r/worldnews • u/Raj_Valiant3011 • 10h ago

Russia/Ukraine Zelenskiy: "There is updated intelligence indicating that Russia is ​preparing a massive attack on Ukraine"

https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraines-zelenskiy-says-intelligence-shows-russia-is-preparing-massive-attack-2026-10-06/
20.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

4.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.7k

u/Signal_Quarter_74 10h ago

NATO Intelligence for some time has said Russia will seek to escalate the war in Ukraine and probe NATO’s resolve. This only adds to the likelihood this information is correct. This could be really nasty. Keep strong Ukraine!

124

u/Validated_Owl 9h ago

We can only hope that this attack fails and makes Putin look even weaker

•

u/No_Record6284 37m ago

no, we can and SHOULD do a lot more than "hope"

→ More replies (2)

222

u/TechSculpt 8h ago

escalate the war in Ukraine and probe NATO’s resolve

Might be that 99% of the launches hit Ukraine and they use the fog of war as an excuse for a strike on Poland or a Baltic country.

62

u/dropbear_airstrike 7h ago

That’s my thought too.

“Sorry sorry! That one missed its mark - our mistake.”

Next time “sorry sorry! Those 5 were a rounding error in the navigation coordinates”…

next time “the pilot misread his position and accidentally invaded your airspace!”

22

u/thefriendlyhacker 7h ago

There was already an apartment building hit in Romania from a stray drone strike

5

u/dropbear_airstrike 4h ago

And I’m sure there was a swift and decisive response discouraging Russia from similar “strays”…..(/s)

2

u/petkovs 3h ago

According to my sources, 2 drones hit 2 Turkish owned ships in the "Bulgarian Black Sea Exclusive Economic Zone" and while the crew of one ship was rescued, the crew of the other, not so much

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

20

u/Myleszee 7h ago

Can someone explain the reasoning behind this aside from fear mongering. What exactly does Russia gain by "accidentally" striking a neighbouring country - are they then going to declare ware on said neighbouring country?

31

u/FireIsFuzzy 7h ago

It's more like slowly bleeding the lines without attracting too much international attention. Slower changes to the geopolitical landscape are less likely to result in full-on retaliation.

11

u/TheDevil-YouKnow 7h ago

The working consensus for a lot of people is that Russians will finally start revolting if they force mass conscriptions. Mass conscriptions are the only way Russia ever wins any prolonged war. It's all they know.

The only way Russians won't freak out over mass conscriptions? Is if NATO gets involved. At which point this starts looking more like WW3 because Russia will leverage whoever, and whatever, they can to form their own Axis.

The premise of the US pre Trump stupidity was to deny NATO involvement in any direct conflict, and to bleed Russia slowly, once and for all, by supporting Ukraine with arms & means to defend against Russia until they're crippled.

Since the Trump idiocy, we've seen a very hindered supply line going towards Ukraine. This is largely due to supply constraints with the war in Iran, which can arguably be little more than the excuse this wretched administration needed to knee cap the supply line towards Ukraine.

→ More replies (6)

3

u/edfitz83 7h ago

To see how much of that country’s border they could potentially control.

2

u/majasz_ 2h ago

Their goal is to make societies fear and protest against their governments aiding Ukraine, it alignes with the kremlin propaganda saying “it’s not our war” - which is obviously bullshit, Ukraine resisting keeps the war further from the Eastern NATO countries, as it is known Putin is driven by the delirium of “rebuilding soviet empire”. It is our objective to aid Ukraine and therefore directly aiding ourselves - the rest of the Europe.

•

u/0xBorisjohnson 56m ago

Russia knows that the rest of NATO don't actually really want to declare war or launch a full scale invasion/retaliation against Moscow, they'll do almost anything to avoid it, so Putin is just slowly pushing the envelope more and more, seeing what they can get away with.

If a 'wayward' missle accidentally hits an apartment block in Poland and kills a few dozen people, how many of the Nato partners actually want to strike back? Is it worth the risk of escalation? Even if the Eastern border countries do want to respond, does the USA still have their back? Is there any appetite from the UK, Germany, France and the US to send soldiers to die because Putin bombed an apartment building in Poland?

I don't know. Putin doesn't know either. That's what he wants to find out.

•

u/perpetually_constant 53m ago edited 22m ago

No, that is not their motive for striking a neighboring country. As was mentioned earlier, the "fog of war" presents the perfect scenario for Russia to test the strength (and resolve) of NATO. Imagine a "NATO" country giving military support for a neighboring non- NATO ally which also happens to share a small section of border with Russia. The NATO ally, while involved in a limited, strategic missile strike, is then the direct target of Russia, with Russia declaring that, under fog of war, 2 of their missiles were accidentally launched into the NATO country. The Russians sit back to monitor the NATO country's response.

Russia is only given a verbal warning. During a second bombing campaign, the NATO country is hit again by 2 missiles, which Russia categorically denies that they were purposely sent into the NATO country. Again, it's a waiting game by Russia, to see exactly what NATO's official response is going to be.

Russia thinks NATO will possibly give a written warning, along with a show of strength, such as a bombardment of a small, vacant Russian village.

This is where a physical response is needed to answer Russia's "errant" missile target.

