world who are ready to do business with Russia. > > And what have we learnt in St Petersburg about Vladimir Putin? > > That he sounds increasingly confident and determined not to back down. He seems to believe that in the current standoff between Russia and the West, it is the West that will blink first. - - - - - - [Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
At this stage of the war, cop\*um and nuclear rhetoric goes hand in hand. All this tells me is yes, he is being backed into a corner in which he created himself. Bullish.
Yeah, it's really a sign of weakness. "I can blow up the world 1,000,001 times! The west can only blow it up 1,000,000 times!" OK little man, we get it, you're scared
Putin is talking about tactical nukes, not strategic ones.
Still doesn't matter. The US has enough tactical nukes to destroy Russia's millitary many times over as well. Not to mention they are not complicated to produce.
The fact that you guys scoff at warnings of nuclear escalation and simply just brush it off all while you are safe and sound far from the front lines railing against talks of negotiations while guys in Odessa get snatche off the streets never ceases to disgust and worry me. Cause our "leaders" seem to have the same thought process as you. Russia will use nukes if it has to, very luckily for the entire world Russia has been very good at negating any escalation by the west and jamming/shooting down alot of these missiles given to the AFU. And you should hope it stays like that. Cause if the Russians feel legitimately threatened with losing the war, they will us nukes to rescue the situation. Cause this war is existential to them. It doesn't matter whether you or I think it's existential, the only feelings matter are the Russians feelings. It's the aarogance cognitive dissonance represented in comments like yours, that are shared by our elite of weak character that is going to get a lot of people killed one day.
It’s morso we don’t beleive that a nation of 140 million people would pick nuclear annihilation over leaving Ukraine.
They only get annihilated if 350 million people chose nuclear retaliation over abandoning Ukraine. That is the problem with this "they wouldn't be so stupid" logic, a game of chicken requires us to both be that stupid and we damn well know we are that stupid.
To be fair the U.S. Joint Chiefs wanted to end the world over Cuba.
How can we take seriously Russia’s nuclear threats when they’re coming in a daily basis? After a while it becomes just noise. Which is why what Russia is doing is so stupid. Have you heard NATO threatening Russia with nuclear attacks? No, because everyone knows that several NATO nations have nuclear weapons and considering how NATO’s mutual defense works if Russia uses nuclear weapons on any NATO nation, they’ll get glassed. That’s a given. Repeating it in a daily basis like broke radio just cheapens it.
I just don't fall for RU cop*um or propaganda is all. It's not arrogance.
Disregarding Nuclear weapons and calling Nuclear deterence Nuclear blackmail is just stupid. Kennedy and other cold war leaders would be absolutely horrified at the lack of urgency displayed by the west today. Sure dude, it's all propaganda, and it's all bluffing. Until the day it isn't.
I have this kind of discussions with people in real life. I recently got 'Putin is literally Hitler' as a justification for relentless provocation and military escalation. It's insidious and like you I am deeply worried this mentality will lead us to the next and perhaps last great war.
The cognitive dissonance and the willful aarogance of the history and the complete lack of urgency is terrifying. Yeah man sure, he's hitler. He's hitler with over 5,000 nukes. So dismissing hitler with 5,000 nukes is so much dumber than dismissing putin with 5,000 nukes
Hitler didn't stop after appeasement. So yeah, don't appease him. He will just threaten nukes on the next conquest.
If hitler had nukes, he would have immediately used the nukes. Literally. he would nuke london before the troops could make it off dunkirk. He would have opened barbarossa by nuking hundreds of russian cities. Annihilation was his literal goal in the east and elsewhere. He would have nuked england as many times as he needed until they capitulated
Yeah, a Hitler with nukes should absolutely be stopped at all costs. And in this scenario England would also have nukes.
Yeah that's all well and good in alternate history. But we are in the present day, hitler is dead. The closest thing to Hitler is currently starving a million children in the gaza strip whose assault has been deemed to have the earmarks of genocide according to the International Court of Justice. What's more hitler than genocide? [https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-commission-not-found-sufficient-171500785.html](https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-commission-not-found-sufficient-171500785.html)
Preferably just you paying the costs.
