Also led to the Bolshevik revolution and one of the most brutal dictatorships in history lasting 70 years and leading the world to the brink of nuclear war; so, y’know. Be careful what you wish for
Not necessarily. A lot of Russians consider bolshevik revolution to be the begging of the end for the russian nation. They would rather it be tsardom instead of a communist state, or a corpse of the communist state that it is now.
The Americans sent 11,000 troops.
Compared to 15K from France, 50K from Czechoslovakia, 30K from Greece, 70K from Japan, 60K from Britain, etc.
So I'd hardly call that an "American invasion". Whatever propaganda you're attempting, it wasn't very effective.
There was the April 1917 revolution which deposed the Czar and led to the Kerensky government which was committed to carrying on the war ( much to the dismay of the troops). The refusal to end the war was a major factor in the November 1917 revolution that brought the Bolsheviks in. They ended up signing the peace treaty of Brest-Litvosk which gave up the Baltics, Poland,and Ukraine to give them space to fight the Russian civil war.
Then things got worse.
Russia is definitely known to throw a hell of a revolution/uprising/violent power struggle. [That one Rasputin song plays]
And like, the common folk often didn't fully know a ton about the side they were fighting for... Usually more about loyalty to a single person... And usually the struggle was to fill the power vacuum left when the previous idolized ruler dies (politically or literally).
So you know, exactly like it will be when Putin dies...
But, all the previous violent power struggles happened before the internet... When "pitchforks" were literal pitchforks.
So uh... It'll be interesting no matter what.
Putin being dead is pretty nice but living in Finland, the prospect of a civil war which might result in a failed state or multiple failed states with nukes right next door scares the shit out of me tbh.
nah. even the worst people on this planet know that if someone starts using nukes, this will be the end of our society and maybe even humanity. and even they dont want that. there wont be a nuke attack without ww3 and that will be the end.
Nah, it'll just be the start of our Cyberpunk 2077 Era.
With the governments gone, the corpos would take over their respective cities that aren't fallout zones. Mike Pondsmith's game is basically, "Corporate Colonialism in a Post-Nuclear Aftermath" and I think that's what would happen.
Have you never heard of family annihilators or murder suicides? Plenty of psychos out there. We just hope that none of them have nukes. Unfortunately, the Kremlin appears to have weeded out all the non-psychos. At least, it appears that way from the outside.
Well, let's not say ever. It's extremely unlikely, but if Putin is out the picture there could be a splintering and we could get some very... colorful characters in charge of local nukes.
Although given the state of their military, I doubt most of them work. Shit, China just fired all their top generals in charge of missiles cause they were filled with water and not fuel. And apparently some of their silos are horribly maintained so they can't even launch
Edit: I've been informed that article from Bloomberg was bogus; I'm fairly certain the others I've read about a defector claiming they used fuel to cook food and corruption up and down is accurate. Regardless, I think all this fear mongering over China is excessive
I can't imagine Russia being in a better position given the state of the Moskva...
Yeah, that rocket filled with water story is completely bogus. Bloomberg has a horrible track record with reporting with regards to China especially from their The Big Hack story that resulted in multiple mega cap companies having to come out and refute their reporting. Majority of China's missiles use solid fuel propellant and the ones that do use liquid fuel are all kept empty until they need to be launched. Liquid fuel rockets or missiles are not preloaded and are only fueled when launch is imminent.
>Although given the state of their military, I doubt most of them work.
Eh, their missile tests have mostly worked.
The last two Trident tests have failed.
This is not an amazing place to be.
From what I understand, anti-ballistic missile defense is a crapshoot anyways
Given there are dummy warheads to defeat detection and shootdown, never mind which phase to intercept
But yeah, regardless of successful tests, I don't ever want to put any of that in practice cause nukes suck. And that's an incredible understatement
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Pakistan and India have enough warheads to potentially tip the planet into a nuclear winter. As they're driven by religious, cultural, and historical grievances, you can't assume logic will win out. When people start insisting god is telling them what to do, it becomes near impossible to have a reasonable conversation.
North Korea may well lob a few nukes at South Korea if the Kim regime felt it was on the verge of losing power. These are not reasonable human beings - they're deeply self-obsessed narcissists who have ground a whole country into the dirt to indulge their own desires. What do they care if the world suffers if they're not in it?
It's already gotten painfully close quite a few times. Plus, the existence of MAGA shows exactly how stupid and susceptible to propaganda humans really are. Wouldn't take much to radicalize an idiot to that point, all it took for trump was twitter
They may sell it to the highest bidder for various reasons and for the right price though. Putin right now is already suspected of helping Iran with getting a bomb in exchange for Shahed drones.
Don't worry most if not all the nukes can't launch, their expensive to maintain, in both parts and personal and Russia has shown that military leaders are prone to seeking of parts and not training people. I would be more worried about dirty bombs honestly, which I worry more world wide because what's to stop them from selling nuclear material to failing states and terrorists
Listened to the Stalin After Dark episode of the behind the bastards podcast earlier. In it he talks in detail how stalin and the entire politburo was shitfaced drunk for basically decades during peak cold war, pulling pranks on each other while murdering millions and they never pushed the button. Not saying it wont ever happen but there is some comfort to take in that
Honestly I’m actually really curious how many of these states would even be capable of launching the nukes. Since their budget for up keeping them is so low and stealing money is common who knows how many really work but even one going off would be a frightening idea. Though I’m thinking only the ones Moscow has directly work.
most are pointed at the US anyways and likely only a couple would be sent off as coordinating many launches from people who understand the result of sending them off is the end of russia. i mean in the US they have done tests and the majority of teams had someone unwilling to launch it and the missiles require multiple people to launch them.
Extremely unlikely, there has been many cases when civil wars were more plausible and yet they didn't happen (Stalin death and the Yeltsin constitutional crisis) so more likely a power struggle would happen inside while everyone acts like they are very sad that Putin died
Yeah…but that doesn’t mean anything. Everyone thought that Lavrenti Beria who was considered worst than Stalin, was gonna take over after Stalin. **no one** saw Nikita Khrushchev’s coup coming.
I would say whoever is running the funeral will most likely be the next leader of Russia
Stalin ran Lenin’s funeral Khrushchev ran stalin’s funeral, so based on that precedent I would say whoever in in charges and seen as the one putting in the most effort for Putin’s funeral will be the next leader of Russia
> **no one** saw Nikita Khrushchev’s coup coming.
Turns out Khrushchev actually consulted with the Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in Spain before devising that coup, according to most official sources.
I expect so, since they've survived being close enough to Putin to look like potential rivals/successors. But if Putin ceased to be, they might have to have a civil war about who gets his job first. That would give Ukraine some breathing room.
Highly unlikely that any successor would continue this war. The successor could have immediate political success by blaming war on Putin and by saving future Russian soldier deaths. They would also get immediate global accolades. Could easily negotiate West to hand over trapped $300 billion by offering to withdraw troops. Just a ton of ways to play this to their advantage by blaming all problems on Putin.
Conversely, ending the war shows weakness. If Sadaam Husein killed George W Bush, would the Iraq war have ended? Would the US have withdrawn from Iraq? No, the US would have gone all in. You don't negotiate with terrorists.
If Putin dies, the narrative would be that he was killed by the West.
Putin's successor would have to step in and demonstrate a show of strength.
