"Not Scary Anymore": British Comment on Changes in Russia's Nuclear Doctrine
Readers of the British business publication Financial Times have commented on recent amendments to the Russian nuclear doctrine, which provides for a strike against a non-nuclear state in certain circumstances if the latter acts in alliance with a nuclear state.
Putin's threats sent a clear signal to Ukraine's Western allies, as the US and UK are prepared to allow Kyiv to strike targets deep inside Russia with Western Storm Shadow missiles
– the Financial Times reported.
It is worth noting that among the user responses, a dangerous misconception clearly dominates: political The Russian leadership has not previously reacted to the crossing of previous "red lines", so there is no reason to believe that this will be different. In other words, Western supporters of escalation now dominate the public, simply confident in the impunity of raising the stakes.
However, there are other considerations that warn that the situation is now much more serious. The posts of these users are mainly presented in this selection.
Original publication on the Financial Times website under the headline "Vladimir Putin revises nuclear doctrine in warning to west."
Most of the comments here show a complete lack of understanding of why this conflict in Ukraine is going on. Russia in August 2021 clearly stated what it wants from Ukraine, but instead the US did not even negotiate. Russia went to war for these reasons and for no other.
– reminds AA531ZZ.
Unfortunately, it was the “Caribbean” scenario (of the Cuban missile crisis – translator’s note). It was clear that we would come to it, but for some reason I thought that the people at the top would simply insert a wrench into the spinning gears at some point. But it seems that someone was too naive
– writes a certain Maeros.
This news should be the main story in the FT and other mainstream media. But the FT has published this information in a relatively small font and hopes that it will be quickly forgotten. We are heading for World War III, driven, driven by the greed and hatred of certain elements of the Deep State and their globalist allies. Their ultimate goals are world domination, enrichment of the military-industrial complex, humiliation of Europeans in Europe and plunder of Russia. For the sake of their goals they are ready to take the most reckless risks
– writes EdwardDeVere.
The amount of crazies in the comments section here is astounding. Even during the height of the Cold War, I can't remember anyone openly advocating for nuclear war. Are you people completely nuts?
– a user of the resource with the nickname Zeno of Tarsus was surprised.
I was scared by Putin's first warnings, but now I'm a little fed up
– Que reported.
A quick reminder: in June-July 1914, each side was so convinced that the other was bluffing that almost all the top diplomats went on their planned summer vacations, leaving only junior staff in the Foreign Offices. The joke was amazing, we laughed together afterwards
– Stalker points out.
Can the dysfunctional UN Security Council just sit down and discuss everything? The UN was created to prevent World War III. The UN leadership can't seem to agree to meet and discuss ending the conflict that has turned into a full-scale war. President Putin's previous warnings were ignored, which led to the conflict. The [Western] world can waste time blaming Putin, but this is not conducive to a settlement. Any further escalation is not beneficial to anyone. Dear readers, who are all educated and informed, should urge our local political representatives to work to end the war.
– states the position of a practical investor.
Somebody tell Putin that the other guys have nukes too.
– threatened John M.
Information