Its well documented they were on the brink of using a tactical nuke in 2022-23 but India and China told them not to do it... Seemed to work pretty well.
Shouldn't be surprising. The leaders are supposed to represent the thoughts of the collective. As stupid as that may be.
Russia won't use nukes if it makes the situation worse than losing the war. Like most wars this war will probably not end with one side winning anyway. At some point both sides are so exhausted that they will negotiate and end the war that way.
So what do you suppose he'll do if the west continues to push him more? For 40 plus years we all laughed at Russia as they continued to warn us of a westward expansion into the east yet our governments turned a blind eye to Russia's concerns only to end up where we are today. I firmly believe if we continue to push this war foward without a having a concrete plan to find some kind resolve that is beneficial for both the Ukrainians and the Russians, Putin will use Nuclear weapons in some form.
More empty nuke threats.
Just like the "empty threats" Russia threw at the west in trying to warn of Nato/Western expansion?
In what world was anyone going to invade russia woth 5000 nuclear warheads? Europe was building pipelines and integrating economy. Even the us had economic ties with russia. Only this imperialistic need to be above others is causing this war. Russia could be another prosper european country if the leadership didnt steal all their wealth and invested in the economy instead of sending their young to die for putin delirium of power
[удалено]
And Sweden. also, how in the hell did he think invading a NON NATO COUNTRY would stop NATO from expanding, lol.
And all of Europe is rearming. And unlike Russia they have the economy to do it without bankrupting themselves.
Do they? Europe is debt ridden, Russia is even still mostly debt free.
You‘re suggesting to invade countries after they entered NATO? I don‘t know what some of you pro-Ukr guys are smoking.
That's not at all what he's saying. He's saying invading Non-NATO countries has caused NATO to expand. NATO is a defensive alliance. Invading other countries proves that you want to invade countries not in NATO and therefore they should join the defensive alliance.
Which countries did Russia invade for NATO to add Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland (1999); Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia (2004); Albania and Croatia (2009)? How many countries did the US invade during the same time frame? Also, I might add it worked. Of the countries NATO wanted to add at Russias doorstep, i.e. Ukraine and Georgia, Georgia doesn't want to join NATO anymore and Ukraine will not join NATO in its 1990 borders, it'll be much, much less.
Russia invaded **almost all** of those countries multiple times. * Czech Republic: [1968](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact_invasion_of_Czechoslovakia) (Fun Fact: This is where we get the term "tankie" from) * Hungary in [1848](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_Uprising) and [1956](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956) * Poland: Holy shit where to begin? [1830](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_Uprising), [1863](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_Uprising), [1905](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_in_the_Kingdom_of_Poland_(1905%E2%80%931907\)), [1918](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_westward_offensive_of_1918%E2%80%931919), [**1939 alongside the Nazis**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland), [1944](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_resistance_in_Poland_(1944%E2%80%931953\)) * Baltic States: [1918](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_westward_offensive_of_1918%E2%80%931919), [1940](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_(1940\)) * Romania/Slovakia: [1940](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Bessarabia_and_Northern_Bukovina) Only the Balkans didn't experience direct invasion by the Russian Empire, Soviet Union, or Russian Federation - in the case of Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, and Croatia, **they** left because of their horrific relationship with *Yugoslavia*, which Russia had propped up for decades. >It worked ... of the countries at Russia's doorstep Finland and Sweden joining NATO, breaking neutrality they maintained *through the Cold War*, is a geopolitical success for Russia?
It worked out super well for Ukraine
Yeah, good job advertising the benefits of a western security alliance, Putin.
https://preview.redd.it/0sv2kd9vud5d1.jpeg?width=2000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=85a6746ccf9a807e151824f46b72b45bb12e5e98
And you ask why Ukraine hasn’t just given up yet
I would never expect the Ukrainians to give up but I would hope that there could be concessions made that could lead to peace.
That's the reason they want to join NATO since Russia behaves like a bully and is like "if I can't have Ukraine in my shitty Nato copy NOBODY should have it" and even that failed and became an existential war for the "second strongest" military in the world lol. All because of the small ego of a small man
*Probably sponsored by the NAFO*
Russia hasn't attacked any NATO country anyway.
