Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Nebaki]

Are you saying because the Western world abandoned Poland after WW2 that they would do it again? Second dumbest thing I have now seen posted today.

In the past even Partitions of Poland happened. History shows us atleast how X would act in case of Y or weighs it. Do you think for example greece would decleare instant War against Russia in case of an attack against Poland?

[Vanoi]

In the past even Partitions of Poland happened. History shows us atleast how X would act in case of Y or weighs it. Do you think for example greece would decleare instant War against Russia in case of an attack against Poland?

In the past. It's 2022. History shows us what has happened. It does not accurately predict what my country would do 80 years later. By your logic Germany should be on the path to start the Third World War. Obviously in the past Germany has helped start the previous two. Your logic dictates they would start the Third as well. And yet that makes no sense as Germany in 2022 is not the Germany of 1914 or 1939.

Greece is a member of NATO so thus they are required to come to another members aid in case of attack. Greece did send troops to Afghanistan after the US invoked Article 5. Why not Poland?

[Kyriakos]

Yes it does. It can be considered an armed attack.

Yes I forgot the Korean War, Vietnam War, Soviet-Afghan ect. never happened at all

Are you just going to talk out of your ass this entire time? Claiming there was no war during the Cold War has to be one of the dumbest statements I've seen posted on here.

I like your courage to think others don't get what you said or are so wrong you'd pick it up.

[Nebaki]

In the past. It's 2022. History shows us what has happened. It does not accurately predict what my country would do 80 years later.

Your country is who?

By your logic Germany should be on the path to start the Third World War. Obviously in the past Germany has helped two the previous two. Your logic dictates they would start the Third as well. And yet that makes no sense as Germany in 2022 is not the Germany of 1914 or 1939.

Well Germany lost two World Wars but they didn´t was the sole reason which led to these Wars. But currently Germany is part of an Alliance called NATO and part of EU which is probably the next Global Player to US.

Greece is a member of NATO so thus they are required to come to another members aid in case of attack. Greece did send troops to Afghanistan after the US invoked Article 5. Why not Poland?

Poland even took part in combat missions and lost his own countrymen. What did greece done same as like Japan some humanitarian aid?

[Vanoi]

I like your courage to think others don't get what you said or are so wrong you'd pick it up.

I like how you actually claimed no wars happened during the Cold War right after Nebaki pointed out a war previously during the Cold War.

Your country is who?

America.

Well Germany lost two World Wars but they didn´t was the sole reason which led to these Wars. But currently Germany is part of an Alliance called NATO and part of EU which is probably the next Global Player to US.

Never said Germany was the sole reason those wars started. I said helped start which they did. Are you saying the EU is going to pull a Hitler and invaded it's neighbors to help expand the Ayran race? No? Then I guess you can't compare the EU to Hitler's Germany.

[Poland even took part in combat missions and lost his own countrymen. What did greece done same as like Japan some humanitarian aid?

Greece sent troops to Afghanistan. Funny enough Turkey only sent training advisers and logistical support to Afghanistan. Too scared to do combat missions. Meanwhile Greek soldiers in Afghanistan actually participated in combat unlike the Turks.

[Nebaki]

America.

Should we really...

In the past. It's 2022. History shows us what has happened. It does not accurately predict what my country would do 80 years later.

Check the past of United States and how they act after 80 years later?

Never said Germany was the sole reason those wars started. I said helped start which they did. Are you saying the EU is going to pull a Hitler and invaded it's neighbors to help expand the Ayran race? No? Then I guess you can't compare the EU to Hitler's Germany.

World War I was not pulling a Hitler and expanding the Ayran race. EU is a direct rival to United States of America. Even if there would be no "Hitler" then there would be another one who would had led Germany.

Greece sent troops to Afghanistan. Funny enough Turkey only sent training advisers and logistical support to Afghanistan. Too scared to do combat missions. Meanwhile Greek soldiers in Afghanistan actually participated in combat unlike the Turks.

Those brave greeks even suffered casualties:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Didn´t know that they using instead of their own an Turkish Flag. Must be an false flag operation like this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Too scared to do combat missions. Meanwhile Greek soldiers in Afghanistan actually participated in combat unlike the Turks.

Yeah they are still their in active duty not like some other countries that just abandoned them:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Vanoi]

Should we really...

