U.S. Planning to Sink Russia's Black Sea Fleet.

[Baron]

Putin can stop the bombing of Russia. And vice versa on America of course.
We can get down to the short strokes whenever you folks choose to talk about it.

Putin promised to bomb 'decision-making centers' as revenge.
Kiev became meanwhile one of favorite vacation destinations for Europeans who want to save money.
Only few are afraid of Putin's revenge

 

[Batcat]

And the same applies to Russia, and China, and the UK, and France.

Using nukes eliminates their only useful purpose. If a P5 State nukes a non-nuclear state, the NPT is dead and we enter a new era of nuclear proliferation.

Russia's interest is maintaining the nuclear status quo, not overturning it.

The nuclear sabre rattling is a transparent psyop, intended to weaken support for Ukraine in the West, and reassure the Russian population that Russia is still invincible.

Whoever promotes this narrative is aiding and abetting Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine and the war crimes the RF are committing on a daily basis there.

If Putin is sane you are most likely right. Some say he is sick and not mentally sound.

Bloated Vladimir Putin video heightens theories Russian leader is sick

A new video shows the Russian president looking bloated and awkwardly gripping a table for support.

nypost.com

 

[para bellum]

If Putin is sane you are most likely right. Some say he is sick and not mentally sound.

Bloated Vladimir Putin video heightens theories Russian leader is sick

A new video shows the Russian president looking bloated and awkwardly gripping a table for support.

nypost.com

Which is why I said somewhere back there, that the argument that Ukraine could rise to the nuclear threshold boils down to 'Putin is not a rational actor'.

It is the only way to reconcile the notion.

He may or may not be, I don't know. In some pics he looks like he's pumped up on prednisone. Some other pics he looks okay.

If he isn't rational, the order would not be followed. If he is rational, he knows he can't give the order.

I know the difference between a psyop and a genuine nuclear posture change, and Russia's nuclear posture hasn't changed throughout the invasion. The only thing that has changed is the propaganda from the Kremlin, and the crackdown on dissent in Russia.

No warheads have been moved, the Start treaty has not been violated or anything like that. The watchers are still watching, and they aren't raising any alarms.

 

[Concerned American]

A polite discussion is required. Start becoming an arrogant American pr--k then you're off my radar.

Your definition of an American prick is anyone south of 49N that disagrees with you and proves you wrong--which BTW, is about 95% of Americans. Now try again duck.

 

[Concerned American]

My OP was meant to serve the purpose of promoting a fuller discussion on the war and it was chosen for it's obviously being an attractive expression of America's ability to win the war against Russia quickly and easily.
I found an appropriate link that serves my purpose. Whether it's true or not is of little concern to me, as it relates to this thread.

But of course is implies a full scale nuclear war is possible/probable.

You haven't answered my post that NATO and the Canadians are waging the war in Ukraine against Russia, duck. You do that alot when faced with facts that you cannot refute.

Canadian special forces operating in Ukraine, New York Times reports

A report published Saturday noted a few dozen commandos from NATO countries, including Canada, had been working inside Ukraine.

ottawacitizen.com

 

[Batcat]

Which is why I said somewhere back there, that the argument that Ukraine could rise to the nuclear threshold boils down to 'Putin is not a rational actor'.

It is the only way to reconcile the notion.

He may or may not be, I don't know. In some pics he looks like he's pumped up on prednisone. Some other pics he looks okay.

If he isn't rational, the order would not be followed. If he is rational, he knows he can't give the order.

I know the difference between a psyop and a genuine nuclear posture change, and Russia's nuclear posture hasn't changed throughout the invasion. The only thing that has changed is the propaganda from the Kremlin, and the crackdown on dissent in Russia.

No warheads have been moved, the Start treaty has not been violated or anything like that. The watchers are still watching, and they aren't raising any alarms.

Let’s hope everybody remains calm and sane. If we had an all out nuclear war I would not be at ground zero but I probably would glow in the dark.

 

[Concerned American]

Let’s hope everybody remains calm and sane. If we had an all out nuclear war I would not be at ground zero but I probably would glow in the dark.

If it comes to that, I hope I am taken out in the first wave. I have no desire to see the aftermath.

