Do you think if russia were to launch a nuclear emp attack on ukraine that the NATO nations will chimpout and start ww3?
Would russia firing a nuclear emp missile at ukraine provoke nato?
Do you think if russia were to launch a nuclear emp attack on ukraine that the NATO nations will chimpout and start ww3?
Seeing as even cyberwarfare counts as triggering article 5, yes? You have to use a nuke to get an EMP effect so that's akin to using a nuke normally.
Are you moronic?
Forgot to add here that Ukraine is officially under China's nuclear umbrella. So it wouldn't even be just NATO. Not that China wouldn't try to wiggle out of it, but technically.
Yeah, people tend to forget that China signed a nuclear treaty with Ukraine in 2013 back when Yanukovych was still in charge stating that China would provide nuclear security guarantees in the event of nuclear invasion. Of course, there's absolutely no way China would actually do something when Russia decides to go full moron but it WOULD make China lose face and international prestige which the current government would lose their shit over since their mission for the past decade has been to show the world that China can stand up against the western world.
>Seeing as even cyberwarfare counts as triggering article 5, yes?
Sorry but this is nonsense. Cyber attacks have been happening, and increasing, from Russia, China, N.Korea and Iran for years now, and nothing has happened.
Because none of them did any meaningful damage.
And if anything it means you always have a valid Casus Beli at hand if you want to go to war.
Just because you CAN declare war over something doesn't mean you must.
>Because none of them did any meaningful damage.
Again, nonsense. Tell that to the Colonial Pipeline
I didn't know Ukraine was in NATO
EMPs and any other form of electromagnetic radiation won't stop at the ukrainian border mate
>A single computer goes out in East Poland from an EMP over Ukraine and the poles trigger article 5 as revenge for interrupting Mrs. Lewandowska's sharing of hilarious minion memes to her cousin in Warsaw.
>HAY GUIZ if snow nigeria uses fricking nuclear weapons offensively in a war of conquest will non-monkeBlack person nations take action?????
>would using a nuke weapon provoke article 5?
>no but it's uh... An EMP nuke! Like in Cawadoody MW2 surely that doesn't count as an attack because ummm... It doesn't.
Yes you fricking moron.
>Do you think if russia were to launch a nuclear emp attack on ukraine that the NATO nations will chimpout and start ww3?
No.
>Nuke ukraine
>Poland, Balts, Turkey get affected and absolutely lose their shit and are beyond any reason or diplomacy
>Will this trigger Article 5?
It wouldn't necessarily. Ukraine isn't part of NATO and I don't think the US is willing to get into a nuclear war with Russia over some shithole kleptocracy.
Russia wouldn't use an EMP anyways. Blowing up their power grid wouldn't win them the war.
>I don't think the US is willing to get into a nuclear war with Russia over some shithole kleptocracy
why would the US go to nuclear with Russia over Russia?
*war
You do realize that to generate intended effect over an area the size of Ukraine that the nuke would need to pop at an altitude that would effect literally every NATO country on Ukraine's periphery, right?
Why not just drop strategic nuke like castle bravo on st. Petersburg and call it special nuclear operation?
You've posted this comment elsewhere and as moronic as it is, I'd still fricking love to see it.
>muh nukes
If one single light bulb in neighbouring Poland gets damaged it's fricking on.
Hypothetically speaking, if the US were to sneak a nuclear weapon into the Ukraine and detonate it behind Russian lines, what could Russia realistically do?
nothing, the world would condemn the russian false flag nuke to justify a foreign strike
Yes of course
I think China would use an EMP, or preform some massive attack on the grid to prevent any adequate response from continental US when they attack Taiwan, and with it Guam and Saipan.
>triggering article 5
Would it be possible to commit am attack like this under a false flag? there a book where the gist was US got hit by EMP via missle that came from unknown cargo ships in the gulf
>US gets hit with EMP
>China just so happens to invade Taiwan
Totally wasn't them guys.
>adequate response from continental US
Don't they have bases in Korea and Japan?
>totally wasn't them
Plausible deniability, they could dress it up as annexing Taiwan over security concerns in the wake of an unprecedented attack. Geopolitics have always been bullshit
An EMP would be a very serious attack that would cripple supply chains, cause civil unrest, amd have serious effect on the global economy, but unlike a full on nuclear attack most of the infrastructure is left intact, and the economy, while severely damaged, acne still very rebuilt
>bases in Japan and Korea
A few bases overseas don't have the capacity to respond to a peer adversary on their own
>Would it be possible to commit am attack like this under a false flag?
If you believe 9/11 was a false flag inside job, then the answer is yes, it triggered article 5 and its several magnitudes less severe than a nationwide electric grid strike or an EMP
Aren't EMPs only produced through nuke detonations? So you're launching a nuke at the US and thinking that the US wouldn't just respond in kind?
The scenario I'm picturing is where an EMP is used by an "unknown" entity; a peer adversary that has been able to cover their tracks well enough to the point US has no one to justifiably target.
It's out there, I'm not denying it, but it's the only way I can think it could happen for the exact reason you point out
WW3? Probably not. Real intervention in Ukraine, more likely.
Russia would alienate most of its support in the UN if it detonated a nuclear weapon.
The stance of the US is that any use of nuclear weapons (or other WMDs) in Ukraine will provoke a direct US intervention.
>US states they will intervene if Russia uses nukes or invades NATO allies
>Russia doesn't and just beats it's chest
>Why doesn't US intervene, comrade?
It's easy to say you'll intervene when the condition you set for intervention is so absurd it won't happen in the first place. Might as well have said: "if aliens landed, we'll intervene."
Lavrov told you to do it already, stop making excuses.
>Lavrov told you
lmao don't give a shit what that lying homosexual says and so does the rest of the world when they walked out on him in the UN.
>trying to maintain peace and avoiding nuclear war while helping your allies is now considered bad
Black person they can't even steamroll a 'shithole kleptocracy' while the US flattens the 4th largest army in the world at the time. The US doesn't even have to put boots on ground to embarrass vatniks lmao.
So the West won't do shit. Got it.
Black person why do you think they haven't resorted to even limited chemical weapon deployment, especially in Mariupol? Putin did his bigboi threat at Western nations at the start, and the US gave his ass a solid counter threat. That's how this shit works. Both ultimatums have been relatively successful: Russia hasn't gone double-full-moron, and NATO hasn't intervened with force. The minute Russia does something wildly stupid, like introduce WMD, then that escalates along lines that have already explicitly been addressed, same for if NATO suddenly sends brigades into Western Ukraine. Stow your Russian chest thumping over nothing of substance.
>Black person why do you think they haven't resorted to even limited chemical weapon deployment,
Because they never needed to. And why would they poison the area they will own in the future. Your shitty argument is already based on a false premise and you're dumb as all hell.
>anyways lets go back threatening Europe with Nukes while they keep ignoring us and supplying Ukraine.
You first homosexual.
>threaten nukes against NATO
>fire nuke at Ukraine which is in the same direction as NATO
>implying NATO thinking nukes are meant for them is chimping out
You stupid or something
>Do you think if russia were to launch a nuclear emp attack on ukraine that the NATO nations will chimpout and start ww3?
No.
In your scenario, Russia is the one chimping out and starting WWIII, by hiting every NATO member state in eastern Europe with an EMP.
NATO would merely be responding with a defensive ICBM fusillade.
There's no such thing as EMP weapons. It's just nukes.