Trump has stated he will cut American aid to Ukraine, which makes a majority of total aid. Recently Zelensky stated that if Ukraine’s only hope for sovereignty is its own nuclear arsenal, they will build it.

  • @Oaksey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    210 months ago

    If they get used it is obviously really going to be a bad time for all but one thing in their favour is that the prevailing wind goes from west to east.

  • @Modva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1210 months ago

    Do it. Promises from super powers are worthless. Only power itself matters. And all the other countries are aware of it too now.

    • @stardust@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      510 months ago

      Yeah, countries will prioritize self preservation and will gladly let even their allies get destroyed to survive. Can’t trust anyone but themselves. Everyone else is just posturing when it is convenient for them.

    • @Thorry84@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Depends what you mean by “use”.

      The Americans are the only ones to have used them in terms of destroying enemy assets (and sadly in that case it was used against civilians). But as a deterrent it’s been used by a LOT of countries all around the world and is still being used for that purpose right now.

      An argument could be made the Cold War could have been an all out world war if it weren’t for nukes, with the short peace after WW2 be considered just a break and not the end.

      I hope nukes won’t be used, but Ukraine is in trouble and if they are backed into a corner and facing destruction who knows what they will do. Same could apply to Iran before long, if they have the ability to get nukes somehow, it might be their only hope. Just please let it be as a deterrent and not actual nuclear war.

        • @InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          010 months ago

          Then let’s threaten to nuke moscow tomorrow if he doesn’t immediately withdraw.

          We’ll make it a really intense threat too, take all our missiles to defcon 1, deploy all our forces, have squadrons of f-22s and f-35s surrounding Ukraine and obviously tail all their borei.

          “It’s just a threat, bro!”

          • @NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            010 months ago

            Well, yes, every chess player and every really powerful man knows that the threat is stronger than the act.

            Unfortunately, yours cannot be taken seriously.

            • @InverseParallax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              110 months ago

              Because?

              This is the whole russian ethos, you must give them everything they want, because they don’t care.

              It’s like the idiot who threatens to eat his own shit, and then does it.

              We get that they have less respect for themselves and peace, but we learned a long time ago that giving in to those people doesn’t win peace, only more war, because you’re rewarding their behavior.

              It is an absolutely credible threat that we could wipe out the entire Russian armed forces with a fraction of our power, and they know that.

              You honestly think they pushed so hard to get Trump in power for no reason? We are the only thing holding them back.

  • @pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1110 months ago

    wow Putin’s bitch stopping aid to Ukraine? never could’ve seen this coming.

    no kidding though, it took a while but Russia finally did it. they are the superpower now. good news, Europe!

  • @ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    110 months ago

    No. Nuclear weapons should not exist.

    Kurzgesagt recently made a video on the nuclear arms race. The end of the race was when the guy who invented the hydrogen bomb invented a bomb that could destroy the entire planet. The bomb wouldn’t even need to be dropped onto your enemy. It could be built inside your own country and detonated any time at all to end humanity. He thought of it as the biggest deterrent to war. Nobody else did. Politicians and military leaders threw out the idea entirely. Why would anyone detonate a nuclear bomb inside their own country??

    The size of that bomb pales in comparison to the size of all nuclear weapons in existence today. We built that bomb. It’s just not one giant bomb, but split into 12,000 parts and spread over the world. Is it any different? If you cannot justify building a nuclear weapon that would destroy your own country to destroy another, how can you justify building any nuclear weapons at all?

    • Miles O'Brien
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      In theory, I agree. Nuclear weaponry should never exist. The power to erase millions of people with a single push of a button is absolute insanity.

      In practice, the world isn’t going to suddenly decide to de-arm itself and dismantle every nuke. So if they aren’t giving up theirs, refusing to make my own over that just leaves me another corpse on the moral high road.

      Sometimes I wonder if the world would be a better place had the Manhattan project been sabotaged by the scientists and nuclear weapons were deemed unfeasible. I’d like to think so.

      • @ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        610 months ago

        It’s the same outcome either way. You don’t have nukes and another country decides to nuke you? Your country doesn’t exist anymore! You do have nukes and another country decides to nukes you? Your country doesn’t exist anymore! What changes?

        People say deterrence, but what is the deterrence? You built something that you’ll never use? What’s the point?? Oh you will use it? Great! You’ve decided there’s some event that is so bad you’d end the world if it happened. I’m not sure what event that is. Maybe you have one in mind? China attacks India? The world should surely be destroyed then! No? Too bad! You don’t get a say! China and India decide if humanity gets to continue! They definitely wouldn’t do that though.

        They built their nukes to never use them. Which is the same as not having nukes, but having nukes is required so that nobody uses them, which is the same as never building them, but they need to be built so they won’t be used!

    • @demesisx@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1310 months ago

      Thanks. This is the only reasonable reply in here.

      People are such fucking military industrial complex tech bro lemmings on world.

  • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈
    link
    fedilink
    910 months ago

    Sadly, they don’t have enough time to build a defense. Trump is going to put them out for slaughter.

    Numerous other entities are at high risk in the immediate future, eg: Palestinians, Taiwan, Japanese islands… etc.

    Trump and Repugnants are not just the end of the U.S., but, also the World as we know it.

    I wish y’all the best and I apologize for the ensuing insanity.

  • DarkThoughts
    link
    fedilink
    010 months ago

    I don’t think they have much of a choice at this point. And yes, I’d support it. They clearly should’ve never agreed to the Budapest Memorandum with its half hearted security guarantees.

  • massive_bereavement
    link
    fedilink
    310 months ago

    I know nothing about the subject but doesn’t it require a massive infrastructure investment and time that Ukraine can’t afford right now? I mean even Zaporizhzhia is controlled by the invaders, though I’m not sure if it’s there where they would produce fissile materials. Furthermore, Ukraine’s remaining allies are staunch anti-nuclear proliferation.

  • sunzu2
    link
    fedilink
    2010 months ago

    Ukraine is fighting two nuclear armed states… But nahh bro, Ukraine doesn’t need nukes 🤡

    • @BluesF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      Idk how easy it easy to just build a nuke… I feel like the long range missile is the hard part, right? The actual nuclear part isn’t quite so complex. Maybe I’m wrong.

      • @NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        He said they could make a bomb in a couple weeks if needed. No specifics on delivery or quality.

        Edit: sounds like kyiv is denying the claim made by some insider. So guess this isn’t likely true.

      • @carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        510 months ago

        They have a lot of the Soviet weapons design bureaus. Not sure how many of the original designers are still around. The tricky bit will be refining enough uranium or plutonium in a war zone.

  • @rayyy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    3310 months ago

    Yes. Yes. Yes. DO IT NOW! Buy the equipment and technology from whoever they can. Even if they do it illegally. Countries that do not have nukes are subjects to those that do.