Should what?

Check the past of United States and how they act after 80 years later?

What did my country do 80 years ago that makes it so they wouldn't defend Poland today?

World War I was not pulling a Hitler and expanding the Ayran race. EU is a direct rival to United States of America. Even if there would be no "Hitler" then there would be another one who would had led Germany.

Germany was also an imperialist and colony power in 1914. The EU is not the Germany of 1914 either. the EU is dozens of countries with dozens of governments with dozens of different views. The EU becoming like Germany in 1914 or 1939 utterly ignores vast amounts of history and is outright ridiculous.

It's like saying Turkey is a threat to Europe because they are a successor state of the Ottoman Empire who threatened and frequently invaded Europe. Your logic makes no sense.

Those brave greeks even suffered casualties:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Didn´t know that they using instead of their own an Turkish Flag. Must be an false Flag

15 casualties. You are seriously bragging about Turkey losing 15 men? Meanwhile the Greeks sent 3300 men to Afghanistan and again, actually participated in combat missions unlike Turkey. Turkey does not compare to what the Greeks contributed in Afghanistan. Even the Dutch lost more men in Afghanistan than Turkey.

[Loyt]

Yes because Russia is going to ask my fellow Americans before he launches. They don't have much of a choice

If Russia launches at Ukraine, America will have a choice. And it will be self preserving choice of not start nuclear exchange, i'm sure.

Nuking Kiev invokes Article 5. Any radioactive fallout will move across Ukraine into NATO territory. Not a stretch to say a Russian nuclear attack has pushed radioactive fallout into a NATO country this causing to call for Article 5 that they have been attacked due Russians nuclear weapons.

They already said that they use conventional forces in retaliation. Yours interpretation of Article 5 is irrelevant. Radioactive cloud is but a little nuisance compared to full blown nuclear war.

Besides that Russia has no real reason to do so. Why nuke Kiev? All you end up doing is making yourself a pariah of the world. China isn't going to support Russia if they nuke Kiev. Not a single scenario of Russia using nukes makes come out ahead or win in the end.

True. But Putin is not very prone to rational and thoughtful decisions recently. Anything is possible.

[Vanoi]

If Russia launches at Ukraine, America will have a choice. And it will be self preserving choice of not start nuclear exchange, i'm sure.

At that precise moment? Sure. Until Poland enacts Article 5 over Russian nuclear fallout sickening hundreds of not thousands of it's people. After that, all bets are off.

They already said that they use conventional forces in retaliation. Yours interpretation of Article 5 is irrelevant. Radioactive cloud is but a little nuisance compared to full blown nuclear war.
True. But Putin is not very prone to rational and thoughtful decisions recently. Anything is possible.

Article 5 being is important as it would involve all members of the alliance. Any conventional attacks conducted before would simply be from the US. Big difference between the US conducting strikes and all of NATO doing it.

But this is irrelevant as Putin isn't going to launch a nuclear attack. No plausible reason for him to do so other than you saying he's irrational. I think rational enough to realize using nuclear weapons wouldn't help him.

[Loyt]

At that precise moment? Sure. Until Poland enacts Article 5 over Russian nuclear fallout sickening hundreds of not thousands of it's people. After that, all bets are off.

What bets are off? America will launch its nukes and prepare to receive same from Russia? Because Poland enacts article 5 (if Poland even do it in the first place)? Seriously?
No. That won't happen unless there is direct and immediate threat of nuclear strike at USA (or at least Poland).

Article 5 being is important as it would involve all members of the alliance. Any conventional attacks conducted before would simply be from the US. Big difference between the US conducting strikes and all of NATO doing it.

There might be strikes from NATO. With conventional weapons, not nuclear ones. NATO officials admitted it publicly already.

But this is irrelevant as Putin isn't going to launch a nuclear attack. No plausible reason for him to do so other than you saying he's irrational. I think rational enough to realize using nuclear weapons wouldn't help him.

Hope you are right.

[Kyriakos]

What bets are off? America will launch its nukes and prepare to receive same from Russia? Because Poland enacts article 5 (if Poland even do it in the first place)? Seriously?

Unfortunately, yes. No wonder things are going as they are, with the gap between reality and personal view. Should be roughly the size of that in the edge of Hades, according to Hesiod.

