What if Russia destroyed only the federal command structure and left the states intact? - A speculation produced from desperation

[Cpt. Stud Beefpile]

As the undeclared war/money-laundering effort in Ukraine continues, I'm sure we're all painfully mindful of the fact that that the United States has given Russia more than enough casus beli to pull out the Cheget if Putin makes the call.

Along with everyone else I don't have a private Luftwaffe or Kreigsmarine able to stop the flow of war material, nor an ICBM to flatten the ZOG high command in Israel. Even my vote is inconsequential. So while browsing a prepper forum with the mega-grim task of trying to prepare for the worst, I had this desperately insane idea:

What if Putin decided - or could somehow be convinced - to flatten the federal string-pullers enough to give America as a whole a bloody nose and a final chance to back the fuck off, for a war that nobody besides looney-ass NeoCon grognards had any interest fighting in the first place? And yes, I fully realize how batcrap autistic this sounds. It is the desperate idea of someone whose money and military are shackled to an incompetent plutocracy who are willing to risk everything we care about from turning into a lifeless self-illuminating parking lot.

For instance, instead of burning the entirety of Washington DC with a tactical nuke, what about using low-yield devices that merely fragged the major federal buildings and immediate area around them? Innocent people would still die, unfortunately enough, but compared to what would follow a full nuclear barrage I'll take Option A. Watch "The day after" and "Threads" if you want some idea of the endgame of Option B.

What would be the absolute bare minimum target list to leave the individual states and remaining US Military able to say "welp, the idiots are all gone, so we no longer have any obligation to follow their dumbass orders."

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

CNN and MSNPC would start screeching about how Putin destroyed our sacred democracy and it's anudda 1/6 so whichever fuckwit in the Biden regime fortunate enough not to be in DC that day gets named dict--sorry, president and the US fires back with as the cattle cheer for mass death.

That's why you don't do a nuclear war like that. Leveling DC is just the start of the attack. Trust me, I wish it were possible to decapitate the US government and if Putin found a way he'd be the savior of humanity, but it just doesn't work like that.

 

[AgendaPoster]

Putin will level ZOG any day now comrades!
Stay strong, Russia will save the Le Ebin Huwhite Race from the ZOGniks!

 

[Bartolomeow Kittensberger]

Continuity of Goyim (COG) ensures that a true decapitation of the US Government is not viable.

It's a pipe dream, nothing more.

 

[Jewthulhu]

I told myself I'd stop interacting with the braindead conversation around Ukraine but I can't help but call OP an utter retard.

At the very least, the US giving weapons of war to Ukraine does not give Russia casus belli to use nukes, even under their own stated nuclear policy.

 

[Kendall Motor Oil]

I told myself I'd stop interacting with the braindead conversation around Ukraine but I can't help but call OP an utter retard.

At the very least, the US giving weapons of war to Ukraine does not give Russia casus belli to use nukes, even under their own stated nuclear policy.

But Russia is now based because they are anti ZOG. Don't look into Russia further than that. They're hekkin based.
The pro-russia accounts on KF spend a lot of time shitting up the news thread. They're the only group who neg-rates people consistently for opinions they don't like.

 

[Wesley Willis]

Depends on how quickly they shuffle away the dancing Israelis.

 

[Cpt. Stud Beefpile]

I told myself I'd stop interacting with the braindead conversation around Ukraine but I can't help but call OP an utter retard.

At the very least, the US giving weapons of war to Ukraine does not give Russia casus belli to use nukes, even under their own stated nuclear policy.

Well you'd be an expert on being a retard, you faggot Jew.

Their 'stated policy' is as reliable as everything else they say. Don't believe a word of it. We are poking an angry bear with a cardboard cut-out Zelensky on the end of the stick to pretend we aren't the ones doing it. Nobody is fooled except the desperately delusional Twittards. It is not a matter of IF we will push them too far but WHEN.

Perhaps one brave officer somewhere in the chain that says "nyet", like Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov, can stop a worldwide BBQ. But counting on that kind of miracle AGAIN is...insane and irresponsible beyond words.

About the only other hope is a coup when Putin's mafia buddies realize he's wrecked the nation's military capacity for very little gain.

 

[Jewthulhu]

Well you'd be an expert on being a retard, you faggot Jew.

Their 'stated policy' is as reliable as everything else they say. Don't believe a word of it. We are poking an angry bear with a cardboard cut-out Zelensky on the end of the stick to pretend we aren't the ones doing it. Nobody is fooled except the desperately delusional Twittards. It is not a matter of IF we will push them too far but WHEN.

Perhaps one brave officer somewhere in the chain that says "nyet", like Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov, can stop a worldwide BBQ. But counting on that kind of miracle AGAIN is...insane and irresponsible beyond words.