 

[gipper]

Which is why I said somewhere back there, that the argument that Ukraine could rise to the nuclear threshold boils down to 'Putin is not a rational actor'.

It is the only way to reconcile the notion.

He may or may not be, I don't know. In some pics he looks like he's pumped up on prednisone. Some other pics he looks okay.

If he isn't rational, the order would not be followed. If he is rational, he knows he can't give the order.

I know the difference between a psyop and a genuine nuclear posture change, and Russia's nuclear posture hasn't changed throughout the invasion. The only thing that has changed is the propaganda from the Kremlin, and the crackdown on dissent in Russia.

No warheads have been moved, the Start treaty has not been violated or anything like that. The watchers are still watching, and they aren't raising any alarms.

If Putin uses nukes, you conclude he’s irrational. I agree any leader resorting to nukes isn’t completely rational. However if the US and NATO continue provoking Russia and if this were to result in Ukraine winning on the battlefield and in attacks on Russian homelands, he could easily conclude he has no other option. I doubt our government leaders would do differently, if the same happened to the US.

At any rate, this war was instigated and promoted by the US and NATO. Ukraine is none of the USG’s business. It’s just another war to enrich the war machine.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If Putin uses nukes, you conclude he’s irrational. I agree any leader resorting to nukes isn’t completely rational. However if the US and NATO continue provoking Russia and if this were to result in Ukraine winning on the battlefield and in attacks on Russian homelands, he could easily conclude he has no other option. I doubt our government leaders would do differently, if the same happened to the US.

At any rate, this war was instigated and promoted by the US and NATO. Ukraine is none of the USG’s business. It’s just another war to enrich the war machine.

Nothing is happening to Russia that would justify using nukes. The official Russian policy on using nuclear weapons is to only use them if Russia or an ally has been attacked with nukes or other weapons of mass destruction or if Russia is facing an existential threat from an attack with conventional weapons. This is basically the policy of all civilized nations and none of these things is happening to Russia. Russia is not being attacked and is in no danger of losing anything but its imperialist adventure in Ukraine. Russia is merely embarrassed by the poor judgement of its leader in invading Ukraine and the poor performance of its military. No civilized nation would consider throwing a nuclear tantrum over such considerations.

 

[gipper]

Nothing is happening to Russia that would justify using nukes. The official Russian policy on using nuclear weapons is to only use them if Russia or an ally has been attacked with nukes or other weapons of mass destruction or if Russia is facing an existential threat from an attack with conventional weapons. This is basically the policy of all civilized nations and none of these things is happening to Russia. Russia is not being attacked and is in no danger of losing anything but its imperialist adventure in Ukraine. Russia is merely embarrassed by the poor judgement of its leader in invading Ukraine and the poor performance of its military. No civilized nation would consider throwing a nuclear tantrum over such considerations.

You missed my point.

IF…IF…IF Russia were to begin losing this war and incur multiple attacks on their homeland, Putin would be backed into a corner. He then might resort to using nukes.

 

[ESay]

You missed my point.

IF…IF…IF Russia were to begin losing this war and incur multiple attacks on their homeland, Putin would be backed into a corner. He then might resort to using nukes.

Of course Russia won't be losing in that way. At best, Ukraine will be able to halt their advance and take back some territory in Kherson and Kharkiv oblast.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You missed my point.

IF…IF…IF Russia were to begin losing this war and incur multiple attacks on their homeland, Putin would be backed into a corner. He then might resort to using nukes.

The security of Russia is not, never was and will not be threatened by Ukraine or its allies on the battlefield, but the damage to Russia's relations with the US and EU caused by Russia's foolish and irresponsible invasion of Ukraine will not be reversed in the foreseeable future and reckless threats of using nukes only serve to convince the US and EU that relations with Russia cannot be normalized again.

 

[gipper]

Of course Russia won't be losing in that way. At best, Ukraine will be able to halt their advance and take back some territory in Kherson and Kharkiv oblast.

Yeah sure. You know how this war will transpire. I would never be so presumptuous. War has a funny way of causing unexpected consequences. History tells you this in spades.

This war could easily escalate and involve several other nations. This could result in Russia losing and incurring attacks on their homeland. Then, who knows what might happen. Nuclear war certainly might result.