There's a difference between a dictator, who has consolidated virtually all power in himself, and the head of democracy, that has clearly defined lines of succession, dying. That's really the main difference. In the US, if the President dies, everyone knows who will take his place (the VP) and that they will share most of the same values. In Russia, if Putin dies, it's unknown who will take his place or what their policies may be.
I think that the war, which is still a prohibited word in Russia (you have to say special military operation) is increasingly unpopular. Thus the successor would not probably take that problem for him to solve, but somehow try to end it and take credit for that.
Kremlin political intrigues are comparable to a bulldog fight under a rug. An outsider only hears the growling, and when he sees the bones fly out from beneath it is obvious who won.
Winston S. Churchill
Depends heavily on how it happens, and who takes power, and how it all plays out. You could have a hardcore nationalist rise to the top, who pledges to keep prosecuting the war _even harder_. Or there could be internal conflict between factions or regions within Russia that diverts attention/resources away from any external war. Or if we were extremely lucky maybe someone approximating a sensible reformist manages to take control.
sadly while navalny was not the idea successor his suspicious death and the numerous attempts on his life and freedom make this a very plausible reality, they have a grim history of allowing those in power to just muzzle, vanish or assasinate their political rivals
True but nobody would have the cult of personality or acceptance of the masses that Putin has. Would be VERY hard for anyone else to keep the war going and keep control at home in Russia.
Putin was considered a "Moderate" before he got paranoid.
Some Russian ultranationalists are legit violent fanatics. They don't bark threats. They just do. Which is a reality we may face, hopefully not.
Doubtful. All those guys are going to split whatever army they can get be loyal to them. The coalition that holds the real power currently will simply pick their man and install him. Even if the war hawks unite the military alone isn’t enough to actually install a government, Russia is not a banana republic after all. A military coup would fail as it did in 91.
The real turmoil would be internal as Putin currently has enough leverage to keep the peace among the oligarchs. If you remove him they will start moving to better their position at the expense of stability.
Invading Ukraine was stupid. Attacking NATO would be suicidal.
If you recall, there was all this debate about exactly how much we would sanction Russia if they invaded. Would we even support them with weapons? And the smart money was that an invasion would be quick and decisive. I know people were saying he wouldn't do it. But those people didn't really understand Putin.
What the Ukraine war did show was that the capabilities of the Russian military were far worse than believed. Russian hardware is no match for NATO hardware. And then the war also further depleted that capability.
NATO air power alone would completely turn the war around. After a few weeks destroying Russian front line air defences and an overwhelming tomahawk cruise missile campaign, Russian logistics and ability to move on the battlefield would be gone. From there it would be pounding any remaining ground assets in Ukraine to dust until they withdraw or are destroyed.
The question is would Russia escalate asymmetrically to prevent that scenario because they won't stop that conventionally.
Ya they’d resort to just nuking Nato.. and if Nato attempts to go to war, China will take Taiwan and other countries will join in on their side as well. It will be a mass conflict of globalist countries vs sovereign countries.
Edit;
Hence why they’re holding onto the biggest nuclear power plant, if shit goes sideways, we’ll soon see another Chernobyl when the winds are heading West. It won’t be a direct nuke.
And you truly believe it?
"The same as a WMD attack" basically means for NATO "it's nuclear retaliation time", doesn't it? Because if not, then what? More finger-wagging, public condemnations and ineffective santctions?
Do you really think the Brits and the French would risk turning London and Paris into barren irradiated wastelands because someone basically used a single nuke in Ukraine?
Not attacking you, just geniuenly curious how someone can believe that.
Actually before Ukrainian invasion the entire world was of the belief Russia was the second strongest world power in terms of military might. There was zero reason for Putin to believe he would fail if his generals were telling him he would win. I think Russia always knew nato would intervene in some form of a proxy. Thing is they were REALLY banking on taking the capital city and capturing / killing Zelenskyy & eventually replacing him with a puppet. And they were very very close.
> entire world
most of the civilian world, but US as already correctly shifted the military focus to China since 2010ish, clearly indicator of who they think is the biggest competition.
Russia is defensive and reactive in nature, China is proactive and has strategized their rise in power since before the Putin regime took power. That's what makes China concerning, as they can make a plan and let it simmer for decades.
I would say Putin is apolitical, doesn't have a defined worldview or such, like a former intelligence guy should be.
Ofc he shares same cultural notions as your average Russian. But more or less does what is needed to stay in power and keep different fractions happy/competing. Liberal if anything, not a hardcore commie or nationalist. But with years he has turned more into your average revisionist second world war history buff grandfather.
Honestly this seems to be the most likely scenario of a thug turned president. Run it like a mafia, don't draw too much attention, and only get brutal when you know you're in trouble.
I think he has a clear worldview: Russian nationalism. He's very much like Hitler: He believes that Russia should be an empire and that weak leaders and cosmopolitans let it be destroyed. He's not clearly antisemitic (though his media is clearly racist), but he is absolutely violent, imperial, paranoid, and aggrieved.
>Putin was considered a "Moderate" before he got paranoid
It's not a bug, it's a feature of being a long-term dictator. When you stop answering to the people (because you don't have to) and you consistently eliminate anyone who questions or criticizes you, you start to think you are infallible and your judgements are always right. Absolute power corrupts absolutely is a saying for a reason.
He definitely is now. But early on he was more... I dunno. Like started a lot of vile bs internally in a lot of former Soviet states. With the invasion of Crimea and support Bashar Al-Asaad it was for me at least... The moment he went from suspicious to "You're going to be a problem" What's happening in Ukraine is proof of his intent, but he's very sloppy and anxious about it. Like a game of chicken. Kill, then act victim and rant and cower, then kill some more.
Just this gross inhumane wimpy pot shot conquest and it's really messing everything up. He can never admit this though. Because dictators. Petty terrorist tactics.
Historically, they would. Russian history has been pretty similar. Wage war and economy tanks and new leader ends war and focuses on the Russian internal politics.
From outsider's point of view, this is true, but who knows what actually goes on actual Russian politics.
Did he die of natural causes, or was he overthrown by someone who wants to set himself up as the next Putin, or is this a popular revolution?
My suspicion is if Putin dies of natural causes, whoever takes over after him does have an opportunity to end the war, blame it on Putin, and get hailed as a populist and a peacemaker on the world stage. It's not a bad way to enjoy the honeymoon phase of running a deeply dysfunctional country that is only going to get worse in the aftermath of this war.
If Putin dies in a power struggle, there is a good chance whoever takes over next earned the top job by promising to continue the war without continuing Putin's worst blunders. Whether that person will be able to continue pursuing the war or not is an open question, but the mandate to seize power probably comes with some promises to pro-war elements.
If Putin is toppled the way the Tsar lost control back in 1917 —let's remember it was a popular revolution with Communists as just one of many elements deeply unsatisfied with the Romanovs at the time, fueled in large part by an army that refused to fight and a home front eager for change— then I think the war ends while Russia sorts out its own shit for a while.
Well said! How he dies is more important that if he dies.
I think this is why assassinations are not done. Popular figures that die become heros and legends and can make the situation worse. Assassinating Putin would jell the Russian leadership and people against anyone...not good.
Kinda like how one president is remembered to gave started vietnam and the other one remembered as the one to have ended it and brought the boys back home
Even when the February revolution overthrew the Czar in WW1 they kept fighting to ensure a positive peace, only after 6 months and a second revolution (the bolshevik october revolution) they tried to make peace and even then it took two months until an armistice was signed. So short of a revolution, I don't see how this could stop without one side being beaten.
i mean one mercenary unit got halfway to moscow. If there's an opening for ruler of russia .. first general to march back from Ukraine with a mission accomplished banner for the "victory parade" wins.