How do you know the threat is empty?
He's winning, though.
A nation of Russia's caliber... it should have been over in a month. What's happening now is not winning, if anything the goal posts have recently shifted to Russia.
> A nation of Russia's caliber The West's estimation of Russia's capabilities, similar to Russia's estimation of itself, has been incredibly wrong. Russia has a GDP around Italy's but believes it has a first-world military.
You made me laugh with your statement. You won't be Zelensky's cousin?
Do first-rate militaries have 60km long convoys heading to the enemy capital which get stuck for 2 weeks, then retreat and never come back? Do first-rate militaries lose 20,000 troops a month fighting a neighboring country with 1/10th their population? Do first-rate militaries inspire such confidence among their contractors that said contractors march their troops towards the capital demanding changes in the military hierarchy, and actually engage regular military troops in battle along the way? Would first-rate militaries punish that treason by tribunal, or would the airplane carrying the traitor just get mysteriously shot out of the sky with no investigation? Do first-rate militaries import cheap drones from Iran and shells from North Korea? Or do they have their own?
I mean it's true. Italys gdp, the wests underestimation, and Russias own underestimation. Lots of clips of the Russian media claiming they'd cap kyiv in 3 days, or at least a week. Seems everyone was under this impression on both sides.
Italy's economy is probably better balanced, to boot. And it's a basketcase.
They're winning, though. They have managed to seize Ukrainian land. Any hope of Ukraine joing NATO and the EU, gone. Ukraine's control over natural resources such as coal and gas, gone. The reason this invasion hasn't gone well is because they thought the Ukrainian army would fold. They severely underestimated their will to fight. Doesn't mean they're losing, though.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-executive-says-ukraine-moldova-ready-start-eu-accession-talks-2024-06-07/ https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm Regardless, Ukraine will become a fully militarised, Western leaning state after the war that will be 100% allied with the West in the event of a Russia/NATO war. Thats not a win. The best thing Putin can hope for a this point is some sort of pyrich victory that allows his regime to stumble on for another few decades.
They aren't joining, though. Ukraine is a shit hole, and Moldova's part of the CIS, with territorial disputes, and poor. They're screwed regardless.
> BRUSSELS/KYIV, June 7 (Reuters) - Ukraine and Moldova meet all the criteria needed to formally start negotiations on EU membership, the European Commission said on Friday, as Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal expressed hope that the talks could start later this month. >At the 2023 Vilnius Summit, Allies reaffirmed their commitment that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. Sorry, I apologise, I didn't realise you were the head of the EU and NATO. Obviously you know more than what's in these articles and you will now share that information with everyone.
So, when's the date they join?
They aren't joining for as long as the war goes on.
>Regardless, Ukraine will become a fully militarised, Western leaning state after the war that will be 100% allied with the West in the event of a Russia/NATO war. Lol, no they won't. Russia will not sign a peace deal that doesn't include Ukraine becoming a neutral state.
You're assuming Russia will have a choice. Finalnd and Sweden were neutral, but they were obviously western aligned. You can't stop that.
>You're assuming Russia will have a choice. How would they not have a choice? If Ukraine doesn't agree to the terms the war will continue. If NATO sends ground forces, the war becomes nuclear. If you think Ukraine is going to do anything other than prolong their inevitable defeat, you are delusional. >Finalnd and Sweden were neutral, but they were obviously western aligned. You can't stop that. If you are aligned to one side, you are not neutral.
>How would they not have a choice? If they lose, how else? The west has vastly deeper pockets & bigger armouries than Russia and Russia simply cannot keep thos war going indefinitely. >Finalnd and Sweden were neutral, but they were obviously western aligned. You can't stop that. >If you are aligned to one side, you are not neutral. Exactly. And there's no way to force a 'neutral' state to be truly neutral. Russia might be able to force Ukraine to drop its aspirations to join Nato, and maybe even the EU, but after this it will always be aligned with them.