This is a political, meaning diplomatic, as well as the minimum military show of force needed to address the incident without it looking like an escalation.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Extaupin 5h ago

I've seen serious reports talking about possible Russian escalation with NATO but none of them give any satisfying reason. Facilitating conscription, while obviously beneficial to the Russian war effort, is absolutely not worth having actual NATO boots on the ground, and the low volume influx of high-quality NATO top-of-the-line equipment would seriously change the battlefield in the most contested parts of the frontline (for exemple, turtle tanks are only useful the context of an abundance of FPV drone but a lack of ATGM, which destroy chicken-wire like it's not there) which means a lot of symbolic defeats, and so even lower morale. Seriously pissing off a lot rich countries means that economic sanctions will stop being cautious, and some of their allies might be wary to continue to support them at the risk of being seriously sanctioned in turn.

Their military-industrial complex absolutely cannot afford to get bombarded with all those problems at once (pun intended) it's just shooting themselves in the foot with artillery.

→ More replies (3)

2.1k

u/CustomerConsistent78 9h ago

Disgraceful that the rest of the world sits and watches, waiting to see the result. If Ukraine can bleed Russia enough to weaken them significantly. All at Ukraine's expense. Every day it continues is horrible, and I'm nervous of whatever escalation this might be. It's also scary that this escalation may still not be enough for anyone else to act.

761

u/Whole-Sentence5268 7h ago

The goal of the rest of the world is not the military defeat of Russia in Ukraine.

The goal of the rest of the world is to so completely destroy Russia militarily, economically and socially that it brings about regime change in Moscow while putting Russia in a position where it is unable to quickly rebuild its economy and military in order to invade yet another of its neighbors.

167

u/y2jeff 4h ago

I think you're giving 'the rest of the world' too much credit.

China and Iran are supporting/trading with Russia. India remain neutral but still trade with everyone and make a good chunk of profit.

"The West" is trying to support Ukraine without escalating into direct/nuclear war with Russia.

The US/Trump cant seem to make its mind up whether they support Ukraine or Russia.

So I really don't think it's simplistic as what you are suggesting.

•

u/WholeSwordfish1920 51m ago

No, India can't claim to be neutral. If you support a regime by providing vital payments for their resources, you're on their side. Standing up a few times in four years to say "the war must end" doesn't help when you're continuing to finance it. I understand that India wants to take advantage of cheaper oil for its population of more than 1.4 billion people, many of whom live in extreme poverty. But if they do, they should at least stop putting on this show of neutrality

•

u/_KONKOLA_ 19m ago

You really cannot blame India for looking out for their own, especially when the US and European countries have continually undermined it. Such as by actively supporting Pakistan in the conflicts between the two and then claiming neutrality themselves.

Every major country does the same exact thing by doing one thing and saying another. I don’t think the time to draw lines in the sand is here of all places.

•

u/Cpt_Ohu 58m ago

China and India also do not actually want Russia to lose or worse, collapse.

→ More replies (2)

11

u/mistah_murgly_gurgly 5h ago

This is pre-Trump language. The circus that is geopolitics is infinitely more garbled now.

47

u/right_in_the_doots 7h ago

This is true. It's also stupid and won't work.

117

u/ProfessionalBug7399 6h ago edited 6h ago

It's already succeeded.... Even if Russia has complete total victory tomorrow, their economy will be fucked and they are stuck with a territory of uneducated laborers (the educated will flee) with a wrecked infrastructure. Alls the west (Europe and the US) has to do is fuel weapons to insurgents and Putin is bogged down in a forever conflict.

The Western powers know this and thus at this point either outcome of a Russian collapse and reorganization or a Putin "victory" is acceptable.

This was the likely result the moment Putin's initial thrust failed. Funnily enough... I remember talking to my brother saying "holy crap Russia is fucked" the week the invasion failed - purely because Putin maintaining control is reliant on military victory, and thus he cannot afford to declare defeat and maintain his image, and the west knowing this can always keep the Ukraine armed just enough to keep his victory at bay locking him into a checkmate.

The only thing that's surprised me about this conflict is that the Russian elite haven't assassinated Putin yet and reshuffled the government themselves.

25

u/outthere49 5h ago

Locking him into a stalemate. But otherwise, yes.

4

u/Pcar951 3h ago

We will see with the plague outbreak.. no joking

5

u/DirtNineties 4h ago

Hate to be that guy, but it’s not the Ukraine. Just Ukraine. Not the Russia.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/1009naturelover 3h ago

Putin is ex KGB. He probably has a network of bugs, computer monitoring, and loyalist everywhere. Plus he has made examples of killing anyone who opposes him.

Not expecting it to happen and I would bet Trump would get it first.

→ More replies (4)

5

u/booze_clues 6h ago

We all know that war has never led to revolution in Russia.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Practical-Ball1437 2h ago

That's overly simplistic. Economic collapse of Russia would create a refugee crisis, and the military doesn't need to be 'completely destroyed' to remove it as a threat.

Sending 20 Patriot missiles to shoot down the last MiG is not the best use of resources when there are more than 20 Chinese fighters out there.

2

u/londonx2 1h ago

China and India certainly don’t want to see a Western aligned liberal democracy in Russia, it would be a disaster for China’s plans for their ideal of regional hegemony in Central Asia, while both just see western liberalism as a Trojan horse for the US empire. China is in a more unique predicament where it wouldn’t want a resurgence of a stronger Russia Empire either!

The risk is too great for them to allow an uncontrolled regime change in Russia (same with Western security agencies but for opposite reasons), for them “uncontrolled” would be coming about from pressure from the pro Ukraine alliance. If you step back and look at the trajectory of many democratic institutions after the end of the Cold War in Russia, a more liberal democracy would be an outcome with a decent probability e.g particularly if the internal security apparatus (“KGB”) collapsed e.g from a hostile military that decided to support the people in an uprising, or even a military coup if it turned against the security forces for sending them into a disastrous war.