[Nebaki]

Should what?

Check how your countries History was in the past 80 years.

What did my country do 80 years ago that makes it so they wouldn't defend Poland today?

Didn´t they were part of the Yalta Conference? How was your actions of your country in the last 80 years? What happened in Vietnam or Afghanistan? Who abandoned them?

Germany was also an imperialist and colony power in 1914. The EU is not the Germany of 1914 either. the EU is dozens of countries with dozens of governments with dozens of different views. The EU becoming like Germany in 1914 or 1939 utterly ignores vast amounts of history and is outright ridiculous.

Germany had an imperial past like all other countries surrounding it. It got some colonies but these were nowhere close to other Major Powers. For example USA was a Colony which later even went further then some colonial powers when it became independent.

It's like saying Turkey is a threat to Europe because they are a successor state of the Ottoman Empire who threatened and frequently invaded Europe. Your logic makes no sense.

Nah those Ottoman Turks even launched Cursades and threatened all the Christians in the Holy Land. Most land gain in Europe didn´t happened just through War. Some fiefdoms just switched their side - an simple supply and demand agreement.

15 casualties. You are seriously bragging about Turkey losing 15 men? Meanwhile the Greeks sent 3300 men to Afghanistan and again, actually participated in combat missions unlike Turkey. Turkey does not compare to what the Greeks contributed in Afghanistan. Even the Dutch lost more men in Afghanistan than Turkey.

Bragging? First of all was not reffering to just 15 men which are not the total losses that Turkey had as participants in Combat Missions which they took part in their role in Afghanistan. Secondly greeks didn´t take part in any combat mission in Afghanistan or not in the scale which Turkey did.

Turkey does not compare to what the Greeks contributed in Afghanistan. Even the Dutch lost more men in Afghanistan than Turkey.

Where do you first get these number:

15 casualties.

Which is just not true. It is funny that you now even start to downplay Turkish contribution in Afghanistan while even comparing it to greek contingent which did not take part in combat missions. Maybe we should first discuss what is "combat" for yourself which is definded as part of "humanitarian aid" which are country provides in a crisis region.

It seems to be that so-called numbers of 3300 was drastically reduced to just 80 Men according to NATO:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Source:https://www.nato.int/isaf/placemats_...F-Placemat.pdf

How it comes Turkey did even held a permanent contingent in Afghanistan.

Even the Dutch lost more men in Afghanistan than Turkey.

That says now exactly what about the Turkish contribution? A Reminder that you are having the perception that Turkish losses just not going any further then fifteen casualties. But if you we are now starting comparing the Dutch Military capabilities to Turkish then we should look who is having more experience or practicing real combat. For many countries like Netherlands it was their first combat mission in a foreign soil since World War II. On other hand Turkey's military experience is vastly different.

[Loyt]

Unfortunately, yes.

How do you know? Are you big wig from Pentagon? Why then your subordinates explicitly stated they'll use only conventional weapons to drive russian army from Ukraine in case of nuclear strike by Russia?
Ukraine is not in NATO, NATO has no obligation to start full-fledged nuclear war because of it. So it won't. Honestly, i think even in case of tactical nuke on Polish land USA might hesitate.

[Laser101]

How do you know? Are you big wig from Pentagon? Why then your subordinates explicitly stated they'll use only conventional weapons to drive russian army from Ukraine in case of nuclear strike by Russia?
Ukraine is not in NATO, NATO has no obligation to start full-fledged nuclear war because of it. So it won't. Honestly, i think even in case of tactical nuke on Polish land USA might hesitate.

It is worth noting that this exact issue was the main motivator behind France and the UK moving to obtain their own nuclear arsenals.
There are clearly other factors dissuading the Russians from nuclear escalation at this point, but a threat of nuclear retaliation from the US probably isn't one of them. Frankly, it would be near-impossible for the US to make such a threat with any degree of credibility.

[Ludicus]

Lessons From the U.S. Civil War Show Why Ukraine Can't Win-Newsweek
Excerpts,

…Armies need railroads and while Sherman systematically tore up the tracks leading to Atlanta, Surovikin is destroying the electricity grid which powers Ukrainian railroads. This has left Ukrainian cities cold and dark, but Surovikin seems to agree with Sherman that "war is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."
…As the West did in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, we are stumbling into another optional, open-ended military commitment. Ukrainian troops are being trained in Europe. Western defense contractors are already maintaining Ukrainian military equipment and operating the HIMAR missile systems. Active-duty American military personnel are now in Ukraine to monitor weapons deliveries.

