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

World News

38977 readers
2234 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
[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

That worked in the 50s but today that isn't the case. We would stop about 90% of missiles. Russia can't stop any. NATO loses 80,000, Russia loses 143 Million.

[–] Marsupial@quokk.au 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Okay Buck Turgidson.

The 11 active Russian nuclear armed subs alone would inflict millions of casualties on American coastal cities.

The fallout would kill hundreds of millions across Europe and North America, the resulting families and global breakdown would take out hundreds of millions more across the globe.

Not to mention Chinese and North Korean responses to their neighbour and ally being nuked.

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

11 active Russian nuclear armed subs ...

If they could get out of port without sinking instantly.

[–] Detheroth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The point is: it only takes one. One nuke successfully launching would be enough for the majority (if not all) the able nuclear powers to retaliate in kind.

Do you think any nation within Europe would detect a missle launch and simply... hope it's a dud? What about America? If any nation responds to a nuclear attack (even a fake one), the odds are the rest of them will follow suit.

I hope every single attempted nuclear weapon launch fails. But the odds of that happening aren't even worth thinking about.

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If there was a threat nations would act accordingly.