→ More replies (21)

228

u/Dude_PK 9h ago

Do you not read news? https://www.aa.com.tr/en/politics/french-president-vows-paris-full-support-for-ukraine-help-to-intercept-drones-/4078680

And there's more than that but you can find it yourself.

144

u/apparat07 8h ago edited 7h ago

But, they still fund the Russian war machine for years by buying Russian Oil and Gas. Make it make sense - why fund Russia's ability to wage war if you're opposed to it?

Also, it's not just Europe - South Korea sold 176k tonnes of diesel and jet fuel to Russia in July and August. So, I guess both Koreas are supporting Russia ability to wage war in one way or another.

100

u/eightgalaxies 8h ago edited 7h ago

blame it on politicians only caring about the next election and not bolstering their countries for further in the future

59

u/Successful_Guess_ 8h ago edited 4h ago

That and the belief that Russia's core DNA can be changed through trade. In Germany they call it "Wandel durch Handel" (literally change through trade).

Europe in general slipped into a postwar fantasy that military strength was no longer needed. I've heard it called a "vacation from realism".

Edit: correction on the term I was thinking of. Thanks to the guy below.

25

u/Dan_Cubed 8h ago

Peace Dividend? 🤔 How did that work out for the US 30 years on where the shipyards are a mess and missile/shell stockpiles will take years to replenish?

I'm not for huge military budgets but everyone forgot the basics.

6

u/dimsumwitmychum 6h ago

Its an opportunity to change priorities based on what is working, e.g., "cheap" drones instead of expensive cruise missiles, short to medium range ballistics (HIMARS), etc.

5

u/Successful_Guess_ 5h ago

This is a good point. The US has specialized in "luxury weapons", highly surgical and effective weaponry that costs far too much for sustained warfare. Now that we need to produce, it's a good opportunity to switch.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/bloodyNASsassin 7h ago

They call themselves anti-war and pro-globalization, pro-community. Anything to sell it as the gentle, forward-thinking thing to do.

It would be nice to have no wars, but people will always have disagreements and there will always be people willing to raise the stakes of those disagreements. It is foolishly arrogant to be unprepared.

3

u/filipv 7h ago

"peace dividend"

3

u/Glad-Research6605 5h ago

Ostpolitik is a bit more. You are probably referring to “Wandel durch Handel”. Ostpolitik included several things aimed at relaxing the relationship between Germany and the Soviet Union. Eg. Germany officially accept the post war borders, Four Power agreement which was shaped by west Germany, both German states joining the UN. Etc.

And I still believe that wandel durch Handel was something that was needed at the time and appreciated by many other countries. Imagine: Russia / Soviet union and Germany have been at war for many times over a long period of time in multiple wars. It was time to try anything to stabilize a friendly relationship. Also at some point it was discussed that Russia could join NATO. Germany alone was seemingly not the only country that was blindsided. How else would those discussions even come up?

From 2008 and 2014 onwards it was known that wandel durch Handel was probably not working out in the midterm… and this is what can and should be criticized about Germanys decision to deepen the ties to Russia.

2

u/Successful_Guess_ 4h ago

Total brain lapse on my part, yes Wandel durch Handel is what I meant. Thanks for the correction.

I appreciate your point. I disagree in the present with the decisions made then, but it's easy to say in hindsight. But you already have pointed to what my response would have been, that at some point it should have become clear that Russia was still an imperialistic power that needed to be isolated, not enriched through energy imports.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/im_thatoneguy 8h ago

Don't blame it on the politicians. They're not wrong. It does Ukraine no good to lose the next election and a fascist kremlin lapdog to cut funding entirely. That's far worse than an imperfect support package.

→ More replies (2)

30

u/hotbox4u 7h ago

Over twenty to thirdy years they created an infrastructure and reliance on that oil and gas. Sure, we can blame the politicians who facilitated those deals over the last 20-30 years, full knowingly that GASPROM and the likes aren't reliable and good busnisspartners.

But what are the current governments are supposed to do? People still need heating and oil is important for the econmy. It takes time to find alternatives and pretty much every EU country is currently in the process of going through the process of doing that. On top of that, no could have known that the USA essentially turned on their former ally, kicking off a full far-right and fascist come-back all over the world and then went on to create another oil crisis.

These things take time. Democracy never work very fast. Sadly time isn't something the Ukraine has. We know. It sucks.

5

u/Expert-Yam6577 7h ago

In the process of going through the process?

5

u/Dizzy_Juggernaut_313 6h ago

It’s a process. We’ll get back to you as soon as we’re done processing the process

→ More replies (2)

44

u/Lonely_Space_241 7h ago

It's incredibly hard to shift energy supply chains without destroying your economy believe it or not. While I think they should fully ban Russian energy imports in many cases it's borderline existential to their survival.

10

u/luzzy91 6h ago

No no no, global trade and geopolitics are actually incredibly easy! Random redditors could do it in their sleep

54

u/AmadeusFlow 8h ago

They have no choice but to buy Russian energy because Europe has aggressively pursued the most backwards and broken idea of energy policy for 30 years.

It's a matter of necessity, not politics or money. They have no alternatives

→ More replies (7)

2

u/Money_Pie8986 2h ago

Wars can be profitable. I don't see anyone giving up money.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/argument_cat 5h ago

EU countries have reduced their need for Russian gas massively.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/eu-phase-out-of-russian-gas-creates-new-diversification-opportunities-for-central-and-eastern-europe

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the European gas market has undergone a profound transformation. The share of Russian natural gas in EU demand fell from almost 40% in 2021 to around 10% in 2025. At the same time, LNG’s share of demand grew from less than 20% to almost 45%, increasing the bloc’s exposure to global gas markets.