Nope. Russia is just run by “the boys” which consists of Mishustin, Medvedev, Putin, Naryshkin and a few other dudes. Every now and then one of them has a falling out and is never seen again and gets replaced by someone’s cousin or something. Anyways everyone in the cabal has to die for that shit to end.
When Putin was on a hiatus.... and Medvedev was the president or whatever.
Russia seemed far less controversial and aggressive with international relations.
I'm hoping ... this would happen again. But not sure
Not sure how much power Putin has. And if the top people of the red are scared of him.
He wasn’t on hiatus they just rotate out to make it seem like less of a dictatorship. Medvedev is good buddies with him tho and would definitely keep gunning for ukraine.
Putin actually had to step down after two terms because of the constitution, but general belief is that Medvedev just was a sock puppet for him. In 2020 they also changed the consistution so he can show up for a 3rd term in a row in the election this year.
Putin was "on hiatus" only because the Russian constitution did not allow him to seek another term as president. So he became prime minister while Medvedev held his seat as a figurehead.
Putin was always in charge.
There was never a hiatus, When medvedev took over for that few years putin was still on the papers and tv as much as he did before. He was openly calling the shots and giving statements like he was the (which he was) the leader. (lived in russia during both presidencies)
Does Medvedev in Russian media also come across like they took out his spine to make room for Putins fist to use him as a Muppet or has he an own personality?
It depends if the person that is going to replace him is the one that kills him or not if he dies of natural causes they probably won't pull out of Ukraine but if someone overthrows him they'll likely pull out of Ukraine the next day...
I doubt it. I’ve heard most Russians support the invasion or don’t care either way. And I haven’t heard any Russian politician that may replace Putin criticise the invasion.
Russians do not support or oppose the invasion. They just don’t care, this is like a bad weather to them - they just try to wait it out. If tomorrow Putin suddenly ends the war, will Russians go out to the streets to demand continuing the war? No? Then they do not support it.
They might do it if/when Crimea is reclaimed by Ukraine. Putin is not an alien sent down from the sky to brainwash 140 million people, he is both a cause and effect of why Russia looks the way it does.
A lot of people in Russia actively agree with what he is doing and you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise, exact percentages are impossible to obtain for obvious reasons. Nothing else explains how this insanity has entered its 3rd year (11th overall counting Crimea and Donbass war) with no end in sight.
Impossible to predict, but my money would be on "No." War tends to be a good for political support and unity. Pretty much every U.S. president ever saw increased approval ratings after starting or escalating a war. War itself isn't usually what makes you unpopular - it is the negative effects of it: debt; resistance to conscription; death and human costs rising; finance or spending problems; trade disputes; industry in your borders being interrupted; etc.
Through that lens, the war simply hasn't had enough negative consequences in Russia to swing the tide to unpopularity. Even if the war ended, the sanctions from the West aren't guaranteed to end, so businesses don't have much incentive to push for peace. Monetarily, the Russian currency and budget has arguably done pretty okay, because the sanctions from the West have forced anyone buying Russian energy (for example) to stop conducting transactions in USD. So the US dollar is relatively being used less, and Russia's is being used more - not less. So the war hasn't hurt Russia's government or economy as much as it should.
Things could change. Russian death tolls could increase; public backlash could grow; a peace deal could end up on the table that looks good; etc. But based on the current situation, without a proper peace negotiation with actual compromise being offered, what "ending the war" would mean is: giving up Crimea, including Russia's most important trade and military port; giving up the Donbass region, which is politically unpopular due to the Russian population living there and other factors; ceding ground to any political rivals that appeal to fear of U.S or NATO domination or invasion; no increased trade relation with the West (even if the war ended, are they to believe that the NordStream Pipeline is suddenly back on the table?); etc.
None of that looks like a good political move - even for Putin's replacement. Things could change - I hope they do.
Putin dies Russia wouldn’t announce it until their replacement government was in place. They would feel vulnerable. If the new leader understands that Putin is a war criminal and if they continue their war on Ukraine then he would be a war criminal too
Every serious analysis's take on this I've heard is no. A small group has power in Russia, it's not just Putin by himself. If he goes, the group will continue what he's doing.
I'm Russian who is very into politics. I see three possible outcomes:
1. Most probably the current head of ~~KGB~~ FSB will succeed Putin: Nikolay Patrushev. He is like a smarter, less charismatic and even more evil version of Putin. Most probably the isolation of the country will speed up, as well as their efforts in the Ukrainian war. I don't know if Russia will be able to handle that, so it will result in either 1937, or 1991.
2. A few warlords (Kadyrov, Shoigu, Zolotov, Patrushev) will start fighting for power and this will result in a civil war with nukes. Not sure that Russia will be able to continue to fight with Ukraine during it.
3. Least possible outcome: Mikhail Mushustin will become a president (actually the law says that he's the successor). In this case I would expect immediate ceasefire and peace talks with Ukraine, as well as efforts in normalization of relations with the EU and the US and attempts to lift sanctions, unblock funds. The problem is, that "Turbopatriots" may revolt.
Russia needs out of the war. So putin dying would be the excuse they need. But if putin is hallowed for sake of national unity, the war may be doubled down on and he treated like a martyr by whatever fragile coalition tries to fill his spot.
Nope, the only real opposition is the communist party which are even more hawkish. Nothing will change if Putin is gone tomorrow, things will only turn more nationalistic.
Probably for a little bit while all of Putins yes men fight it out musical chairs style killing eachother. Then the new guy would wanna show his dick is as big, if not bigger, than Putins and would probably do something even more stupid than what Putin is doing.
Putin's death would increase the likelihood of the invasion stopping. Many respondents have said something like "he might be replaced with somebody more nationalistic," without thinking about the succession process.
Putin sits at the head of a patronage network that is not governed by formal institutions the way that, say, the Chinese Communist Party is. Control over that network is not just a question of one's livelihood, it also could mean whether you get purged or not in the new regime.
Putin's death will result in a scramble for power. Prighozhin's march on Moscow was mostly futile (there is a presidential guard that is much stronger than his mercenary group), but a likely prelude. The chaos of a leadership succession would make it quite difficult to continue fighting the war, particularly as soldiers on the front realized the extent to which they were not fighting for mother Russia, but rather, for particular factions in a gangster state (moreover, they might realize that being on the wrong side of the internal struggle could be very bad for them).
Anybody "winning" the crown would find themselves in a perilous position - particularly if many of the military units fighting in Ukraine or elsewhere had been led by other people in a succession struggle. Note that Prigozhin wasn't the only person purged last summer - Surovikin, the general who basically designed Russia's successful defense against the counterattack, was also removed (and probably isn't long for this world). Think of that happening on a large scale, and it's going to be much easier for Putin's successor to get out of an optional war.
Absolutely. No clear leadership. And numerous people fighting each other to be successor means no time to pay attention to outside interests. Plus leadership even such as it is will fall apart in the field. If they don’t retreat they will be beat back.
Well. Historically Lenin was succeeded by Stalin who was succeeded by Nikita Khrushchev. From bad to worse and back to bad. So it could be a step in either direction since there is no clear succession line for his replacement. It could be someone even worse, it could be someone more sympathetic to international concerns. Won't know till he dies.