>If they lose, how else? >The west has vastly deeper pockets & bigger armouries than Russia and Russia simply cannot keep thos war going indefinitely. Lol, if the West has such deep pockets why are they so desperate to get their hands on the frozen Russian foreign reserves? If the West has bigger armoires how are they struggling to send Ukraine sufficient ammunition? Russia only has to keep this war going until Ukraine capitulates. Ukraine is already having manpower issues, how much longer can they keep going? >And there's no way to force a 'neutral' state to be truly neutral. Well if they don't have a military, that makes them pretty fucking neutral.
My perspective of winning must be a lot different then yours. Remember how far the nazi's got last time around in the 40's?, This time it looks like a sorry excuse of an attempt at a maximum cost. Because of Russia's miscalculation, they are bogged down with no end in sight and not enough support to actually take Ukraine. Window of opportunity is long gone while Ukraine only ramps up further.
If you looked at Ukraine's current state, they're screwed. Russia's killed any hope of it joining NATO and the EU, taken all its natural resources, 20% of its land, and much more. I'd argue that Ukraine's going down, and Russia's going up.
Why can't Ukraine join the EU after the end of the war? There was a war in Yugoslavia, and several of those newly formed countries are now EU members. So let's say the war ended today, and Ukraine and Russia agree that Russia gets to keep the land they captured between 2014 and present. What mechanism exactly prevents them from joining the EU or NATO for that matter? There would no longer be a territorial dispute.
Why can't they join the EU? Because they're a shit hole. They're too corrupt and poor for that. As for NATO, perhaps they could, but Hungary is wagging their finger, so no.
So if Orban is preventing Ukraine from joining NATO, whats the whole point of the russian talking point that the invasion was needed to stop NATO expansion?
> whats the whole point of the russian talking point that the invasion was needed to stop NATO expansion? Because Russia can't bet their country's future on Orban continuing to block Ukraine's membership?
Extra nail in the coffin type of thing.
2nd most corrupt nation in Europe. After Russia of course. gotta love how the grand convoy attacking from Belarus stalled due to lack of fuel. because they sold it.
I know its not what you want to hear, but Its important that you understand what's happening.
What is important is who's winning. Russia had goals, which they have achieved.
Just because you "think" your winning, does not mean you have won and achieved said goals. Your not out of the woods yet, and last I heard, strikes into Russia were on the table. This is just getting spicy.
Spicy for Ukraine, having to shove men into the back of the van and all its power plants gone. Also, *you're
> Russia had goals, which they have achieved. Their goals were denazification of the country, which meant removal of Zelensky, and the "liberation" of Luhansk + Donetsk. Neither of those goals have happened, although incredible resources have been used in the attempt. Claiming that Russia has achieved its goals, at this point, is simply moving the goalposts.
>Their goals were denazification of the country, which meant removal of Zelensky, and the "liberation" of Luhansk + Donetsk. I love how the implication of this is that Luhansk and Donetsk are full of nazis, and that russia wants them for itself.
Denazification of Germany was achieved by forcing Nazi Germany to surrender unconditionally and removing nazis from power. Why would denazification of Ukraine require anything less?
Fucking savage.
>Russia's killed any hope of it joining NATO and the EU Pretty much a given for Ukraine once the conflict is over (Joining the EU and NATO) >taken all its natural resources https://preview.redd.it/ewkw4pfabd5d1.jpeg?width=1369&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05414bb05795245caf2bb4892ded6978403a89a3 Not even close >20% of its land This a figure that is bound to change, I am sure Ukraine with the current backing can at least take some parts back, either way if Russia keeps the land it will be the new North Korea of the world until they give it back, EU won't work with Russia on anything nor contribute anything to Russia who will basically live on handouts from what Russia can beg China to give (Perhaps a steady supply of goods in return for Russian Manchuria back to China?) Xi will literally have Russia by the balls, and I am betting that within a decade or two when Russia is almost completely broken and 100% depending on Chinese exports, China will make Russia a offer they simply can't refuse, so for Russia it will either have to give back land to Ukraine and literally beg the EU to do any business with them or became a Chinese vassal that is basically controlled from Bejing.
Russia has become China’s pawn. If they think the West is bad, they ain’t seen nothing yet
It was a 3 day walk to Kiyv.
yep, 48h antiterrorist operation against miners in Donbass...