As the Russian offensive gains momentum, we expect loud voices to call for sending ever-more advanced weapons and eventually NATO boots on the ground to defend Ukraine. These voices should be unambiguously rejected for many reasons. Here are a few.
Generations of Western leaders worked successfully to avoid direct military conflict with the Soviet Union. They recognized that, unlike Moscow, the West has very little strategic interest in who controls Donetsk. They were certainly unwilling to risk a nuclear war for Kharkiv.
Ukraine is not a member of NATO, and the alliance has no obligation to defend it. Nor has Putin threatened any NATO member, but he has made clear that any foreign troops entering Ukraine will be treated as enemy combatants. Sending NATO troops into the Ukraine would thus turn our proxy war with Russia into a real war with the world's largest nuclear power.
Some have presented this conflict as a morality play, between good and evil, but the reality is more complex.

Ukraine is no flourishing democracy. It is an impoverished, corrupt, one-party state with extensive censorship, where opposition newspapers and political parties have been shut down. Before the war, far right Ukrainian nationalist groups like the Azov Brigade were soundly condemned by the U.S. Congress. Kiev's determined campaign against the Russian language is analogous to the Canadian government trying to ban French in Quebec. Ukrainian shells have killed hundreds of civilians in the Donbas and there are emerging reports of Ukrainian war crimes.
The truly moral course of action would be to end this war with negotiations rather than prolong the suffering the Ukrainian people in a conflict they are unlikely to win without risking American lives.

Perhaps we are wrong. Perhaps there will not be a Russian winter offensive or perhaps the Ukrainian armed forces will be able to stop it. However, if we are correct and February finds General Surovikin at the gates of Kiev, we need to have soberly considered and honestly debated as a nation and an alliance the extent of our commitment to Ukraine and what risks we are willing accept to our own security.

David H. Rundell is a former chief of mission at the American Embassy in Saudi Arabia and the author of Vision or Mirage, Saudi Arabia at the Crossroads. Ambassador Michael Gfoeller is a former Political Advisor to the U.S. Central Command. He served for 15 years in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

---
---

Kissinger said a few days ago it’s time for a negotiated peace, to reduce the risk of another devastating world war. According to the news, Kyiv government dismissed his comments as amounting to "appeasing the aggressor". It is this inflexibility that sooner or later may end in the complete destruction of Ukraine, or a world war.The EU is completely obsessed with wearing itself out with this war, while the US is already turning to the Indo-Pacific. Taiwanese chip giant invests $40bn in US plant - BBC News
----
A provocative text about the European garden - and much more. Good news for the world's autocrats - Guardian.
Excerpts,

It’s the betrayal that hurts most. Democracy is a vulnerable plant, easily neglected and weakened by parasites. It has faced overt, sometimes lethal attacks in 2022 from autocrats in places as far apart as the US, Brazil, China, Russia, Iran and Turkey. Yet when democracy is silently corrupted and subverted from within – that’s the real killer.
…That is part of the EU’s problem: officials and MEPs are largely self-regulating and face minimal scrutiny.
...Joe Biden is hardly perfect. He rightly ostracised the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and the kingdom’s human rights abuses. Then he undid himself, fist-bumping Salman during a humiliating outing to Riyadh in a futile search for cheap oil.
Biden’s unintended, self-defeating message: democratic principles are negotiable; everything has its price.
Watch and weep as, around the world, the voters’ trust, integrity in public life and confidence in representative governance are surreptitiously bartered away in cynical games of influence-peddling and money-politics.