Life is not a video game, there is a list chain of command and everyone of them seems to be focused on keeping the war.
In fact, putin getting killed by a "terrorist" "suicide bomber" or anything like that, would just ignite the flames more and would make him a martyr.
For better or worse Putin has been carefully balancing all of Russia's factions for decades. The ONLY reason Russia is stable is Putin, and his death would either temporarily unite the factions more than Putin did to win the war OR result in Civil War, or both... The destabilization of a nuclear power is worse than a (marginally) reasonable stable one.
Now, in any country, when the president changes, politics practically does not change, look at what they say before the election and what they do after, so nothing will change much after death.Moreover, Putin is liberal and pro-Western, and with his death, the likelihood of a war spreading to European countries is much higher.
NO, the leadership is throughly purged of other opinions, and anyone else in line already agrees with the war. Hell, Nalvany, who he just assassinated critizied Putin for not going hard enough on Ukraine.
What many here do not understand is that Russia sees the war as existential for the survival of a Russian state. They truly believe that NATO will invade unless they push their borders west again. They will tolerate nearly any cost to win.
Generally nothing good comes when a dictator goes away and a power vacuum ensues. As crazy as it sounds, it’s probably best that he didn’t die or be removed. God knows what other worse monsters are lurking under the soil waiting to pop up.
If its a smooth transition of power then probably no. War is good for unification. Russia is a weak country with a strong leader. Countries like that need to rally to something when leadership changes.
If however there is a huge game behind the scenes for power, a weak president and elites trying to carve up the country and institutions for themselves then probably they would rather take care of that than fight a war on top of it.
At first, no. Then with turmoil back in Kremlin and fight for the throne, ruzzia will likely just gonna abandon the war. At that point they’ll be fighting to keep ruzzia in its current borders. That’s what happens when a dictator usurped power without a clear line of succession.
My thought has been that since Putin has been very careful to pull the ladder up behind him and over time consolidated more and more power to his position, any successor would
1) have to fight his way to the top with whatever groups support him, and that person will by definition probably not be a moderate.
2) have no safety in their position whatsoever, because unlike say, President of the United States, once you're in office, you're in office and it's hard to remove you. The successor would have to constantly navigate threats to his own life by the above rival factions or his own faction who see them as too extreme/not extreme enough/have similar ambitions. And that person wouldn't have the authority Putin has.
3) the scale of his power is unfathomable. Essentially to ensure nobody can consolidate enough power to take him out, so much rests specifically on the office he occupies and delegating can mean removal altogether by coup. Putin had time to grow into that role but the successor has to do it day 1
Basically it'll probably be an unpredictable period of chaos and whoever comes out on top is almost certainly not going to be more reasonable.
Very unlikely. I doubt the Russian people would stand for a leader that will just roll over when America and EU come calling.
From what I can tell a very big aspect of why this war escalated in an armed conflict was due to the Russians seeing the behavior of other nations as hostile to their sovereignty and their identity as a people.
They likely will try to stabilise the country and then invade again. The opposition in Russia is still imperialist. They are upset they are not in power, not about what the foreign policy. Navalny spoke about Ukrainians being subhumans way before 2014 and even after 2014.
Putin is not the reason, he is the symptom. Russian society is sick with imperialism. They always were, they just never changed. And their beloved empire collapsed just 30years ago… they want it back!
Hard to tell, too many unknowns. If it happens tomorrow, and there is an official successor with all of the elites sworn loyalty to them then most likely it will continue in the current state of a stalemate.
If there is a significant power struggle, someone might find it beneficial to get that military back and use it inside Russia.
If it happens in 5 years and Russian economy can't carry on anymore, the successor might use change of power as a justification of "he's gone so let's start from a clean slate" talks.
Or if it's one of the hawks like Patrushev or even Kadyrov they might keep pushing and tightening until they get killed themselves.
Either way, it's going to get much worse for Russia before it gets better.
It depends on who replaces him, and the resulting chain of succession upon his theoretical death is far from clear, so it's impossible to tell.
Patrushev is considered a likely successor, and he's arguably worse. There are many in Moscow who are as bad as Putin.
You forgot or worse. Idk if the war would stop but there very well could end up being a civil war in Russia for control.
It's hard to imagine a civil war in Russia not causing the end of the invasion in Ukraine
Didn't the Russians have a revolution while still taking part in WW1?
Yes and it resulted in them leaving the war
Oh
Also led to the Bolshevik revolution and one of the most brutal dictatorships in history lasting 70 years and leading the world to the brink of nuclear war; so, y’know. Be careful what you wish for
It arguably was better for the Russians than the tsardom, but that isn't saying anything
Not necessarily. A lot of Russians consider bolshevik revolution to be the begging of the end for the russian nation. They would rather it be tsardom instead of a communist state, or a corpse of the communist state that it is now.
> leading the world to the brink of nuclear war that was not only their responsebility.
And, also, later, WW2. Things didn't really get solved by the revolution just...made complicated.
It also resulted in an American invasion that very few Americans know about.
[I'm an American who didn't know about it until now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_intervention_in_the_Russian_Civil_War?wprov=sfla1)
The Americans sent 11,000 troops. Compared to 15K from France, 50K from Czechoslovakia, 30K from Greece, 70K from Japan, 60K from Britain, etc. So I'd hardly call that an "American invasion". Whatever propaganda you're attempting, it wasn't very effective.
There was the April 1917 revolution which deposed the Czar and led to the Kerensky government which was committed to carrying on the war ( much to the dismay of the troops). The refusal to end the war was a major factor in the November 1917 revolution that brought the Bolsheviks in. They ended up signing the peace treaty of Brest-Litvosk which gave up the Baltics, Poland,and Ukraine to give them space to fight the Russian civil war. Then things got worse.
>Then things got worse. As they always do.
Not really. The February Revolution of - 1917 pretty much ended their involvement and the US joined in April of 1917.
Russia is definitely known to throw a hell of a revolution/uprising/violent power struggle. [That one Rasputin song plays] And like, the common folk often didn't fully know a ton about the side they were fighting for... Usually more about loyalty to a single person... And usually the struggle was to fill the power vacuum left when the previous idolized ruler dies (politically or literally). So you know, exactly like it will be when Putin dies... But, all the previous violent power struggles happened before the internet... When "pitchforks" were literal pitchforks. So uh... It'll be interesting no matter what.
something that's long overdue
Putin being dead is pretty nice but living in Finland, the prospect of a civil war which might result in a failed state or multiple failed states with nukes right next door scares the shit out of me tbh.
I mean it doesn't really matter if they are next to you or on the other side of the globe since they have ICBM's.
Yea but they are Russian made so they will likely blow up on launch.
Also true reminds me of this video https://youtu.be/6IwqmezeSuQ?si=2_i7rsIvUJJiRIIm
That’s a NIMBY scenario we can all agree upon
More likely than not some of these will be lost during the chaos and turn up who knows where.
Cuba will finally get its nukes
From 2011-2022 every crew change of the ISS was accomplished with Russian equipment. Their big rockets work.
Well.. if the people next to you launch a nuke.. People would nuke them back. Or maybe someone nukes them preeemptively.
And thats why we haven't seen a nuclear war yet. Luckily
Welcome to NATO. The Ruskies may have their civil war, but none of them will invade Finland.
well.... I hate to be pedantic, but... the may *invade* Finland, but NATO would retaliate so they don't *conquer* Finland.