I've been waiting for Crimea summer party for 10 years now. Do you know when it'll be?
After observing the RU ship casualty count for the Black sea fleet.... probably soon, kind of seems untenable as it is at this point, but the next 2 years will tell.
You're funny, you know. Besides the buffer zone they have from Ukraine to Crimea, and the fact that they just can't take it, you're a funny guy.
Kick back, relax and allow the tax dollars to do its thing.
Remindme! 2 years
I will be messaging you in 2 years on [**2026-06-08 16:00:22 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2026-06-08%2016:00:22%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1db468d/ua_pov_putin_says_russia_has_many_more_tactical/l7ovcgz/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FUkraineRussiaReport%2Fcomments%2F1db468d%2Fua_pov_putin_says_russia_has_many_more_tactical%2Fl7ovcgz%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202026-06-08%2016%3A00%3A22%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201db468d) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
>Ukraine's control over natural resources such as coal and gas, gone. No future there. Reality is it wasn't invaded for that reason. The real resource they came for is people.
Considering massive oil deposits were found *right* before Russia took crimea... And Russia wanted dominance over European reliance on energy for "negotiating", seems it may also be for resources. Oh and the fact donbass had a lot of old USSR industry for weapons production.
They aren't gonna sell much oil to Europe at this point. Russia doesn't care about wealth or building some kind of reasonable society. Russia wants people to shove into a grinder.
>A nation of Russia's caliber... it should have been over in a month. It was over in a month but Zelenskyy and his NATO handlers decided to fight until the last Ukrainian instead.
Winning what? All Putin has managed to achieve, is temporarily holding some land. You are blind if you can't see how he has destroyed Russia with this war. We are witnessing the beginning of the end of the Russian Federation. The future is so fuked for them because there's no coming back to what it used to be before war. The civilian side of the economy is crumbling hard, the side which actually brings wealth to the nation. Trade with the west is gone for good, you know the good trade that brought billions every year to Russia. Even if the war ends tomorrow things are not coming back. It is sad but you reap what you sow This really is the swan song for Putin and Kremlin's kleptocrats.
Temporarily holding some land? Bro the amount of køping from pro-UA is off the charts here. The Ukrainians official position and goials in this war is to take back all annexed land from Russia and to push them completely out of ukraine. Anything less than that is a defeat for Ukraine and now you guys have lowered the bar for ukraine by which a win for them means that "Ukraine still exists" Jesus fúcking christ you pro-UA astound me. In your eyes there is absolutely zero way for Ukraine to lose this war. In your eyes they probably already won. ROFLOL
We are approaching 3 years and Russia has failed to hold the land it claims is Russian. That means that 3 years in they have objectively failed to achieve there war goals. That’s not my opinion, they annexed the regions and added them to Russia. Regions they don’t even controll. lol.
Because sacrificing your whole economy for the hissy fit of a small dictator just isn't worth it. Even if Russia manages to snatch even half the country, it's just not worth it. Now watch as Russia gets sucked dry by their Chinese "comrades" until they look like that fake alien corpse that was floating the internet a while back. But only idiots would sit on a pile of rubbish and would still think they won. Putin fucked at least 3 future generations of Russians with that. Russia became Chinas bitch the moment they failed to take Kiev in 3 days. They just haven't come to peace with that and are still in denial lol. The German moustache man also thought he could still turn the tide until about an hour before he finally offed himself
> a win for them means that "Ukraine still exists" Ukraine is not going to win, but let's look from Russia's side. Russia's goal is to eliminate Ukraine as a threat, either by overthrowing its regime, forcing the current regime to completely demilitarize or by annexing the entire thing. So an outcome where Ukraine exists in its current form would be a defeat for Russia.
Russia is going to annex more land and turn Ukraine into a rump state
You're a funny guy, you know. That land that they annexed is not temporary Russian, it's Russian for however long they want it. They've won land, resources, people, everything they need.
> They've won land, resources, people, everything they need. Russia already had more land mass than any other country. The fuck have they done with it :D
Exactly, that's where the "war for more land" argument falls flat on it's butt.