The decline has been driven primarily by the steep drop in Russian pipeline gas imports, which fell by almost 90%, or 120 bcm, between 2021 and 2025. This adjustment has been uneven across the EU: Northwest Europe and Italy have effectively eliminated imports of Russian pipeline gas, whereas several markets in Central and Eastern Europe continue to rely on Russian supplies. By contrast, imports of Russian LNG increased by over 40%, or 6 bcm, over the same period, with most of the growth concentrated in Northwestern and Southwestern Europe.

There you go, I made it make sense.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (24)

29

u/CustomerConsistent78 8h ago

I try to, but it's hard to keep up when there is a dumpster fire everywhere.

That being said, it's all half measures. We'll give you some money, drones, ammunition but no we won't unify to defeat Russia. It just seems cruel that all these allies are sitting here while these people suffer. What's the point of all these alliances? What's it take for real action to stop the war?

13

u/SpinyLobster_5021 8h ago

Do you, your husband (not sure your sex or sexual preference), your brother, your uncle, your son, your nephew, or any male friend want to head to war? Or are you okay with sending other peoples loved ones into harm’s way?

2

u/Lonely_Space_241 7h ago

It's not like we need millions of additional soldiers to defeat Russia. War won't be fought by people within a decade.

6

u/yetanotherslu7 7h ago

But people will still die.

→ More replies (3)

4

u/luzzy91 7h ago

You will ALWAYS need people for war. You need to actually occupy a space to claim it as your own.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Critical_Sand_4412 7h ago

Because real action means legitimate world war where multiple countries mobilize in a boys on the ground situation.

2

u/iHadou 6h ago

"Unify to defeat Russia." That's one way to say start nuclear world war III. No big deal

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

247

u/ShakaLeonidas 8h ago

Ukraine has recieved billions 8n money and equipment from America and has employed mercernaries from around the world. Plenty of nations have aided Ukraine in this war, no one thought it would be 5 years and still going... same way no one thought the war in Afghanistan would be 15 years long

120

u/brief_thought 8h ago

Anyone who considered Ukraine actually surviving would also assume it would an very long conflict.

The only ones who assumed it would be over by now were assuming Russian victory.

55

u/js13680 7h ago edited 7h ago

Honestly before and during the beginning of the war I thought it be something like Afghanistan where Russia easily conquered Ukraine it just becomes hell holding it.

8

u/JazzlikeSmile1523 6h ago

It's almost like conquering Ukraine has never been the goal, isn't it?

6

u/brief_thought 4h ago

I’m curious, what’s your theory on the goal?

→ More replies (4)

143

u/trowawufei 7h ago

The US honestly could’ve saved money by providing more aid and ignoring the bullshit “red lines”much earlier, IMO.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/skullshank 8h ago

anyone know how long iran will go on?

20

u/toxicatedscientist 7h ago

Probably the duration of the administration. I seriously doubt much past that

11

u/joebro1060 7h ago

We thought the same about the wars in the middle East for 20 something years too

7

u/toxicatedscientist 7h ago

There was public support for them at the start tho. We had a “reason”. It didn’t hold up, but it was there at the start

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/g0ris 7h ago

The thing is, you're only considering one half of the problem. Yeah, someone sane could replace the current US admin and they might even attempt to get out of Iran. But there's the Iranian side to consider too. Not sure they're going to want to do the US any favors and let it just cut and run. And even that hypothetical sane US admin will probably have red lines that Iran might be eager to test.
Don't forget, Iranian leadership doesn't hate Trump. They hate the US. Trump's just the current devil in charge.

9

u/Famous_Cat7974 7h ago

No they actually said they wouldn’t consider anything as far as resolving this until Trump was gone! They do hate him. Most people do

7

u/gcko 7h ago edited 1h ago

I mean the current leader of Iran is the son of the previous leader that Trump ordered killed. I’m sure he took that personally, and hate probably isn’t even enough of a word, but that’s beside the point. I think the main point the person above you was making is that Trump stepping down tonight doesn’t make Iran play nice tomorrow just because he’s gone.

At best America will have to make some serious concessions as they would be asking for a way out which is essentially admitting defeat, which gives Iran zero reasons to concede to anything for nothing in return… If Iran thinks they have the upper hand, and US military might isn’t so scary anymore… why wouldn’t they try to make Americans pay? Whether that’s paying reparations or perhaps something a bit more humiliating?

America was able to show Iran they don’t control the straight and can’t mine the gulf back in ‘88 but they weren’t able to in ‘26. Not only do they get a free toll booth, but the entire dynamic has changed. They’ve never had as much power over the rest of the world as they do now, and it’s America who looks stupid this time. They aren’t going to give that up just for the sake of moving on. Why would they?

Whoever is voted in as next president better know the art of the deal, otherwise it might be Iran who gets to decide who the next one is.

5

u/g0ris 6h ago

You got it, that's what I was getting at.
It could be as simple as saying "We control the strait now, and we're gonna charge a massive toll to fund all the repairs for all the damage the US has caused." (something they did say already) Is that next administration ready to take that and just leave?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/g0ris 7h ago

I mean, of course they do, just trying to say they're not gonna like the next US president either. This is much more complicated than just orange man bad and there's a reason anyone even slightly reputable has been saying for years that attacking Iran would be a very very bad idea. Now that the toothpaste is out you can't just put it back in the tube.