About the only other hope is a coup when Putin's mafia buddies realize he's wrecked the nation's military capacity for very little gain.

Lol calm down

 

[Angry Alt Right Nerd]

There is no chance, the overwhelming vast majority of Americans love the federal government of the United States, an attack on the government is an attack on them all.

 

[Return of the Freaker]

Well you'd be an expert on being a retard, you faggot Jew.

Their 'stated policy' is as reliable as everything else they say. Don't believe a word of it. We are poking an angry bear with a cardboard cut-out Zelensky on the end of the stick to pretend we aren't the ones doing it. Nobody is fooled except the desperately delusional Twittards. It is not a matter of IF we will push them too far but WHEN.

Perhaps one brave officer somewhere in the chain that says "nyet", like Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov, can stop a worldwide BBQ. But counting on that kind of miracle AGAIN is...insane and irresponsible beyond words.

About the only other hope is a coup when Putin's mafia buddies realize he's wrecked the nation's military capacity for very little gain.

That's nice, now how about based huwhite savior Putin cavorting around with Rabbis and Jewish oligarchs and holocaust denial being illegal in Russia?

 

[AgendaPoster]

I told myself I'd stop interacting with the braindead conversation around Ukraine but I can't help but call OP an utter retard.

At the very least, the US giving weapons of war to Ukraine does not give Russia casus belli to use nukes, even under their own stated nuclear policy.

There's precedent that nuclear powers armed and meddled in their enemies' wars, so there's not much to worry about.
Russia is sperging out because it has to. But the threats are nearly empty.
And there is no way we could allow some country to take and annex lands just because it has nukes, if we openly allow it, it's directly WW3 between the nuclear armed countries.

 

[draggs]

What if Shinji just got in the damn robot and started the autistocalypse instead of letting Vlad daddy and Hoe Biden steal his thunder

 

[Jewthulhu]

There's precedent that nuclear powers armed and meddled in their enemies' wars, so there's not much to worry about.
Russia is sperging out because it has to. But the threats are nearly empty.
And there is no way we could allow some country to take and annex lands just because it has nukes, if we openly allow it, it's directly WW3 between the nuclear armed countries.

I used a bad wording. I meant "at the least" as in it was the least of the problems with the OP.

Spoiler: Nuclear Strategy Sperging

As for Russia's nuclear sperging, it's a kind of interesting situation. During the 90s, after the collapse of the USSR and the Russian army was at its weakest, Russia adopted a nuclear strategy similar to "massive retaliation" in order to make up for the weakness in conventional forces. It walked the strategy back since, pledging to only use nuclear weapons in either response to a nuclear attack or "in case of aggression against Russia with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened." The problem for many analysts is the vagueness of the statement "when the very existence of the state is threatened." On the surface, in a more sane state, one would imagine it to only imply armed conventional invasion that they feel that they cannot defend against. However, not only does Russia like to speak of its foreign strategic projects in a very existentialist manner, but Russia has a history of making loose threats to use nuclear force (long before the current conflict), to the point where even China gets concerned. Add on top of that how much Russia's conventional forces are underperforming in Ukraine, and many people start getting concerned.

Now, does that mean that Russia will actually follow through? Probably not, they know the US/NATO still has most of their nuclear arsenal pointed right at them, and believe (rightfully so) that any use of nuclear weapons would be met with nuclear retaliation. The problem with nuclear saber-rattling though is how destabilizing it is. Not only does it increase tensions and puts everyone's nuclear forces on alert, but it sets a bad precedent, one that drastically increases the chances of something going wrong.

 

[AgendaPoster]

I used a bad wording. I meant "at the least" as in it was the least of the problems with the OP.

Spoiler: Nuclear Strategy Sperging

As for Russia's nuclear sperging, it's a kind of interesting situation. During the 90s, after the collapse of the USSR and the Russian army was at its weakest, Russia adopted a nuclear strategy similar to "massive retaliation" in order to make up for the weakness in conventional forces. It walked the strategy back since, pledging to only use nuclear weapons in either response to a nuclear attack or "in case of aggression against Russia with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened." The problem for many analysts is the vagueness of the statement "when the very existence of the state is threatened." On the surface, in a more sane state, one would imagine it to only imply armed conventional invasion that they feel that they cannot defend against. However, not only does Russia like to speak of its foreign strategic projects in a very existentialist manner, but Russia has a history of making loose threats to use nuclear force (long before the current conflict), to the point where even China gets concerned. Add on top of that how much Russia's conventional forces are underperforming in Ukraine, and many people start getting concerned.

Now, does that mean that Russia will actually follow through? Probably not, they know the US/NATO still has most of their nuclear arsenal pointed right at them, and believe (rightfully so) that any use of nuclear weapons would be met with nuclear retaliation. The problem with nuclear saber-rattling though is how destabilizing it is. Not only does it increase tensions and puts everyone's nuclear forces on alert, but it sets a bad precedent, one that drastically increases the chances of something going wrong.