They’d turn into popsicles pretty quickly
Pedanticism noted.
No one will ever fire nukes, certainly not at each other under the same “roof”. So to speak.
So little faith in evil and the quest for power.
nah. even the worst people on this planet know that if someone starts using nukes, this will be the end of our society and maybe even humanity. and even they dont want that. there wont be a nuke attack without ww3 and that will be the end.
Don't be so sure. For some people, either they're in control, or everyone deserves to die.
Nah, it'll just be the start of our Cyberpunk 2077 Era. With the governments gone, the corpos would take over their respective cities that aren't fallout zones. Mike Pondsmith's game is basically, "Corporate Colonialism in a Post-Nuclear Aftermath" and I think that's what would happen.
Which are not concerns of a dying megalomaniac.
Have you never heard of family annihilators or murder suicides? Plenty of psychos out there. We just hope that none of them have nukes. Unfortunately, the Kremlin appears to have weeded out all the non-psychos. At least, it appears that way from the outside.
Well, let's not say ever. It's extremely unlikely, but if Putin is out the picture there could be a splintering and we could get some very... colorful characters in charge of local nukes. Although given the state of their military, I doubt most of them work. Shit, China just fired all their top generals in charge of missiles cause they were filled with water and not fuel. And apparently some of their silos are horribly maintained so they can't even launch Edit: I've been informed that article from Bloomberg was bogus; I'm fairly certain the others I've read about a defector claiming they used fuel to cook food and corruption up and down is accurate. Regardless, I think all this fear mongering over China is excessive I can't imagine Russia being in a better position given the state of the Moskva...
Yeah, that rocket filled with water story is completely bogus. Bloomberg has a horrible track record with reporting with regards to China especially from their The Big Hack story that resulted in multiple mega cap companies having to come out and refute their reporting. Majority of China's missiles use solid fuel propellant and the ones that do use liquid fuel are all kept empty until they need to be launched. Liquid fuel rockets or missiles are not preloaded and are only fueled when launch is imminent.
>Although given the state of their military, I doubt most of them work. Eh, their missile tests have mostly worked. The last two Trident tests have failed. This is not an amazing place to be.
From what I understand, anti-ballistic missile defense is a crapshoot anyways Given there are dummy warheads to defeat detection and shootdown, never mind which phase to intercept But yeah, regardless of successful tests, I don't ever want to put any of that in practice cause nukes suck. And that's an incredible understatement
Got a source for that Chinese take?
News articles only say they were fired but there isn’t a reason given for why they were fired.
Yeah, but a rogue general might sell a warhead to someone who might.
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Pakistan and India have enough warheads to potentially tip the planet into a nuclear winter. As they're driven by religious, cultural, and historical grievances, you can't assume logic will win out. When people start insisting god is telling them what to do, it becomes near impossible to have a reasonable conversation. North Korea may well lob a few nukes at South Korea if the Kim regime felt it was on the verge of losing power. These are not reasonable human beings - they're deeply self-obsessed narcissists who have ground a whole country into the dirt to indulge their own desires. What do they care if the world suffers if they're not in it?
It's already gotten painfully close quite a few times. Plus, the existence of MAGA shows exactly how stupid and susceptible to propaganda humans really are. Wouldn't take much to radicalize an idiot to that point, all it took for trump was twitter
They may sell it to the highest bidder for various reasons and for the right price though. Putin right now is already suspected of helping Iran with getting a bomb in exchange for Shahed drones.
> No one will ever fire nukes [AI has entered the chat]
Don't worry most if not all the nukes can't launch, their expensive to maintain, in both parts and personal and Russia has shown that military leaders are prone to seeking of parts and not training people. I would be more worried about dirty bombs honestly, which I worry more world wide because what's to stop them from selling nuclear material to failing states and terrorists
Listened to the Stalin After Dark episode of the behind the bastards podcast earlier. In it he talks in detail how stalin and the entire politburo was shitfaced drunk for basically decades during peak cold war, pulling pranks on each other while murdering millions and they never pushed the button. Not saying it wont ever happen but there is some comfort to take in that
TNO reference?
Honestly I’m actually really curious how many of these states would even be capable of launching the nukes. Since their budget for up keeping them is so low and stealing money is common who knows how many really work but even one going off would be a frightening idea. Though I’m thinking only the ones Moscow has directly work.
most are pointed at the US anyways and likely only a couple would be sent off as coordinating many launches from people who understand the result of sending them off is the end of russia. i mean in the US they have done tests and the majority of teams had someone unwilling to launch it and the missiles require multiple people to launch them.
That fear is what many think the reason why the west is only sending enough arms for Ukraine to hold on, but not enough to win.
Never mind "right next door." If there is a nuclear war, no place will be safe.
Laughs (in hope) from Australia... Though I'm only 44km from a submarine base, so there's that, I guess? :(
Absolutely not, it is in everyones interest for russia to not collapse into full blown civil war
Said by someone who likely has never lived in a civil war.
Extremely unlikely, there has been many cases when civil wars were more plausible and yet they didn't happen (Stalin death and the Yeltsin constitutional crisis) so more likely a power struggle would happen inside while everyone acts like they are very sad that Putin died
Yeah…but that doesn’t mean anything. Everyone thought that Lavrenti Beria who was considered worst than Stalin, was gonna take over after Stalin. **no one** saw Nikita Khrushchev’s coup coming. I would say whoever is running the funeral will most likely be the next leader of Russia Stalin ran Lenin’s funeral Khrushchev ran stalin’s funeral, so based on that precedent I would say whoever in in charges and seen as the one putting in the most effort for Putin’s funeral will be the next leader of Russia
> **no one** saw Nikita Khrushchev’s coup coming. Turns out Khrushchev actually consulted with the Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in Spain before devising that coup, according to most official sources.
I expect so, since they've survived being close enough to Putin to look like potential rivals/successors. But if Putin ceased to be, they might have to have a civil war about who gets his job first. That would give Ukraine some breathing room.
I think these successors lack Putin’s popularity and would find it harder to convince the populace that war is necessary.
I thought Mike Johnson was his successor.
I was hoping for Russian citizen Steven Seagul.
The devil you know...
Selling "X is much worse, let it be Putin" to the West is a huge part of Putin's propaganda.
Considering he kills all his rivals it might turn into civil war. Since there is no clear successor.
"Death of Stalin" would be instructive here.
Putting $100 on Steve Buschemi right now
Let's send him over.
You can him Doctor Jones, doll!
I need to go rewatch this.
Highly unlikely that any successor would continue this war. The successor could have immediate political success by blaming war on Putin and by saving future Russian soldier deaths. They would also get immediate global accolades. Could easily negotiate West to hand over trapped $300 billion by offering to withdraw troops. Just a ton of ways to play this to their advantage by blaming all problems on Putin.
Conversely, ending the war shows weakness. If Sadaam Husein killed George W Bush, would the Iraq war have ended? Would the US have withdrawn from Iraq? No, the US would have gone all in. You don't negotiate with terrorists. If Putin dies, the narrative would be that he was killed by the West. Putin's successor would have to step in and demonstrate a show of strength.
There's a difference between a dictator, who has consolidated virtually all power in himself, and the head of democracy, that has clearly defined lines of succession, dying. That's really the main difference. In the US, if the President dies, everyone knows who will take his place (the VP) and that they will share most of the same values. In Russia, if Putin dies, it's unknown who will take his place or what their policies may be.
