Recent comments in /f/worldnews

autotldr t1_j6m5iku wrote

Reply to Russian Troops Offered Bounties for Destroying Western Tanks in Ukraine by flopsyplum

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 54%. (I'm a bot)

> A Russian company has offered a cash bounty of up to 5 million rubles for the destruction or capture of Western-made tanks recently promised to Ukraine by its European and American allies.

> Multiple Western countries including the United States and Germany announced they would provide advanced combat tanks to help boost Kyiv's military capacity last week, prompting Moscow to threaten any tanks shipped to Kyiv with destruction.

> Russian regional volunteer battalions also offered one-time payments and bonuses for the destruction of enemy heavy weaponry, including payments of up to 300,000 rubles for destroying an enemy tank or aircraft.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: tank^#1 rubles^#2 destruction^#3 capture^#4 Fores^#5

3

neverfarts t1_j6m5579 wrote

Reply to comment by ChadorLondo in Ukraine Says Its Air Defenses Can't Protect Against Iranian Ballistic Missiles by BeautyInTheNegitive

Because the iranian nuclear program is light years ahead of the Iraqi one. Some of it is buried so deep, only the US's biggest of bombs, deliverable only by US strategic bombers stand a chance of destroying it. Israel can't execute this all alone, as they did in Iraq and Syria. So until American support and active engagement is guaranteed, nothing on such scale will happen.

1

RandomStuffGenerator t1_j6m4te2 wrote

Reply to comment by Sxzym in Russia says nuclear arms treaty with US may end after 2026 by Sxzym

Not at all, but he will likely be less powerful and receive a country with a collapsed economy, a decimated military, no diplomatic leverage, a huge pile of sanctions, and probably very difficult internal conflicts.

It still sucks that they have nukes (probably even more so, since selling them to rogue states gets quick cash to deal with these problems), but Russia will otherwise pose no threat to anyone but the Russians who didn't make it out if there, at least for a decade.

5

-Purple_Light_Saber- t1_j6m4ro0 wrote

Reply to comment by CalTechie-55 in Haavisto: Finland has patience to wait for Nato membership — with Sweden. by parandroidfinn

Yes, and the UK for example has already done so. But that kind of arrangement would create a lot of red tape. Sweden and Finland are de facto under NATO protection already, and the main benefit of formal membership comes from NATO's coordination structures (planning, logistics, operations etc.). With 28 separate treaties, things would be far more messy and complex.

Of course, if Turkey doesn't see sense, Sweden (and Finland) will be integrated into the collective defence system. NATO is the preferred option, but alternate solutions exist.

1

ConnorChandler t1_j6m4n1r wrote

Reply to comment by lukfrom in Peru tourism industry in 'free fall' as Machu Picchu closed by protests by DoremusJessup

It's complicated, it's a fight between the upper class Lima born Peruvians who are sick of the constant political instability and the poor indigenous people of Peru's south who have been disenfranchised for years, finally have a champion who was one of them in Castillo only for him to be held down by the majority conservative Congress to the point he had to launch a self coup just to get his policies across.

−11