The plan to flatten Russia that runs out of soldiers

Recruiting the entire population aged 18 to 29 to flatten Moscow

The proposal appeared with a frightening level of detail: mobilize the entire population between 18 and 29, open a 2,000-kilometer front from Finland to Romania and advance "day and night" toward Moscow until Belarus and western Russia are turned into a wasteland. The stated goal was not military but historical: that the destruction be such that the Kremlin's name is reduced to a footnote. The problem, as always, is who supplies the first body.

The most common answer in the thread was not ideological but logistical. "You've got the wrong direction, the enemy is further west across the ocean," one person replied. "It will take a lot of little boats for those millions of soldiers." The author of the plan is 30 years old, as he was reminded, so he wouldn't even fall into his own draft bracket. The crusade is left without crusaders.

Who enlists when the war belongs to others

The thread fills up with offers of free rides to the front. "When did you say you're enlisting in the Ukrainian army?" one message asks. "I agree, when do you want me to drive you to Ukraine? I'll take you for free, you won't get a better offer." Nobody takes up the challenge. The distance between calling for total war and boarding a bus toward it is the real subject of the debate.

One reply sums up the temperature: "I'm 27 years old, and anyone who tries to draft me for any war gets their throat slit." It's not a credible threat, it's a stance. The mass mobilization the plan requires collides with a generation that doesn't see Moscow as its problem.

The Russian threat argument and its evidence

The defense of the plan rests on a list of grievances that several messages enumerate: the Kremlin's threats, the statements of its TV pundits, the weaponry deployed in Kaliningrad, the invasion of a neighboring country that wanted to be European, the use of migrants as pressure on the Polish border. "There's no bigger warmonger than the Kremlin," one person sums up.

The accusations extend to historical events: the downing of the plane carrying 96 Poles, the sabotage of NordStream, the creation of Gladio. Here the consensus breaks down. One participant corrects: "Indeed, all of that is true except the Gladio thing." The list is long, but not every item withstands the same scrutiny.

The Budapest Memorandum and the fine print

Then the legal argument appears. The Budapest Memorandum required refraining from the threat or use of force against Ukraine's territorial integrity, except in self-defense or in accordance with the United Nations Charter. The conclusion drawn is that this obligation "is not absolute." The wording is vague, and that's where everything unravels.

The same message warns: "Apparently they have the false hope that he'll back down. But what if he doesn't? I wouldn't take that chance, just in case." Deterrence, the message goes, isn't built on wishful thinking.

The nuclear scenario nobody wants to calculate

The question that dismantles the original plan is simple: "How do you do all that without Russia first deciding to launch nuclear missiles at every European country involved?" Nobody answers. The 2,000-kilometer front and the millions of soldiers are, in that scenario, a list of targets.

The counterpoint is constant: "Every action has a reaction. If the leaders of the respective European countries decide to declare war on Russia, they shouldn't expect Pilingui to sit on his hands." The apocalyptic plan has a problem of reciprocity.

The war that is won on the internet

Another current holds that the narrative is already written before anything begins. "The only ones winning the war on the internet are the Ukrainians. In the Western media they're already in Moscow, 10 million Russians have died and the Russian economy has already collapsed." The irony targets media enthusiasm, not the front.

The thread also has its opposite version: those who argue that NATO provoked the situation by refusing to accept Russia, and that the Alliance benefits from confrontation. "It's like putting your hand into the tiger's cage and then shooting it for being too aggressive." The blame, in this reading, lies with whoever rattles the cage.

---

The original plan called for fire and brimstone. What remains is a thread of 99 replies where nobody enlists, several offer rides to the front, and the discussion drifts toward who provoked what. Total mobilization is still waiting for volunteers.