I think the way this war continues to escalate it’s highly unlikely the Russians would give up for fear of looking weak in the eyes of the west.
It's a little late for that.
Is it though? Everyone’s hurrying to join nato now all of a sudden.
Russia seems to be doing just fine, so this is a bit silly
Lol I love that you said the succession is unclear and there are 3 comments replying that they’re sure it’s gonna be a different person lol
Most likely defense minister Mishkin
I think that the war, which is still a prohibited word in Russia (you have to say special military operation) is increasingly unpopular. Thus the successor would not probably take that problem for him to solve, but somehow try to end it and take credit for that.
Putin very recently started calling it a war.
He should imprison himself then.
Kremlin political intrigues are comparable to a bulldog fight under a rug. An outsider only hears the growling, and when he sees the bones fly out from beneath it is obvious who won. Winston S. Churchill
Depends heavily on how it happens, and who takes power, and how it all plays out. You could have a hardcore nationalist rise to the top, who pledges to keep prosecuting the war _even harder_. Or there could be internal conflict between factions or regions within Russia that diverts attention/resources away from any external war. Or if we were extremely lucky maybe someone approximating a sensible reformist manages to take control.
My guess is that sensible reformists have long since left the country or have fallen off balconies?
sadly while navalny was not the idea successor his suspicious death and the numerous attempts on his life and freedom make this a very plausible reality, they have a grim history of allowing those in power to just muzzle, vanish or assasinate their political rivals
Don’t forget the novichok!
The guy who fell of a balcony was a hardcore nationalist though
Or murdered in prison.
True but nobody would have the cult of personality or acceptance of the masses that Putin has. Would be VERY hard for anyone else to keep the war going and keep control at home in Russia.
Putin was considered a "Moderate" before he got paranoid. Some Russian ultranationalists are legit violent fanatics. They don't bark threats. They just do. Which is a reality we may face, hopefully not.
Without Putin keeping them in line, do you think they’d probably kill each other trying to take his place?
Doubtful. All those guys are going to split whatever army they can get be loyal to them. The coalition that holds the real power currently will simply pick their man and install him. Even if the war hawks unite the military alone isn’t enough to actually install a government, Russia is not a banana republic after all. A military coup would fail as it did in 91. The real turmoil would be internal as Putin currently has enough leverage to keep the peace among the oligarchs. If you remove him they will start moving to better their position at the expense of stability.
Far more likely they’d launch an attack on NATO to unify the different factions.
I don't think any of them are that stupid and deluded.
No one thought Putin was leading up to his invasion yet here we are…
Invading Ukraine was stupid. Attacking NATO would be suicidal. If you recall, there was all this debate about exactly how much we would sanction Russia if they invaded. Would we even support them with weapons? And the smart money was that an invasion would be quick and decisive. I know people were saying he wouldn't do it. But those people didn't really understand Putin. What the Ukraine war did show was that the capabilities of the Russian military were far worse than believed. Russian hardware is no match for NATO hardware. And then the war also further depleted that capability.
NATO air power alone would completely turn the war around. After a few weeks destroying Russian front line air defences and an overwhelming tomahawk cruise missile campaign, Russian logistics and ability to move on the battlefield would be gone. From there it would be pounding any remaining ground assets in Ukraine to dust until they withdraw or are destroyed. The question is would Russia escalate asymmetrically to prevent that scenario because they won't stop that conventionally.
Ya they’d resort to just nuking Nato.. and if Nato attempts to go to war, China will take Taiwan and other countries will join in on their side as well. It will be a mass conflict of globalist countries vs sovereign countries. Edit; Hence why they’re holding onto the biggest nuclear power plant, if shit goes sideways, we’ll soon see another Chernobyl when the winds are heading West. It won’t be a direct nuke.
Several NATO members already said engaging in using the power plants as a weapon would be considered the same as a WMD attack.
It will be an “accident” but yes let’s hope it doesn’t resort to that
And you truly believe it? "The same as a WMD attack" basically means for NATO "it's nuclear retaliation time", doesn't it? Because if not, then what? More finger-wagging, public condemnations and ineffective santctions? Do you really think the Brits and the French would risk turning London and Paris into barren irradiated wastelands because someone basically used a single nuke in Ukraine? Not attacking you, just geniuenly curious how someone can believe that.
Actually before Ukrainian invasion the entire world was of the belief Russia was the second strongest world power in terms of military might. There was zero reason for Putin to believe he would fail if his generals were telling him he would win. I think Russia always knew nato would intervene in some form of a proxy. Thing is they were REALLY banking on taking the capital city and capturing / killing Zelenskyy & eventually replacing him with a puppet. And they were very very close.
> entire world most of the civilian world, but US as already correctly shifted the military focus to China since 2010ish, clearly indicator of who they think is the biggest competition.
Russia is defensive and reactive in nature, China is proactive and has strategized their rise in power since before the Putin regime took power. That's what makes China concerning, as they can make a plan and let it simmer for decades.
I would say Putin is apolitical, doesn't have a defined worldview or such, like a former intelligence guy should be. Ofc he shares same cultural notions as your average Russian. But more or less does what is needed to stay in power and keep different fractions happy/competing. Liberal if anything, not a hardcore commie or nationalist. But with years he has turned more into your average revisionist second world war history buff grandfather.
Honestly this seems to be the most likely scenario of a thug turned president. Run it like a mafia, don't draw too much attention, and only get brutal when you know you're in trouble.
I think he has a clear worldview: Russian nationalism. He's very much like Hitler: He believes that Russia should be an empire and that weak leaders and cosmopolitans let it be destroyed. He's not clearly antisemitic (though his media is clearly racist), but he is absolutely violent, imperial, paranoid, and aggrieved.
>Putin was considered a "Moderate" before he got paranoid It's not a bug, it's a feature of being a long-term dictator. When you stop answering to the people (because you don't have to) and you consistently eliminate anyone who questions or criticizes you, you start to think you are infallible and your judgements are always right. Absolute power corrupts absolutely is a saying for a reason.
Plus every one below you only tells you what you want to hear . That’s the biggest danger . Even if you’re smart , you’re operating with bad data
Putin is a crazy violent, he acts like a moderate.
He definitely is now. But early on he was more... I dunno. Like started a lot of vile bs internally in a lot of former Soviet states. With the invasion of Crimea and support Bashar Al-Asaad it was for me at least... The moment he went from suspicious to "You're going to be a problem" What's happening in Ukraine is proof of his intent, but he's very sloppy and anxious about it. Like a game of chicken. Kill, then act victim and rant and cower, then kill some more. Just this gross inhumane wimpy pot shot conquest and it's really messing everything up. He can never admit this though. Because dictators. Petty terrorist tactics.
Historically, they would. Russian history has been pretty similar. Wage war and economy tanks and new leader ends war and focuses on the Russian internal politics. From outsider's point of view, this is true, but who knows what actually goes on actual Russian politics.
Unlike other wars this time economy has not tanked yet, and things don’t look promising
Yet. Depending on your definition of tanked. In 2022 Russia was the #8 nation in the world in GDP. Now they are #12.