It is destabilizing but there is nothing we can do. As long as Russians accept Putin's rule or any of his underling oligarchs', this is what we will get as "diplomacy".
For most of East EU this is no surprise as we have always, always warned that Russia is a traditionally militaristic, expansionist state. Largest on the planet. Yet it's never enough. It's disastrous to be on its borders, regardless of what regime Russia has, be it monarchy, communism, Soviets or capitalism like now.
When things go wrong for Russia, it'll make these belligerent threats, especially if isolated. I'm not entirely dismissing them, but at the same time, regardless of what Russian propaganda says, nobody wants to drive its tanks on Moscow and put the regime under existential threat so it feels that nukes are necessary. We just want to remove it from lands it does not own, and maybe if you're pissed at the vatnigs for destabilizing the area like me, you'd favor some sort of glowie gayops to replace Putin, but that comes with its own big dangers.
Most likely scenario is Russia will keep Crimea and, depending on Western help and Ukraine's resources to deal with the savagery, Donbas' status is more flexible.
Unlike most pro-Ukraine dudes, I'm quite pessimistic about things. While Ukraine's resistance is to be praised, Russia will slowly mobilize more and more resources and roll over the enemy. Chances are small for Ukraine to "win" and getting smaller every week that passes like this.
But even if Russia dismembers Ukraine or takes it over, and the war is "over", the illusion of peace is gone, bye-bye, all of you here can kiss stability and geopolitics as normal goodbye. It's gonna be super-competition and war for a while.

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

The problem is that the forces that compelled the western democracies into ultra-lgbt hyper tyranny aren't in Washington DC, it's international finance which has its seat in New York. Without removing the power and influence of this cabal of bankers, nothing meaningful would change. I am a communist and even I recognize this.

 

[Cpt. Stud Beefpile]

The problem is that the forces that compelled the western democracies into ultra-lgbt hyper tyranny aren't in Washington DC, it's international finance which has its seat in New York.

...fuck. That's a very good point. I was thinking solely along the lines of military command and federal ability to control the states at gunpoint.

 

[Jewthulhu]

When things go wrong for Russia, it'll make these belligerent threats, especially if isolated. I'm not entirely dismissing them, but at the same time, regardless of what Russian propaganda says, nobody wants to drive its tanks on Moscow and put the regime under existential threat so it feels that nukes are necessary.

Russia has an extremely paranoid view of the west. Realistically, yeah. NATO is a defensive alliance and literally no one in charge is thinking of invading Russia. But Russia constantly acts as if it's on the brink of invasion or nuclear annihilation, which, ironically, causes more political favor towards NATO which only makes Russia more paranoid. Case in point, Russia's military action against Ukraine (which many have purported to being a response to NATO expansion), succeeded in getting Finland and Sweden to join NATO.

and maybe if you're pissed at the vatnigs for destabilizing the area like me, you'd favor some sort of glowie gayops to replace Putin, but that comes with its own big dangers.

Eh. As much as I'd love to see a more stable leader in power (and, more importantly, and end to the corruption of the Orthodox Church), glow-in-the-dark gayops will probably do more harm than good. In a country that's already paranoid about the west, that blames the CIA for more shit than even the most schizophrenic /pol/ack, and with how well CIA glowops have traditionally went, something like that would just make Russia more (justifiably) pissed and probably create even more problems.

Most likely scenario is Russia will keep Crimea and, depending on Western help and Ukraine's resources to deal with the savagery, Donbas' status is more flexible.
Unlike most pro-Ukraine dudes, I'm quite pessimistic about things. While Ukraine's resistance is to be praised, Russia will slowly mobilize more and more resources and roll over the enemy. Chances are small for Ukraine to "win" and getting smaller every week that passes like this.
But even if Russia dismembers Ukraine or takes it over, and the war is "over", the illusion of peace is gone, bye-bye, all of you here can kiss stability and geopolitics as normal goodbye. It's gonna be super-competition and war for a while.

Eh. That's probably what's most likely, but war is dynamic so no one really knows what tomorrow brings. Outside of that, no matter what happens, geopolitics is going to get very interesting. NATO will grow in capability as the west shifts back into "cold war" mode, Russia will isolate itself more and start to realize what the consequences of that are, and the CIS power structure will continue to shift in favor of China. We live in interesting times.

 

[Gender: Xenomorph]

Why do people see Russia anything else other than a bigger, more corrupt Ukraine?

Sure Zelensky is a grifter political puppet, but Putin has been doing this for what? 30 years now?

 

[celebrityskin]

Muh based Evropean Russia!