 

[gipper]

The security of Russia is not, never was and will not be threatened by Ukraine or its allies on the battlefield, but the damage to Russia's relations with the US and EU caused by Russia's foolish and irresponsible invasion of Ukraine will not be reversed in the foreseeable future and reckless threats of using nukes only serve to convince the US and EU that relations with Russia cannot be normalized again.

You too! You know this how?

War has a way of causing unexpected consequences. No?

 

[Vastator]

If Putin uses nukes, you conclude he’s irrational. I agree any leader resorting to nukes isn’t completely rational. However if the US and NATO continue provoking Russia and if this were to result in Ukraine winning on the battlefield and in attacks on Russian homelands, he could easily conclude he has no other option. I doubt our government leaders would do differently, if the same happened to the US.

At any rate, this war was instigated and promoted by the US and NATO. Ukraine is none of the USG’s business. It’s just another war to enrich the war machine.

Who dares, wins. For far too long the west has imagined for the most part that any use of nukes would be large scale, and on population centers. Almost completely ignoring the potential utility of low yield tactical nukes on the battle field. Russia? Not so much. They’ve developed, and war gamed the usage of low yield nukes far more than the West. And have also considered the reaction from the West should they use them. This myopic point of view leaves the West wide open on the battle field. Defaulting the West to resort to MAD as their only response should Russia use one. Which means the West would likely do little to nothing, in response, nuclear speaking, as it pertains to Ukraine. No European nation, nor America, are going to offer up their own cities, in response to a tactical low yield battlefield strike, in Ukraine. None.

 

[Batcat]

If it comes to that, I hope I am taken out in the first wave. I have no desire to see the aftermath.

Where I am at I will not be taken out in the first wave but I will glow in the dark.

 

[toomuchtime_]

You too! You know this how?

War has a way of causing unexpected consequences. No?

By observation, it is clear there was no military threat to Russia's security before the invasion, that there is none now and that Ukraine and its allies would gain no advantage by threatening to attack Russia in the future.

Russia's threats to cut off gas sales to Europe this winter, its many threats to bomb and otherwise attack European cities, Putin's insane Peter the Great speech and the anti western culture Putin has fashioned in Russia make it clear that any trade with Russia that strengthens its economy and therefore its military is a national security risk for Europe.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Who dares, wins. For far too long the west has imagined for the most part that any use of nukes would be large scale, and on population centers. Almost completely ignoring the potential utility of low yield tactical nukes on the battle field. Russia? Not so much. They’ve developed, and war gamed the usage of low yield nukes far more than the West. And have also considered the reaction from the West should they use them. This myopic point of view leaves the West wide open on the battle field. Defaulting the West to resort to MAD as their only response should Russia use one. Which means the West would likely do little to nothing, in response, nuclear speaking, as it pertains to Ukraine. No European nation, nor America, are going to offer up their own cities, in response to a tactical low yield battlefield strike, in Ukraine. None.

But if Russia doesn't attack population centers, what would Russia target with its nukes? If Russia knew of any mass concentrations of soldiers or weapons or essential war infrastructure it has the capability of attacking them now, so what would be the point of using nukes? Just as terror weapons?

 

[Vastator]

But if Russia doesn't attack population centers, what would Russia target with its nukes? If Russia knew of any mass concentrations of soldiers or weapons or essential war infrastructure it has the capability of attacking them now, so what would be the point of using nukes? Just as terror weapons?

It hasn’t felt threatened enough to do so yet.Russia is still bulldozing through the Ukraine, and gaining ground. Low yield nukes at this point would be completely unnecessary.

 

[gipper]

By observation, it is clear there was no military threat to Russia's security before the invasion, that there is none now and that Ukraine and its allies would gain no advantage by threatening to attack Russia in the future.

Russia's threats to cut off gas sales to Europe this winter, its many threats to bomb and otherwise attack European cities, Putin's insane Peter the Great speech and the anti western culture Putin has fashioned in Russia make it clear that any trade with Russia that strengthens its economy and therefore its military is a national security risk for Europe.

You’re uninformed. Of course Russia thinks NATO is a threat. You thinking it isn’t, is proof you’re uninformed or a dupe of the state.