----
Whatever happens, the scandal will damage the EU, which likes to lecture the world about democratic values, including the norms of public life in the Borrell’s western garden. The scandal is already reaching Ursula, who blocked questions about the role of her commission vice-president, Greek Margaritis Schinas, who represented the EU at the World Cup opening ceremony and posted tweets praising exploitative labor practices in the construction of the championship infrastructure. EU pressroom erupts as VDL ducks questions on Schinas

The corrupt vice-president of the European Parliament did what she did because, as the European Parliament itself established two weeks ago, that for Europe, there is only one state in the world outside of law and decency: Russia, the first and only country to date declared a "sponsor of terrorism." Thus, Eva Kaili concluded that everything else could be whitewashed.
----
----
Among us, various voices are deliriously trying to convey the idea that Putin is equal to Stalin and that the bombing of Ukrainian power plants is the new Holomodor. One deliberately confuses what is a war itself, even an illegitimate one, with the inevitable acts arising from that war or any other war, such as attacks on civil institutions, which in this case all become "war crimes" and "terrorism," and assumes that the rest of the world is an oasis of peace.
The "Saudi ally" continues a hidden war in Yemen where every day 10 times more civilians die than in Ukraine, the Saudi prince regent sees Biden visit him to ask for oil, the Israeli ally is turned into a racist state where apartheid is the official government policy, and every day expropriates another piece of a foreign country: Palestine. The EU is now receiving electricity from Azerbaijan. Years ago the relationship between the EU and Azerbaijan was subject to devastating criticism Europe and Azerbaijan: The End of Shame

This is where Europe has come in: as far as Russia is concerned, the obsession with seeing everything in black and white has made the EU forget geopolitics, has closed the door on diplomacy: in the end, on a continent in disintegration, Europe will discover that it has been left alone in a world without bridges between the various realities, where the law of the strongest will triumph. And it won't be ours.
---
James Carden calls attention to the need to return to the old traditional practice of diplomacy, without American “values” being a kind of precondition for diplomacy, Looking back at a 'Golden Age' of US-Russia diplomacy

Unfortunately, Lynne Tracy, Biden’s nominee to be the next ambassador to Russia, reflects the stale views of the more recent past.

As for her appointment to Moscow, Peitro Shakarian, an Armenian-American scholar of Soviet and Russian history, says he “would not be too optimistic about this appointment, if we are looking for a dramatic improvement in U.S.-Russian relations. Tracy is essentially a typical State Department career diplomat whose views on Russia and the region reflect those of the Washington Beltway consensus since the 1990s.”
And, indeed, during her confirmation hearing November 30, Tracy, in keeping with recent diplomatic fashion, decried the Putin regime’s “intensifying repression against civil society, independent media, human rights activists, pro-democracy advocates.”
Yet if Tracy’s tenure in Moscow is to have any chance at success, she might consider abandoning the activist mindset that has become de rigueur among the diplomatic corps in recent years and return to the traditional practice of diplomacy as exemplified by a coterie of distinguished Cold war-era U.S. envoys to the Soviet Union in the 1950s and 1960s.

…U.S. diplomacy as carried out in those days was marked by pragmatism and an understanding of the hard calculus of national interest. American diplomats back then would perhaps have been puzzled by the recent fashion of seeking to impose American “values” as a kind of precondition for diplomacy — or even legitimacy.
Bohlen swam against the tide of conventional wisdom which then prevailed in the Washington of the 1950s by asserting that the United States should approach the Soviet Union as a traditional nation-state not merely as the embodiment of communist ideology —accommodation, limited and pragmatic, was possible.

As his biographer Ruddy put it, Bohlen “never doubted that the Soviet Union presented a threat, a threat created by a unique combination of ideology and national interest. But he especially saw it as a nation, leading him to believe that limited accommodations were possible.” As Bohlen’s successor in Moscow, Llewellyn Thompson once observed, “The trouble with Americans is that we see everything in black or white, but there’s a lot of gray in diplomacy.”
There’s a lesson in that. Today, Russia’s security interests are viewed as illegitimate because of the widespread belief that Putin is, among other things, the leader of a global authoritarian movement, if not the embodiment of evil itself.
But what Bohlen and his illustrious cohort understood is that, for Russia, it is interests that matter.

[Lord Thesaurian]

I wonder, if Ukraine manages to drive Russia out of Crimea, whether the saintly devotees of world peace will then demand Russia surrender to avoid complete destruction and world war.

[Loyt]

Lessons From the U.S. Civil War Show Why Ukraine Can't Win-Newsweek

Are you serious? That's exact repeating of russian propagandistic mainstream. I won't be surprised, if Margarita Simonyan wrote this article herself.

massive Russian onslaught will commence. In fact, it has already begun at the important transportation hub of Bakhmut

Yeah, it has began alright, not now - in spring. And from august it is main attack target of russians. Result of this "great onslaught" after many months of fighting is kinda unimpressive tho. Lots of losses over minimal advance.

