• AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      45 minutes ago

      Well yes we do, ICBMs are generally associated with nukes because their sheer cost normally makes them impractical for standard explosive payloads.

    • Saleh@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      25 minutes ago

      While i appreciate the whish that Russian nukes don’t work, it would be exceptional for none of their 10.000 or so to work. Even if only 1 in 1.000 work, that is still enough to annihilate some 10-20 million people or so.

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 minutes ago

      How insane would that be? A nuke that fails to go off and they were like: just kidddding.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Why though? A warning to the west?
    Cause last time I checked, Russia and Ukraine are on the same continent, making this a huge waste.

    • remon@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Cause last time I checked, Russia and Ukraine are on the same continen

      The RS-26 only has around 6000km range and was developed for striking Europe.

    • Saleh@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Probably a warning in response to letting Ukraine use western missiles deep into russian territory.

      • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        “deep into russian territory” is quite an exaggeration. Biden only okayed it for the Kursk and neighbouring regions.

        The U.S. official, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly about the decision, said the U.S. is allowing Ukraine to use the weapons to target in and around Kursk — the same region where some 10,000 North Korean troops were recently deployed, according to the U.S. and its allies.

        Source: NPR

      • Skua@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Funnily enough, it is not according to Russia. The definition of “continent” is almost completely arbritrary anyway, and exactly where you draw the line between Europe and Asia - or if you draw it at all - is probably the fuzziest bit of all. Russia and many other countries just consider Eurasia to be one continent

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        that still doesn’t explain using an icbm against a nation you share a border with. there’s some message russia is sending. it’s either “don’t forget, we have icbms and they’re operational” or it’s “we are running low on standard missiles and have to fight weird”

        • _bcron_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Don’t let the name fool you, ICBMs not only have a much larger range but they also (generally) have higher payloads and they’re designed around ‘user servicable’ and swappable warheads.

          They’re sending a message and it isn’t “we could hit you even if you were thousands of kilometers away”, it’s “we could bolt a nuke to this bad boy”

          • Laser@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            43 minutes ago

            I mean… The general point still stands. It’s not that western nations seriously doubt that Russia has these weapons. We know Russia has ICBMs, we know they have nukes, we know they’re willing to attack Ukraine with conventional weapons.

            What Western nations doubt is that Russia would actually attack them or use nukes, because it’d trigger a united response they’d lose against, and they know that and want to avoid it.

            It’s not about capabilities, but willingness.

            • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 minutes ago

              Yeah, but a central tenet of nuclear deterrence is that you don’t constantly posture your own position with nuclear armaments. If you keep saying if you cross this red line we’ll go nuclear, and then don’t … It makes future threats pretty laughable.

              International nuclear relations have already been gamed out. It’s always a last case scenario, because everyone has a sense of self preservation, especially the narcissistic types that like to be in charge of countries.

              No one wants to live in a nuclear wasteland, so no one is going to create a nuclear wasteland unless they feel that they themselves are in immediate existential danger, and even then it would be an action made in spite.

  • perestroika@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    The report is true. The landings were recorded on CCTV.

    https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1859535662539526551

    It was even expected. A few days ago, Ukrainian intelligence informed the public that a non-standard missile attack was likely coming. They had seen launch preparations in Astrakhan and speculated that a liquid-fuel ICBM would be launched with multiple hypersonic glide vehicles.

    Apparently, multiple shots of something considerably more dumb - what seems like six ICBMs with dummy warheads (alternatively a single missile with six warheads, each with six penetration aids) - rained down on Dnipro. It seems that air defense didn’t even fire, no chance of intercepting and what’s the point.

    I guess this must be Putin’s language for “don’t poke our command centers” (Ukrainians recently attacked the command center of Russia’s army group north). I guess Ukrainians can decipher what he means and won’t torch the Kremlin, but will keep poking command centers.

    • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s sad that to avoid twitter, owned by a far right billionaire, the alternative is the telegraph, owned by rupert murdoch, a far right billionaire.

        • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          I don’t have to own a peertube instance to be allowed to say it’s sad that video sharing is monopolised by billionaires.

          (If I misunderstood your reply, I’m sorry, I’m just used to getting snarky comments here on lemmy)

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Sorry, I meant it in a “be the change you wish to see in the world” sort of way, not a “you aren’t entitled to complain” sort of way.