{"id":2475,"date":"2024-11-28T18:21:00","date_gmt":"2024-11-28T15:21:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/factcheck.lt\/?p=2475"},"modified":"2025-01-10T01:03:50","modified_gmt":"2025-01-09T22:03:50","slug":"","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/factcheck.lt\/eng\/news\/nuclear_conflict\/","title":{"rendered":"\u0421heck the reasoning of a Belarusian political scientist about nuclear escalation","raw":"\u0421heck the reasoning of a Belarusian political scientist about nuclear escalation"},"content":{"rendered":"

On November 27, 2024, political scientist and writer<\/a> Andrei Lazutkin, during the ONT talk show “ObjectiveLy,” made the following assumption about nuclear escalation in the world:<\/p>\n

\nAn important phrase in Putin’s speech was that, well, our next action depends on whether or not there will be a treaty on intermediate- and short-range missiles. That is, this is how the SMO (special military operation) began. So let\u2019s restore it all, or not. And today, Trump was essentially given the suggestion that, like Kennedy, he can come to power without really doing anything, without stopping anyone. This, in principle, is a clever move. This is a missile targeting Europe. Let Europe ask Trump; some sort of link might form there. So, in principle, this is a multi-move strategy, as I understand it, with relatively little bloodshed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Our verdict, based on the complexity of the problem and the analyses conducted:<\/p>\n

\n

Verdict: Mostly Incorrect<\/h2>\n

\"\"<\/span>
\nReason: If several statements were made, most of them are false.
\n
\nRating Scale<\/i><\/a>
\n<\/small>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Full video:
\n