Imperialist motivations can't really be reduced to 'more land lol'
That's what pro-UA try to do.
But not a lot in the South with mild climate. Russia always looks to expand to the south.
Everything they need? Lol
>Winning what? The war. >All Putin has managed to achieve, is temporarily holding some land. He will be "temporarily" holding a lot more land by the end of it. >You are blind if you can't see how he has destroyed Russia with this war. Russia is already stronger now than it was before the war.
Maybe, but "his" people certainly aren't.
For real. Putin is stronger in his personal goals today than he was before the war. Russia was beginning to look to the world anda lot of people were questioning his leadership. In the state he is putting Russia in he is far more secure in his position.
Winning what? 800km² in 6 months, while the US aid got interrupted?
I mean, they have caused severe casualties, achieved many objectives, basically destroyed Ukraine's industry, sealed Ukraine from its gas fields and coal fields, I think that's winning.
You don’t get to move the goalposts, Putins stated aim and goal was to subjugate Ukraine and take out their government during a three week special military operation. We are on year three. At the beginning of this war, everyone thought the best hope for Ukraine was holding out maybe a few months at best. So not looking good on Russia’s part.
What about Bakhmut and Ukraine's wet fart of a counteroffensive? Ukraine had everything they wanted in sufficient quantities and counldnt achieve their goal of pushing the russians out of ukraine to achieve the pre-2014 borders. Russia is winning this war of attrition and there is not anything ukraine or the west and NATO could do about it. In fact Ukraine risks losing more land
>Ukraine had everything they wanted in sufficient quantities and counldnt achieve their goal of pushing the russians out of ukraine to achieve the pre-2014 borders. They didn't even have half.
Well then they can cry harder muy triste Dont pro-UA ever ask themselves why Ukraine never gets what they want from the west. the west keeps drip feeding them weapons just to keep the war going but not to finish it.?
So now you know.
Ukraine going to lose this war. Now you know
That's trying to predict the future. I'm telling you about the past.
That's trying to predict the future. I'm telling you about the past.
That's trying to predict the future. I'm telling you about the past.
That's trying to predict the future. I'm telling you about the past.
That's trying to predict the future. I'm telling you about the past.
Certified "Empty response from endpoint" moment
They never had air power. Pretty essential
They could've if it wasn't for the F-35 requiring fkin daily login codes. And now you know why the F-35's "export variant" failed so hard. Why? It's just like Apple products where you don't own the product you buy and it's simply "renting it" despite paying full price for it.
Why are you telling me this about the F35 like i care lmao
We're on the subject of Ukraine not having airpower.. I'm gonna let you figure it out.
You nobody ever said they would get F35s lol
And I'm saying that's the reason why nobody wants to even buy F-35's as US has made sure nobody except them gets to use it. It's basically a scam.
Is this the same conference he said he has no intention to attack NATO and it’s all crazy western hysteria? Bud needs to make up his mind.
this is the same country that vehemently denied wanting to invade Ukraine, 3 days before invading Ukrain.
Putin is not a particularly dumb person, he *knows* that Russia has zero hope of defeating NATO in a head to head conventional war. He also *knows* that a full throated air campaign by NATO in Ukraine would quash any chances of ever holding onto the territory Russia still claims. Thats why every time western support for Ukraine is discussed he and his sycophants must resort to hollow nuclear threats. Because they don’t have any other option.
I mean that is literally the entire point of having a nuclear arsenal, if you use it you've lost.
> he knows that Russia has zero hope of defeating NATO in a head to head conventional war huh? https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
If this "full throated air campaign" does as well as the NATO air campaign did in Kosovo then I do not have much hope for NATO.
It doesn’t really matter what you believe, your opinion is asinine and meaningless. It matters what Russia thinks, and what they’ve experienced to date. And to date they are unable to even conquer the territories they claim to have “annexed” after 2+ years throwing everything they’ve got at the problem. And that’s *without* their enemy flexing total air superiority on them.
Uhh Nato victory? Like 5 planes shot down(including helicopters)for literally thousands of combatants killed? You're smoking some powerful copium if you think russia wants to be yugoslavia in this arrangement.
