• LoveSausage
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          Will you start and put yourself in a grave? Or is it just the “others”?

        • pearable
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Groups of humans have lived beneficially with other life before. Plenty of folks are doing it right now. The endless need for consumption and extraction are manufactured for the benefit of the few. Eliminate the system that requires endless economic growth and we can start making decisions that won’t destroy ourselves and others

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    We already had the Cuban missile crisis before, we don’t need this shit again. This time it might go differently.

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    While I can understand Poland’s desire to have nuclear weapons available, this seems like it would be a really provocative step towards Russia. Nuclear weapons positioned that close to Russia will raise the threat of a nuclear first strike against Russia. Even without an unstable strongman in charge of Russia, it’s easy to see how a Russian government would be uncomfortable with this. At the same time, with an unstable strongman in charge of Russia, the provocation may not matter. Putin has proven he is willing to invade his neighbor and slaughter thousands, without provocation. So, I’m sure Poland isn’t as worried about provocation as they are defense.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    Unnecessary, there is nothing Poland can offer that isn’t already guaranteed by an Ohio class submarine

  • bigpEE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    7 months ago

    Cool, let’s let them. Poland’s a strong ally in Europe. I don’t see a downside

    • Arthur BesseA
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      you don’t see any downside to nuclear escalation?

        • AEsheron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          This isn’t the same. Host nukes is not owning nukes, they seems to be proposing housing US nukes that Poland would not have control of, or be able to launch. With no launch codes, they aren’t a valid deterrent to conventional war, unless the world is convinced the US would use them to protect Polish sovereignty, which would obviously not be on the table.

          • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            There’s no way USA would ever let Russia (or any other enemy) even near the nukes in Poland.

            So really hosting USA’s nukes provides a double guarantee for help in case of invasion on top of NATO

    • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      it’s a mirror of “Cuba is a strong ally in the West, let’s let them have nukes. What could go wrong”

      • bigpEE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Nothing did go wrong, though. If you’re saying there was a close call, that’s true, but Russia doesn’t have the ability to threaten a conventional response. And no one gets nuked for moving nukes around; look at Belarus.

    • Omega_Haxors
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      The problem with the world is that good people are conflicted while evil people are confident.