Russia will recapture Kharkov, Kherson, and the remainder of the Donbas by next summer

Definitelly wrote by Simonyan or some other russian propagandist. Russia never had Kharkov and remainder of Donbas in the first place, what "recapture"?

Who are these guys, what else did they write?
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opini...e7i-story.html
https://intpolicydigest.org/what-wou...e-middle-east/

Same thing, singing praises to Putin and whitewashing his ambitions. Another one "Scott Ritter".
And apparently "Russia has already won the war" In june. No one noticed yet.

[Septentrionalis]

Threatening with nukes can never be met with standing down and just letting the aggerossor get his will. It will only lead to more and more until a nuclear strike is inevitable. When someone uses nucclear weapons as a shield for aggressive conquest they have to be resisted by every conventional means possible, if they respond by going nuclear then that was going to happen anyway.

This is sadly the state of the matter in this world now. The genie won't go back into the bottle, but almost any nuclear expert will tell you that submitting to nuclear blackmail will increase the chance of a nuclear war in the future, and it will greatly incentivize countries that do not have a nuclear program to start one if they can.

My personal intuition is that already Russia speaking about using nuclear weapons is a dreadful disservice to non-proliferation efforts.

[Cyclops]

This is sadly the state of the matter in this world now. The genie won't go back into the bottle, but almost any nuclear expert will tell you that submitting to nuclear blackmail will increase the chance of a nuclear war in the future, and it will greatly incentivize countries that do not have a nuclear program to start one if they can.

My personal intuition is that already Russia speaking about using nuclear weapons is a dreadful disservice to non-proliferation efforts.

Yes agree very strongly.

There are a couple of countries that have rattled the nuclear sabre, for example Russia (with less success) and Israel (with some apparent success). The arms war between India and Pakistan is a terrible flash point with more potential than Ukraine to explode to my eyes.

However There's only one power I confidently expect to use nukes (and only then in limited circumstances) and it is the US. They don't really need to rattle the sabre, their past acts speak for themselves.

If the West capitulates to Russian nuclear threats expect a wave of nuclear programs. I don't think it will happen, as it would cost the US too much in present disadvantage and future instability. For Russia to use nukes would be a suicidal final act after they have utterly lost.

Russia is not alone in causing international instability, there are waves of war slopping across the Islamic world in the wake of the wretched US attack on Iraq. That doesn't justify the Russia attacks across its borders. These wars of adventure seeking material advantage at the expense of others are truly evil. I wish we could put Cheney in the dock next to Putin and Prince Salman.

[Septentrionalis]

If the West capitulates to Russian nuclear threats expect a wave of nuclear programs. I don't think it will happen, as it would cost the US too much in present disadvantage and future instability. For Russia to use nukes would be a suicidal final act after they have utterly lost.

Exactly. The more countries have nuclear weapons, the greater the chance that somewhere, sometime, someone will use them irrationally. In precisely the kind of scenario you describe or, without any utter loss, in some other kind of "after me the deluge" situation. Such as a deranged dictator who learns that he is terminally ill.

The worst thing to me now is that in my personal view Putin has a chance, however small, of being that person. He clearly does not care about the lives and human rights of Ukrainians, and he doesn't care about the wellbeing of his own people. He is willing to sacrifice Russian lives and economies, and he has ideas of grandeur and of going into history as the modern equivalent of Peter the Great. Who knows if his folly will increase.

I recently listened to a podcast interviewing William J. Perry, one of the creators of the US strategic nuclear program. He is an elderly but clear-minded individual who has turned an anti-nuclear activist. As I recall, one of the main points presented was that a nuclear war can start by accident. By a misunderstanding of an impending attack. Or a deliberate attempt to generate a misunderstanding. And the chance of that happening is now great because nuclear weapons are on the table, so to speak. If at this moment either the west or Russia got false information of an attack on the way, the chances of it being taken seriously is greatly elevated over when there is no war and brandishing nuclear weapons.

The podcast series is a paid one, but I believe this episode is outside the paywall because of the importance of its message. Please anyone listen while doing your chores, if you are interested.

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/m...logic-doomsday