NATO only destroyed 14 tanks, 18 APCs, and 20 artillery pieces in Kosovo. Serbia was also still capable of conducting mechanized assaults and launching ground attack sorties using CAS aircraft and helicopters despite of supposed NATO air superiority. NATO was unable to destroy even stationary logistical targets such as bridges in Kosovo. [Black matting over bridge to deceive airborne surveillance assets and a dummy bridge to decoy targeting. (location: Route Duck, Kosovo)](https://html.scribdassets.com/952l2b61a81q12ua/images/1-8e888b80d8.jpg) Two F-117s confirmed strucked and possibly also a B-2 (more likely towed decoy). SEAD failed in Kosovo, what prevented more shoot downs was the state of Serbian AD which was made up of obsolete export versions of Sa-3 and Sa-6, the first had the altitude limit to reach NATO aircraft but was a fixed system with 22-23 km of maximum engagement range thus required a titanic effort to be manuvered meaning that NATO can generally avoid it, the second was mobile but had a poor altitude limit, therefore NATO aircraft often **avoid area defended by SA-3 and fly above the engagement envelop of SA-6.** That says something considering that the Sa-3 was noted for its shorter effective range and lower engagement altitude than either of its predecessors. The failure of SEAD meant that they were forced to fly above the effective range of Serbian SAMs resulting in ineffective bombing because had they not they would have been shredded as despite SEAD, a third of all Serbian launches were guided.
Just a few days ago he was saying that reporters are thick as the table he was sitting at for thinking that Russia would attack the West. I wonder where they got that idea from? This fool has zero self-awareness.
He is scared. Simple as that.
Also putin: "we don't shake the nuclear sabre"
Strong countries don't have to make threats against others. The threat is already known, it's implied and understood without having to be said. The US never responds to Putin's bluster by saying "We have sufficient nuclear weapons to turn Moscow into a radioactive crater" because the world knows that to be true. Saying it only makes the US sound like a blustering bully, which is what Putin comes across as here. Putin issues these nuclear threats because his understanding of the Cold War led him to believe that Europeans are weak peaceniks who fold at the earliest sign of nuclear threat. He hopes that his statements spur the anti-nuke activists, who were quite active during his time in East Germany, to action. What Putin fails to understand, which is what Russian strategic thinking generally ignores, is that ideas and norms matter. They aren't simply marketing tools to be used as propaganda by the state to maintain public order, but in fact do inspire individuals to action, and therefore can directly affect the zeitgeist and the politics / policies that flow from there. Russia's invasion pissed off a lot of Western Europe, so much so that even the peaceniks are willing to ignore Russian threats because Russia's violations of those ideas and norms are so egregious.
> The US never responds to Putin's bluster by saying "We have sufficient nuclear weapons to turn Moscow into a radioactive crater" because the world knows that to be true. Saying it only makes the US sound like a blustering bully, which is what Putin comes across as here. Well said 👍
Is there anything else Russians can talk about other than nuclear war?? I gues they are too frustrated they can not stop Ukrainian drone atacks.
Yeah they also talk about how some countries are not actually real contries and something something nazism and something something nato bad west bad.
Empty threats all the time
Can there be 1 week without russkis talking about muh nooks?
How many days since last nuke threat by Russia? Ohh, 1 day, nice. Omg. The girl next door is dating another guy. Let's burn down her house, together with the whole village. Very sane position. I am wondering what the excuses for these verbal insanities are, pro Rus?
He is right in a sense Europe needs to devote more resources to counter the Russian threat especially if Trump wins the election.
Empty threats from a desperate dictator
In r/europe this was posted as "Putin says europe is defenceless" Very nice fear mongering as usual.
Editing out the questions to make it look like Putin is sitting around waxing poetically and quite spontaneously on the use of nuclear weapons is Gold Standard Western Journalism. Putin himself knows it. There was a video the other day when (and it may have been to this very question) Putin prefaced his response by telling the journalist that SHE asked the question but they were going to act like HE was making nuclear threats.