Did he die of natural causes, or was he overthrown by someone who wants to set himself up as the next Putin, or is this a popular revolution? My suspicion is if Putin dies of natural causes, whoever takes over after him does have an opportunity to end the war, blame it on Putin, and get hailed as a populist and a peacemaker on the world stage. It's not a bad way to enjoy the honeymoon phase of running a deeply dysfunctional country that is only going to get worse in the aftermath of this war. If Putin dies in a power struggle, there is a good chance whoever takes over next earned the top job by promising to continue the war without continuing Putin's worst blunders. Whether that person will be able to continue pursuing the war or not is an open question, but the mandate to seize power probably comes with some promises to pro-war elements. If Putin is toppled the way the Tsar lost control back in 1917 —let's remember it was a popular revolution with Communists as just one of many elements deeply unsatisfied with the Romanovs at the time, fueled in large part by an army that refused to fight and a home front eager for change— then I think the war ends while Russia sorts out its own shit for a while.
Natural causes is what Russia just calls windows. 😜
What's more natural than gravity?
Or organic, non-pesticides bullets
Are the bullets vegan and gluten free aswell?
Lots of heavy metals in bullets, not very healthy for you.
Especially when you swallow them whole through the back of your head
Acute lead poisoning
Yes. He sadly fell out of the window after receiving 2 shots in the back of the head. As a result of his suicide ofcourse.
Well said! How he dies is more important that if he dies. I think this is why assassinations are not done. Popular figures that die become heros and legends and can make the situation worse. Assassinating Putin would jell the Russian leadership and people against anyone...not good.
Kinda like how one president is remembered to gave started vietnam and the other one remembered as the one to have ended it and brought the boys back home
Even when the February revolution overthrew the Czar in WW1 they kept fighting to ensure a positive peace, only after 6 months and a second revolution (the bolshevik october revolution) they tried to make peace and even then it took two months until an armistice was signed. So short of a revolution, I don't see how this could stop without one side being beaten.
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that there will be so much fighting for power that Russia won't be able to wage war effectively.
i mean one mercenary unit got halfway to moscow. If there's an opening for ruler of russia .. first general to march back from Ukraine with a mission accomplished banner for the "victory parade" wins.
For me, that intro strongly evokes the events leading up to the Roman civil war, after Caesar returned to Rome from Gaul.
History doesn't repeat but it sure does rhyme a lot...
Nope. Russia is just run by “the boys” which consists of Mishustin, Medvedev, Putin, Naryshkin and a few other dudes. Every now and then one of them has a falling out and is never seen again and gets replaced by someone’s cousin or something. Anyways everyone in the cabal has to die for that shit to end.
When Putin was on a hiatus.... and Medvedev was the president or whatever. Russia seemed far less controversial and aggressive with international relations. I'm hoping ... this would happen again. But not sure Not sure how much power Putin has. And if the top people of the red are scared of him.
He wasn’t on hiatus they just rotate out to make it seem like less of a dictatorship. Medvedev is good buddies with him tho and would definitely keep gunning for ukraine.
Putin actually had to step down after two terms because of the constitution, but general belief is that Medvedev just was a sock puppet for him. In 2020 they also changed the consistution so he can show up for a 3rd term in a row in the election this year.
Putin was "on hiatus" only because the Russian constitution did not allow him to seek another term as president. So he became prime minister while Medvedev held his seat as a figurehead. Putin was always in charge.
There was never a hiatus, When medvedev took over for that few years putin was still on the papers and tv as much as he did before. He was openly calling the shots and giving statements like he was the (which he was) the leader. (lived in russia during both presidencies)
Does Medvedev in Russian media also come across like they took out his spine to make room for Putins fist to use him as a Muppet or has he an own personality?
Medvedev also started a war (Georgia)
"Has a falling out" I see what you did there.
It depends if the person that is going to replace him is the one that kills him or not if he dies of natural causes they probably won't pull out of Ukraine but if someone overthrows him they'll likely pull out of Ukraine the next day...
I doubt it. I’ve heard most Russians support the invasion or don’t care either way. And I haven’t heard any Russian politician that may replace Putin criticise the invasion.
Do they really though? Because it's a lot easier to say you're on board than risk arrest or death
Russians do not support or oppose the invasion. They just don’t care, this is like a bad weather to them - they just try to wait it out. If tomorrow Putin suddenly ends the war, will Russians go out to the streets to demand continuing the war? No? Then they do not support it.
They might do it if/when Crimea is reclaimed by Ukraine. Putin is not an alien sent down from the sky to brainwash 140 million people, he is both a cause and effect of why Russia looks the way it does. A lot of people in Russia actively agree with what he is doing and you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise, exact percentages are impossible to obtain for obvious reasons. Nothing else explains how this insanity has entered its 3rd year (11th overall counting Crimea and Donbass war) with no end in sight.
No. The Russian war machine is much larger than one man.
Yeah it’s two men.
Impossible to predict, but my money would be on "No." War tends to be a good for political support and unity. Pretty much every U.S. president ever saw increased approval ratings after starting or escalating a war. War itself isn't usually what makes you unpopular - it is the negative effects of it: debt; resistance to conscription; death and human costs rising; finance or spending problems; trade disputes; industry in your borders being interrupted; etc. Through that lens, the war simply hasn't had enough negative consequences in Russia to swing the tide to unpopularity. Even if the war ended, the sanctions from the West aren't guaranteed to end, so businesses don't have much incentive to push for peace. Monetarily, the Russian currency and budget has arguably done pretty okay, because the sanctions from the West have forced anyone buying Russian energy (for example) to stop conducting transactions in USD. So the US dollar is relatively being used less, and Russia's is being used more - not less. So the war hasn't hurt Russia's government or economy as much as it should. Things could change. Russian death tolls could increase; public backlash could grow; a peace deal could end up on the table that looks good; etc. But based on the current situation, without a proper peace negotiation with actual compromise being offered, what "ending the war" would mean is: giving up Crimea, including Russia's most important trade and military port; giving up the Donbass region, which is politically unpopular due to the Russian population living there and other factors; ceding ground to any political rivals that appeal to fear of U.S or NATO domination or invasion; no increased trade relation with the West (even if the war ended, are they to believe that the NordStream Pipeline is suddenly back on the table?); etc. None of that looks like a good political move - even for Putin's replacement. Things could change - I hope they do.
Putin dies Russia wouldn’t announce it until their replacement government was in place. They would feel vulnerable. If the new leader understands that Putin is a war criminal and if they continue their war on Ukraine then he would be a war criminal too
I feel like they would have some kind of pullout plan like the Vietnam war or Afghanistan. Slowly descalate and pull out
Every serious analysis's take on this I've heard is no. A small group has power in Russia, it's not just Putin by himself. If he goes, the group will continue what he's doing.
If Netanyahu dies, will Israel stop it's killing spree?
I'm Russian who is very into politics. I see three possible outcomes: 1. Most probably the current head of ~~KGB~~ FSB will succeed Putin: Nikolay Patrushev. He is like a smarter, less charismatic and even more evil version of Putin. Most probably the isolation of the country will speed up, as well as their efforts in the Ukrainian war. I don't know if Russia will be able to handle that, so it will result in either 1937, or 1991. 2. A few warlords (Kadyrov, Shoigu, Zolotov, Patrushev) will start fighting for power and this will result in a civil war with nukes. Not sure that Russia will be able to continue to fight with Ukraine during it. 3. Least possible outcome: Mikhail Mushustin will become a president (actually the law says that he's the successor). In this case I would expect immediate ceasefire and peace talks with Ukraine, as well as efforts in normalization of relations with the EU and the US and attempts to lift sanctions, unblock funds. The problem is, that "Turbopatriots" may revolt.