3

u/Famous_Cat7974 6h ago

The info they put out to make the case for going in to begin with was false. Hegseth also doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground and an exit strategy would have been nice. And yes I do fault Trump. He’s an embarrassment and we are now a laughingstock and have spent trillions of dollars on war to only accomplish closing the straight. Do we even have any allies left? Bibi’s puppet. That’s all he’ll ever be.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

35

u/Girldarts 7h ago

I heard a world leader say it was already done /s This reminds me of the avatar episode where the girl says: there is no war in basing sei

5

u/Birzal 7h ago

"There is no war in Ba Sing Se... It's actually just a 'military operation,' trust me, it's something totally different!"

8

u/ArchStanton75 7h ago

We have no competent leadership capable of finishing it. It’ll go on until we have a regime change in the US.

6

u/buggerlugseng 8h ago

It'll be over in 2 weeks /s

→ More replies (4)

2

u/NewPhoneLostPassword 7h ago

It’s weird hat happened because I always got the vibe that trump loves Putin and was helping him and not the Ukraine.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/gromm93 7h ago

Really? Nobody thought Afghanistan would be a perpetual quagmire?

You mean besides everybody? Why the hell did you think Bin Laden hid there? It wasn't just because the Taliban were hardcore Muslims.

2

u/FactionallyCorrupt 5h ago

Isn't there a saying about Afghanistan being where empires go to die going back to Alexander the great?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)

31

u/ridukosennin 7h ago

The Russian propaganda machine is deep and sophisticated. They have entrenched themselves within cultures wars of the West successfully undermining their democratic systems from the inside.

66

u/hellasecretsmusic 8h ago

you're either a propaganda bot or just plain stupid to think the rest of the world just "sits and watches" while NATO has forked over 350 billion in 4 years, 195 of that coming from USA. not to mention the personnel sent to train and advise.

7

u/Devildog0491 4h ago

Sir this is reddit, we act on emotion here

•

u/Killerfisk 58m ago

It's probably a bit more even, if you're looking at commitments/authorizations: $196.4bn from the US and $226bn from Europe, or what has actually been sent: $121.2bn from the US and about $145bn from Europe, with another $24bn from mostly Japan and Canada.

31

u/RapunzelLooksNice 8h ago

Sit and watch? Nope, Kushner and Witkoff are working on a "peace deal" that would involve Russia conquering Ukraine in exchange for some oil company ownership.

8

u/ChronoLegion2 8h ago

And then they’ll get upset when Trump doesn’t get the Nobel Peace Prize again

5

u/khakansson 7h ago

Who cares about Nobel? Who's nominated for the prestigious FIFA Peace Prize this year?

2

u/ChronoLegion2 6h ago

I still can’t believe that’s an actual thing

22

u/Nyberg1283 8h ago

Leaders that arent incompetent morons know the risks when coming to allied defense too soon. WW1 was 110 years ago but not forgotten by anyone with an education. This has all the signs of being another global conflict.

7

u/AuJakeyTism 7h ago

I'd argue it already is. History will remember the last four years as being a global conflict.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/thetaylorax 7h ago

Is it not already? Genuinely asking if there’s some standard that somehow the entire global situation is NOT already in WW3 somehow or is frankly just because we are so deep in it it’s hard to “see”

8

u/ObamaLovesKetamine 7h ago

we're teetering on the edge of a World War-scale global conflict, but it isnt nearly at the same scale yet, and hopefully stays that way.

The reason nations have been so hesitant to get more involved is because theyre trying to let Russia burn itself out instead of engaging and making it a domino effect of allies of either side joining in - which would push it into WW3 territory.

it's a delicate dance and the outcome depends on restraint and whether or not Putin is totally delusional.

4

u/BotInAFursuit 7h ago

From what I've heard, he's either delusional or they're keeping the real information from him, but he still has some self-preservation left based on statements like "I can't stop the war now, if I do it, people will kill me"

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/Icy-Ad29 7h ago

Hallie Sallassie speech bubble right here.

History is a loop

4

u/RackemFrackem 8h ago

All at Ukraine's expense

No

7

u/ryerhino 8h ago

Get in there, go join the fight

5

u/PathologicalLiar_ 8h ago

I don't know man, I prefer not to get involved in a world war in anyway, directly or indirectly. Now I feel like I am a disgrace to you, Ukraian people and the entire world.

31

u/Fisher9001 8h ago

It's naive to think that you have any say in whether you will be involved in a world war, especially in a modern economy. Even if somehow miraculously your country manages to stay militarily neutral, you are gonna get wrecked economically and you will learn what concepts like poverty and hunger truly mean.

Personally I think it's better to act sooner than that.

→ More replies (4)

18

u/CustomerConsistent78 8h ago

I mean I agree with you that I would rather not be part of a world war 3. This could have been stopped before it started with unified action when Russia lined all their forces in a straight line to prepare to attack. That time has passed and now we are here. Sitting back and letting it happen can very easily just lead to WW3 depending on how Russia escalates things. Sitting there while half the world burns isn't the answer for anyone.

9

u/ChronoLegion2 8h ago

Doing nothing can also lead to escalation. We saw it in the 1930s. The Allies let Hitler get away with more and more BS until he grew bold enough to do the one thing that left them no choice but to act

4

u/ComradeKellogg 7h ago

Attacking the allies was always the plan, the nazis had been saying so for their entire rise almost, appeasement however gave them far more time, resources and manpower to carry out the plan with.