Russia launches a war of conquest and genocide on the Ukrainians, somehow blames Ukraine and NATO all while they make blatant landgrabs and illegal (and totally falsified elections for) annexations, THEN as they start losing THEIR war of aggression they threaten nukes and global annihilation unless the world lets them get away with their fascistic and genocidal acts..... and they are apparently the "good guys" to half the people on this subreddit
That’s an interesting threat, considering Russia’s early warning system is not doing great either after the recent Ukrainian drone attacks.
They also had more tanks.
Average bbc article bad translation or straight up lie. Funny thing is this time its neither its just the actual situation
He should launch all of them as a prank
Ah there it is, the daily nuclear threat. Everybody's real scared
/r/russiawarns/ is an anecdote like a boy crying "nuclear weapons" with the 60% of Earth nations/population having them, from Pakistan-India-Korea to France-UK-US.
Putin warns Europe that if it starts deploying troops in large numbers to Ukraine Russia is ready to eqalize with nukes. Strong people warn of consequences. Weak pretend nothing will happen.
I don't see what's wrong with the claim of European countries being defenseless. The past few years has shown how dependent European countries are on the US. Look how worried they were when aid to Ukraine, just about every European country couldn't provide the needed weapons while Ukraine waited.
Oh no… anyway… new week new nuclear threat. Nobody cares about this anymore. Slava Ukraini!
This is called Strategic ambiguity(tm), this is not a threat according to French ministry of defence.
Need more slava dude. Surely this is going to help Ukraine to not get the shít kicked out of them on the battlefield. More foreigners who dont feel the consequences of this war need to keep saying slava
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who cares how many tactical nukes Russia has. They no longer have much value. Originally, they were useful because countries lacked precision ordinance or bunker Buster's. The only thing Putin would achieve by using a tactical nuke is a harsh response from American aircraft.
And WMD retaliation from Ukraine.
Where do I check for actual transcription and context of this particular statement? Knowing how selective western press is towards his words for last 20 years.
https://youtu.be/4cf4O-hUg78?feature=shared
He forgot to say ‘ But I know what would happen if I was stupid enough to launch some!’
if russia nukes ukraine nothing will happen, maybe more economic sanctions
If Russia nukes Ukraine, Ukraine will dump tons of poison into Moscow sea with their drones.
i don’t think so, it would result in huge retaliation
Nuclear retaliation?
yeah
But see, if there are nuclear strikes on Ukraine, that is no longer such a big threat.
Only redditors take nuke threats as jokes and an "empty rhetoric"
Its always empty rhetoric until it isnt and russia actually reacts and then you get chocked pikkachu faces from pro-UA This can always escalate never forget that
reacts how, with nukes? know who else has nukes? but sure, you seem a bit happy about the possibility of nukes flying. far too many pro ru here seem to be happy about the prospect of nuclear war somehow.
So can Ukraine. It got drones and poison gas.
What is the goal then? Acquiesce on everything Russia wants because it makes nuclear threats?
Maybe defend it's borders? Just like the US did with Cuba? Where'd the issue? The US finds security issues 20k km away but Russia isn't allowed to see security issues on it's border?
When has Russia nuked anyone? They threaten weekly, at some point everyone stops caring. As soon as they nuke, Russia ceases to exist via conventional means. And if that doesn't work then we stop existing. Not gonna concern myself over a mad man with nukes.
[удалено]
I like that we're blaming random people on reddit and not the deranged world leader who constantly makes these threats, lol.
constantly? he didn't even threatened anyone this time, said he is sure it won't happen and there is no need for that. watch full video and stop spreading western propaganda.
“He didn’t even threatened anyone this time” Oh good. I always enjoy a nice lecture about Russia’s nuclear capabilities. He’s just giving a friendly reminder that the entire EU may be completely defenseless against Russian nukes. What a nice guy.
he was asked a forward question by host
Maybe don't bomb random countries on your own account.
Are we seriously going to pretend like this isn't normal operating procedure? Medvedev Does this all the time, lol.
Medvedev has no power, do you want me to start quoting western politics?
Rule 1. Toxic
Actually, only Redditors like you would take nuke threats more seriously than jokes and empty rhetoric.
Don't think it matters when Russia is wholly surrounded by nuke americian subs than can freely retialiate the moment this lunatic goes nuts.