Question in title. Just wondering as I saw France had proposed an initiative to withdraw because of the US’ shenanigans…

  • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Tactical nukes are relatively new

    Like new if you time traveled from the 50s We literally conceived of a bazooka launched personal nuke. Generally speaking not much was actually made by anyone and is unlikely to have been maintained as they would have been deemed basically useless for decades as is very expensive to maintain.

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well TIL. I though they couldn’t make them that small back then. But anyway, the russians were producing the latest version of small tactical nukes in the 20 teens. Those are pretty new.

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        The logic behind not using them is either they can’t or they can’t. They didn’t kill a million russians and junk a fair chunk of their existing hardware for nothing. The reasonable perception is that they couldn’t take Ukraine and fight NATO at all whereas without NATO assistance historical or current Ukraine would have actually fallen in 3 days. Their ability to take Ukraine is therefore 100% a function of how well they can keep NATO out of it and nuking Ukraine blows that objective.