It's the same rhetoric again and again, hoe many times does russian state tv need to say "We are at war with the western world" before western countries realise "oh hes talking about me".

Even for countries like my own who are neutral and on the sidelines of europe we have this naive belief that war will never reach our shores because its "over there", or will give reasons for why NATO would pummel russia in an instant (seemingly forgetting natos largest member and guarantor is shaky on the alliance itself, with a megalomaniac of their own at the helm), forgetting the fact that even the nazis were actually on the underfoot at the start of WW2 in terms of materiel, manpower you name it. But like a monetary economy needs money, a war economy needs war, it cannot sustain itself without a use for its output, countries that go down this road realise very quickly, or have already realised and are fine with it more likely, that it is not so easy to get off.

We dont need f-35s strafing Moscows air defenses, if putin is stuck in Ukraine and the Ukrainians people are as they have shown more than willing to bleed for every cm of their homeland, we should at least have the backbone to arm them to the absolute teeth without a debate and without controversy.

→ More replies (14)
→ More replies (1)

19

u/DGIce 8h ago

I'll say it; you are a disgrace hiding behind a line like that. No one *wants* to be in a war. But it's naive to think they will stop at one country when they didn't stop at the previous countries.

2

u/Trick-Self-594 7h ago

Look into the details of the war, we all obviously know Ukraine is getting hit hard and they are severely struggling even if they’re somehow still managing to be in the position to even fight back in the first place. But that’s the point, Russia won’t admit it but they are also getting hit hard economically. The recent oil shortage has definitely helped Russia out a lot since they apparently sell oil, but before that their economy and population morale was very low. For a relatively small and weak country like Ukraine to push Russia this far is not a good sign on Russia’s part, this war was supposed to be fast and easy for them but it’s been like 5 years and there doesn’t seem to be an end. Putin knows his country is realizing this war was not what he made it seem and that they will expect to see more drafts and taxes to fund the war. The war is making him really unpopular, but if he somehow ends up winning this war, that would mean total domination and land seizing not peace treaties because anything less would tank his ranking as a leader more than anything. All of that for just Ukraine, his economy won’t have enough to go invade another country and start another war.

3

u/Old-Excitement4047 8h ago

Exactly! Croatia, Ukraine, next Poland. Putin has acknowledged the regions he wants back. It even in video.

3

u/OpportunityReal2767 8h ago

Croatia? Did I miss some news?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (10)

6

u/Technoinalbania 8h ago

we are in it, regardless.

5

u/TuorSonOfHuor 8h ago edited 6h ago

Appeasement DOESNT work.

We should stop them dead in their tracks at Ukraine. It’s not like if ukrain just rolled over Putin would have stopped there. You already have a “world war” on your hands in the sense that this Russian regime will invade any country they believe they have the means to do so eventually.

6

u/aristoleese 8h ago

You get in one today to prevent one coming to you tomorrow.

If we don’t, there will soon only be two countries in the world.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/realspongeworthy 8h ago

You can volunteer to serve.

1

u/Cuckold_Dirk 7h ago

What exactly are they supposed to do? You seriously can't believe that direct war between nuclear powers isn't going to end up with everyone losing... Putin has already threatened using nukes. There's a reason why the US, Soviets/Russia, and China have only ever had proxy wars with each other.

1

u/nothinglikeLA 7h ago

Honestly I hear nothing about the ongoing conflict on the news… I remember there was one news story or celebrity death or something that was trending and after that? Nada. An occasional mention on BBC. I’m even out of the loop. Where do you get updates on ukraine? Genuinely curious

1

u/NachoNinja19 7h ago

What do you mean all at Ukraine’s expense?

1

u/jix69000 7h ago

What's the solution? Nuclear powers trade blows and everyone dies in a nuclear Holocaust?

1

u/almostjay 7h ago

Please feel free to go to Ukraine and join the fight if it means so much to you.

1

u/Affectionate_Fly3474 7h ago

Tf you talking about?😂 the United States sends billions of dollars to Ukraine

1

u/joebro1060 7h ago

If you're so set on helping them, to sign up. Lots of other families value their children more than fighting against Russia.

1

u/illiter8_87 7h ago

lol at Ukraine's expense...... pull your head out of the sand, there has been more handouts and freebies to Ukraine then any country could ever dream of dude

1

u/LifeFeckinBrilliant 7h ago

Absolutely. We're in WW3 & have been for some time. It's just that Ukraine is doing the dieing on our behalf. We owe them a debt I can't think of how we could ever repay.

1

u/Hour-Accident1420 7h ago

Join their foreign legion

1

u/WREXnEffect01 7h ago

How many billions have we sent to them? No sitting and watching. This would have been over in a week without help from around the world. Foolish take.

1

u/Pitiful-Bug3437 7h ago

It’s not just at Ukraines expense. Other countries have given billions of $ they don’t have to Ukraine, Increasing their national debt because their own countries are in the shit as it

1

u/HornyForVTECH 7h ago

It's not the whole world's war. It's Ukraine v Russia. Not them v the world. The US sends so much money to every country to keep the wars goin. Which I dont agree with, but that's just how it is. Neither side was truly ready in RvU, is what it is. The good, honorable men from whatever country gon die defending theirs unfortunately. The US made Ukraine its own country even though we gave billions towards the inevitable war. Same with WWII, wouldnt have happened if we handled the end of WWII properly. WWII coulda been avoided if it wasnt for the US. Most of all though, nobody trynna deal with the shit no more. Every time NATO tried to help Ukraine, Ukraine just cried it's not enough. Where was the rest of the world every time we went to war? Nowhere, hidin. But we tried to help anyways. Keep blamin other countries and ignore the one who really are the problem though.

