As a Finn I say this is fine. Every military resource that is tied down and not raping and destroying Ukraine is net positive.

    • JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      33·
      2 years ago

      how many of them are correctly mantained and in working conditions?

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.worldEnglish
          31·
          2 years ago

          Maybe. The issue is we don’t know. Are our missile defense systems able to take down that 1%? How reliably? What if that’s 5% instead?

          It’s all a game of probability, and all it takes is 1 missile to slip through. The only 0% chance is if no nukes are fired in the first place.

    • doctorcrimson@lemmy.todayEnglish
      22·
      2 years ago

      So does Ukraine, so why hasn’t Russia tried anything with them? Oh because there is no winning a Nuclear War, idiot.

      • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 years ago

        Russia isn’t threatened behind their own borders by Ukraine. If a NATO army were to invade Russia however, and Putin has his back against the wall, then I’m not sure he wouldn’t order that button to be pressed.

        • doctorcrimson@lemmy.todayEnglish
          3·
          2 years ago

          I suppose he could threaten foreign nations who breach the borders, but it’s not accurate to say they aren’t currently threatened behind their own borders. Russia recently lost a major railway connecting to china to the war, and a few months ago there was a military coup that had Putin hiding in a bunker.

          • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            2 years ago

            Fair point, but it’s still not quite the same as foreign soldiers on russian soil.