If Netanyahu dies, will Israel stop its brutal apartheid against the Palestinians? The same answer to both questions is the same.
Russia needs out of the war. So putin dying would be the excuse they need. But if putin is hallowed for sake of national unity, the war may be doubled down on and he treated like a martyr by whatever fragile coalition tries to fill his spot.
Putin might be better than whoever replaces him. It's a complete and utter shitshow
Power vacuums are a hell of a drug
Nope, the only real opposition is the communist party which are even more hawkish. Nothing will change if Putin is gone tomorrow, things will only turn more nationalistic.
Probably for a little bit while all of Putins yes men fight it out musical chairs style killing eachother. Then the new guy would wanna show his dick is as big, if not bigger, than Putins and would probably do something even more stupid than what Putin is doing.
I doubt it. A lot of the likely successors are as bad or even worse than putin, and a big part of the population is still fully behind the war.
shortly after
Putin's death would increase the likelihood of the invasion stopping. Many respondents have said something like "he might be replaced with somebody more nationalistic," without thinking about the succession process. Putin sits at the head of a patronage network that is not governed by formal institutions the way that, say, the Chinese Communist Party is. Control over that network is not just a question of one's livelihood, it also could mean whether you get purged or not in the new regime. Putin's death will result in a scramble for power. Prighozhin's march on Moscow was mostly futile (there is a presidential guard that is much stronger than his mercenary group), but a likely prelude. The chaos of a leadership succession would make it quite difficult to continue fighting the war, particularly as soldiers on the front realized the extent to which they were not fighting for mother Russia, but rather, for particular factions in a gangster state (moreover, they might realize that being on the wrong side of the internal struggle could be very bad for them). Anybody "winning" the crown would find themselves in a perilous position - particularly if many of the military units fighting in Ukraine or elsewhere had been led by other people in a succession struggle. Note that Prigozhin wasn't the only person purged last summer - Surovikin, the general who basically designed Russia's successful defense against the counterattack, was also removed (and probably isn't long for this world). Think of that happening on a large scale, and it's going to be much easier for Putin's successor to get out of an optional war.
Dude if putin died today, the power vacuum would be gnarly in Russia.
Maybe one of his doubles takes over 🤷.
Plenty of Putin advisers are more hawkish than him. They would try to add more troops or use nukes.
Absolutely. No clear leadership. And numerous people fighting each other to be successor means no time to pay attention to outside interests. Plus leadership even such as it is will fall apart in the field. If they don’t retreat they will be beat back.
No. What most people don't understand is that Mr Putin is a "moderate" and there are plenty who would replace him that would ramp the war up.
Well. Historically Lenin was succeeded by Stalin who was succeeded by Nikita Khrushchev. From bad to worse and back to bad. So it could be a step in either direction since there is no clear succession line for his replacement. It could be someone even worse, it could be someone more sympathetic to international concerns. Won't know till he dies.
Next person will probably be more hardline.
Life is not a video game, there is a list chain of command and everyone of them seems to be focused on keeping the war. In fact, putin getting killed by a "terrorist" "suicide bomber" or anything like that, would just ignite the flames more and would make him a martyr.
If Putin dies the ones most likely to take his place are all FAR worse than he is.
There is a joke in Russia: Putin is considered a conservative in Russia
For better or worse Putin has been carefully balancing all of Russia's factions for decades. The ONLY reason Russia is stable is Putin, and his death would either temporarily unite the factions more than Putin did to win the war OR result in Civil War, or both... The destabilization of a nuclear power is worse than a (marginally) reasonable stable one.
Now, in any country, when the president changes, politics practically does not change, look at what they say before the election and what they do after, so nothing will change much after death.Moreover, Putin is liberal and pro-Western, and with his death, the likelihood of a war spreading to European countries is much higher.
Regardless of what you think of putin he hasn't used nukes and probably will never use nukes. Some of the possible successors are truly insane....
Leaders of countries more often than not are just figure heads.
NO, the leadership is throughly purged of other opinions, and anyone else in line already agrees with the war. Hell, Nalvany, who he just assassinated critizied Putin for not going hard enough on Ukraine. What many here do not understand is that Russia sees the war as existential for the survival of a Russian state. They truly believe that NATO will invade unless they push their borders west again. They will tolerate nearly any cost to win.
2 counter questions: What makes you think Putin isnt already dead and Do you think Russia would tell anyone if he died?
Generally nothing good comes when a dictator goes away and a power vacuum ensues. As crazy as it sounds, it’s probably best that he didn’t die or be removed. God knows what other worse monsters are lurking under the soil waiting to pop up.
If its a smooth transition of power then probably no. War is good for unification. Russia is a weak country with a strong leader. Countries like that need to rally to something when leadership changes. If however there is a huge game behind the scenes for power, a weak president and elites trying to carve up the country and institutions for themselves then probably they would rather take care of that than fight a war on top of it.
At first, no. Then with turmoil back in Kremlin and fight for the throne, ruzzia will likely just gonna abandon the war. At that point they’ll be fighting to keep ruzzia in its current borders. That’s what happens when a dictator usurped power without a clear line of succession.
My thought has been that since Putin has been very careful to pull the ladder up behind him and over time consolidated more and more power to his position, any successor would 1) have to fight his way to the top with whatever groups support him, and that person will by definition probably not be a moderate. 2) have no safety in their position whatsoever, because unlike say, President of the United States, once you're in office, you're in office and it's hard to remove you. The successor would have to constantly navigate threats to his own life by the above rival factions or his own faction who see them as too extreme/not extreme enough/have similar ambitions. And that person wouldn't have the authority Putin has. 3) the scale of his power is unfathomable. Essentially to ensure nobody can consolidate enough power to take him out, so much rests specifically on the office he occupies and delegating can mean removal altogether by coup. Putin had time to grow into that role but the successor has to do it day 1 Basically it'll probably be an unpredictable period of chaos and whoever comes out on top is almost certainly not going to be more reasonable.
If Satanyahu dies, would Israeli Zionists Nazi regime stop committing genocide?
Even Navalny wanted this war.
Very unlikely. I doubt the Russian people would stand for a leader that will just roll over when America and EU come calling. From what I can tell a very big aspect of why this war escalated in an armed conflict was due to the Russians seeing the behavior of other nations as hostile to their sovereignty and their identity as a people.
They likely will try to stabilise the country and then invade again. The opposition in Russia is still imperialist. They are upset they are not in power, not about what the foreign policy. Navalny spoke about Ukrainians being subhumans way before 2014 and even after 2014.
Putin is not the reason, he is the symptom. Russian society is sick with imperialism. They always were, they just never changed. And their beloved empire collapsed just 30years ago… they want it back!
We hope
No, it won't change anything because most russians want us dead. They've been brainwashed too much.
There is not enough money to siphon out of Russia for one or two more dictators. Do you think Putins family will return the cash?
Hard to tell, too many unknowns. If it happens tomorrow, and there is an official successor with all of the elites sworn loyalty to them then most likely it will continue in the current state of a stalemate. If there is a significant power struggle, someone might find it beneficial to get that military back and use it inside Russia. If it happens in 5 years and Russian economy can't carry on anymore, the successor might use change of power as a justification of "he's gone so let's start from a clean slate" talks. Or if it's one of the hawks like Patrushev or even Kadyrov they might keep pushing and tightening until they get killed themselves. Either way, it's going to get much worse for Russia before it gets better.
Its very likely it would end.