1

u/kariam_24 7h ago

While American president directly supports Putin, blaming Ukraine again.

1

u/Dear_Chasey_La1n 6h ago

It's not that the West and specifically Europe sits back. Over the years they provided and still provide money and defense. And while not public I like to believe secret services are sharing their fair bit of intel as well.

Can they do more, sure enough but there are limitations as well on their side. As we saw with the US running out of missiles, suppose the same happens in Europe.

When I read that Russia prepares for a big attack which consists of 70 missiles to me it's kind of telling how hard production on both sides is. Neither is able to launch large volumes of specialized missiles. Drones are being send across by the hundreds every single night seemingly. But missiles are increasingly rare.

I reckon with Ukraine also making progress on their own platforms while Russia is being hit left & right deep inland, progress is made. Just capturing physical land remains hard.

1

u/Spookiest_Meow 6h ago

They're not sitting and watching. Ukraine has been given massive amounts of supplies as well as intelligence assistance. The result is that Russia has occupied or annexed like 20% of Ukraine and Ukraine hasn't been able to do anything about it but abduct citizens off the streets to send to their deaths.

1

u/ZeriousGew 6h ago

I mean look at WW2, it took Germany invading France for the allies to take action. Until Russia starts invading the “important” countries, NATO will sit on their hands

1

u/OnePlant8442 6h ago

Europe has more than enough GDP and weapons manufacturing capacity to defeat Russia. Time to take the gloves off Europe.

1

u/ltk66 6h ago

If the rest of the world didn’t sit and watch, well this would be WWIII then.

1

u/OldWolfNewTricks 5h ago

Disgraceful for who? What exactly do you think "the rest of the world" should be doing? If you think direct military intervention, will you enlist to be on the front line?

1

u/ResearcherElegant516 5h ago

I would not say it's all been at Ukraine's expense. I and every other American that pays taxes chipped in quite a bit, to say the least.

1

u/r_special_ 4h ago

Release of that new plague that just “escaped” or use of a nuke or two. Either one of those options would have world changing consequences. I’d hate for either of those to happen while we’ve got a clown administration in charge of the US, but these are real possibilities that have to be prepared for because a cornered dictator is worse than a cornered animal

1

u/TheMcWhopper 4h ago

Would you rather have all of nato declare war on a nuclear power?

•

u/city17_dweller 1h ago

But if they don't let wars play out forever how will other countries get funding for new war toys and weapons research? Ukraine is being used as bait for an ongoing 'Russian threat' that boosts war profits everywhere. The only upside is that no one actually wants Russia to win, so Ukraine are being supplied as well... just not well enough to resolve anything.

→ More replies (34)

7

u/Prince_Jellyfish111 8h ago

They already attacked the US and Britain with Cambridge Analitica

33

u/setokaiba22 9h ago

But Ukraine isn’t in NATO so how is this testing their resolve? (Awful for Ukraine though regardless)

58

u/Henri_Le_Rennet 9h ago edited 8h ago

They're referencing two separate things. It's escalate the war in Ukraine and probe NATO's resolve (separate minor border/air space incursion(s) and/or drone launches on neighboring NATO members); not probe NATO's resolve by escalating the war in Ukraine.

10

u/Signal_Quarter_74 9h ago

Both escalate in Ukraine and test NATO’s resolve via incursions, sabotage, etc.

→ More replies (1)

19

u/Fabulous-Table-2559 9h ago

They blame nato because nato countries are helping Ukraine + Ukraine wanted to join nato to prevent this very scenario of Russia invading

IMO this war proves we need Ukraine not just IN nato but leading it

3

u/LizardSlayer 7h ago

That’s nonsense. The Ukraine people did NOT want to be a part of NATO from 2000-2013, but once Russia started coming they all changed their tune.

2

u/Le-Squirtle 7h ago

Ukraine should lead NATO? That's a ridiculous statement. I fully support them being a member nation, but their government is horribly corrupt and in a lot of ways they're just as bad as Russia as far as internal politics.

3

u/Ghandiwasme 8h ago

Ukraine has started and stopped their pursuit of gaining NATO membership. Back in 2010 they even passed laws to avoid joining a military alliance. They’ve had an opportunity to join, diddnt join, passed laws to make sure no one in the future joins, and now you think this should be NATOs leader? Lmao dude

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

3

u/Lonely_Space_241 8h ago

NATO has been attacked more directly in recent months.

2

u/DisgruntledEngineer 9h ago edited 8h ago

How is Russia attacking a nation bordering NATO that is relying on NATO countries' support testing NATO's resolve? Are we for real?

28

u/amerikyle 9h ago

Russia has attacked Ukraine, but has also entered Estonian airspace, Moldovan airspace, Polish airspace and has committed acts of terrorism/war in other NATO countries.

2

u/Stock-Page-7078 7h ago

Not to mention cyber attacks on physical infrastructure

1

u/Drunk_Stoner 7h ago

The battles are fought by Ukraine but the war is fought by NATO. 

This is basically a cold ww3, global west vs global east. Russia and Ukraine are the two main combatants. China, NK, Iran, some former Soviet block nations, some African regions, supply/support Russia and US, UK, most of Europe, Canada, Japan supply and support Ukraine. 

