this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
215 points (98.2% liked)

World News

38977 readers
2268 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A Russian pilot tried to shoot down an RAF surveillance plane after believing he had permission to fire, the BBC has learned.

The pilot fired two missiles, the first of which missed rather than malfunctioned as claimed at the time.

Russia had claimed the incident last September was caused by a "technical malfunction". The UK's Ministry of Defence (MoD) publicly accepted the Russian explanation.

But now three senior Western defence sources with knowledge of the incident have told the BBC that Russian communications intercepted by the RAF RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft give a very different account from the official version.

The RAF plane - with a crew of up to 30 - was flying a surveillance mission over the Black Sea in international airspace on 29 September last year when it encountered two Russian SU-27 fighter jets.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem is that, at that point, they already lost, so it's a matter of whether they lose alone, or if they are petty enough to make everyone lose with them. I know where Putin stands on that, the unknown is how the Russian generals would take the order.

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The Kremlin won't commit suicide over a failed land grab in Eastern Ukraine. Stop fear mongering, it's exactly what they want.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Read the thread and see what we were talking about, and then come back.

[–] bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago
  1. The UK/NATO would not retaliate in a nuclear manner

  2. Even if they retaliate conventionally, it would be far more likely that Russia would strike a deal before launching nukes

  3. The UK/NATO would likely accept that deal easily since literally nobody with more than 2 braincells, on either side, want to risk destroying the entire planet

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

The problem with nuclear deterrence is that it’s very easy for the train to start rolling before anyone can stop it. And once it’s rolling, it’s out of everyone’s hands.