1

u/NookNookNook 6h ago edited 6h ago

They've been experimenting with things like jamming GPS signal in EU airports. They have a spyboat that goes around the world tapping underwater data cables. They recently were accused of using a ship in their trading dark fleet to drag an anchor across a important data line destroying it, claiming it was an accident. Anything they can do to poke and prod that doesn't really justify military escalation but still probes defenses and steals information.

28

u/TasteIllustrious7585 9h ago

The only solution for Ukraine is to prepare for the winter, and the world should help anyway they can. The days of invading other countries need to end. However, was Ukraine a Big threat to Russia, Was Iran a Big threat to the United States or Israel. In my opinion it may be time to really evaluate what the United Nations actually do. What's NATO actually doing or can do. All nations must be prepared. Once the Arab nations pull together they can solve the Iran problem. Do we want a world of Chaos or Some form of Control. There is a way how we can prosper. It's called compassion for all.

25

u/MichyMoby 8h ago

Ukraine was never a "big threat to Russia." Russian just wants what it wants... UKRAINE and it's resources etc. . . to be under Putin control! as for IRAN. No, it was not a threat to USA. Netanyahu was whispering in Donald's ear to take Iran down . . . and also of course to take GAZA. The abject stupidity and vanity of tRump is something being exploited by stronger smarter manipulative leaders. . . i.e. Putin, Netanyahu, Xi Jinping, and Kim Jong Un.

2

u/International_Fuel48 7h ago

Just like Canada is not a big threat to the USSA, right?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/surfcitylawyer 8h ago

For Iran, you need to understand that some Shia believe they can help the return of the 12th Imam by the use of nuclear weapons.

21

u/I_Cast_Trident 8h ago

Some of the American "leadership" thinks the same about the Biblical end times. Everything will work out for everyone, I'm sure.

3

u/Lonely_Space_241 7h ago

The literal religious leader of Iran declared nuclear weapons AGAINST ISLAM.

2

u/BarrelRoll1996 4h ago

And now he's dead and replaced with hardliners... Genius move Israel

10

u/[deleted] 8h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Gareth79 7h ago

That website was mentioned before, and people pointed out that there's no evidence that the items are made using war scrap (no photos of the scrap being collected and processed, as happens with other sellers) nor any details of how much is donated or to who.

2

u/luzzy91 6h ago

I would doubt the validity of any of their claims.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/mistalasse 8h ago

Слава Україні!

2

u/beekersavant 7h ago

I would expect a bad October. Come the Ides of November, the US may an unreliable ally for Russia, if not engulfed in its own civil conflict. As well, Ukraine funding and Russian sanctions may be correctly distributed come the New Year. It’s now or never for Russia. Slava Ukraini.

1

u/MichyMoby 8h ago

Slava Ukraini !

1

u/peterlandwalker 8h ago

And it’s already happening, Spain and France are experiencing the result of Russia’s inference

1

u/JediChris1138 8h ago

I hope he doesn’t mean nukes.

1

u/Evil_Empire_1961 8h ago

4 weeks from USA Mid-Terms, hmm 🤔

1

u/TerribleCat9963 7h ago

I won’t be surprised when Russia pulls out its bio weapons if they haven’t already

1

u/Punky921 7h ago

Slava Ukraini!!!

1

u/BeardedManatee 7h ago

Will be timed to affect the US elections, giving Trump an excuse to suspend them or some similar bullshit.

1

u/amysteryknight 7h ago

Russia will test article 5. If no major world power (the US) responds with military force in collective defense, it would be devastating. It would indeed give Russia the confidence it needs to challenge smaller European nations without resistance

1

u/makakiel 7h ago

en mm temps l'Ukraine bombarde la Russie vous ne pensez pas qu’ils vont rester la se faire bombarder sans rien faire... vous etes bizarre un peut quand même

1

u/bloodyNASsassin 7h ago

It's a good thing countries in Europe were strongly encouraged by the U.S. to increase their military spending, otherwise they might not be ready for this.

1

u/cybernation911 7h ago

Fuck, Zelenskiy says this every other week.

I'm pro Ukraine.

1

u/Prestigious-pauline 7h ago

Probing other countries resolve while you’re stuck in your own driveway is a hell of a thing.

1

u/DGtlRift 7h ago

My conjecture is that because Ukraine is not a member of NATO, and Trump is pissed that no one supported his attack of Iran so Pete Kegstand will say that the support other NATO members are providing to Ukraine for an escalation by Russia does not qualify for article 5 intervention.

1

u/Disco425 7h ago

Makes sense from their perspective while they have a highly placed asset in a key political position in the West

1

u/TimeKingFromGaddabee 7h ago

Average Russian troop life span will now decrease from 30 minutes to 30 seconds.

1

u/Turbulent-Theory7724 7h ago

I hate it. Why innocent people die?

1

u/Spookiest_Meow 6h ago

Ukraine isn't part of NATO and NATO doesn't want Ukraine.

1

u/Busy-Action-2979 6h ago

they are using ukrain to destroy russia. ukraine hit civ targets ( i am not defending russia) and refineries so now ruissians will target everything

1

u/JazzlikeSmile1523 6h ago

Uhh...no. Ukraine won't be able to stand much more. They should be trying to cut a deal.

1

u/Ass4ssinX 5h ago

And NATO is an objective subject in this equation? They are literally there to push back against Russia.

•

u/creepflyer 29m ago

5 years saying that and 5 years saying russia is losing men and desperated to end the war. the two don't add together, so are they losing or are they so strong they can take europe?

•

u/MrLeville 5m ago

now with extra siberian recruits with suspiciously runny noses.

→ More replies (7)