The World Seems Pretty Much United Against Putin And His Ukraine Attack.....

[global1]

So it the world countries are that much united against him - how does hitting back on Russia and Putin with all the force we can muster - foment a WWIII?

It would seem like - if a counterattack was engineered against Russia in a organized way with NATO and the UN - that it could bring Putin down on his knees relatively quickly.

I know Putin was making noise about 'nuclear' - but I think that's all it is - noise and bravado. He figures that people think him that unpredictable - that he can make threats and that the world would back down - because of his un-predictability. I don't think he's that stupid that he go nuclear - as that would assure his demise for sure.

So how does this escalate into a WWIII.

Don't you think we should call his bluff and put this bully in his place?

[Ocelot II]

1. People who actually deal with Russia and national security on a daily basis

seem to think otherwise.

[sarisataka]

2. I recall another poster talking about Russian bluffing

They claimed to be a good poker player and said we should call the bluff because Putin would never invade. Do we really want to call a bluff when the nuclear chips are in play?

Why is it people are thinking if we were to invade Russia they would not use every weapon in their Arsenal to resist?

[Jazz Jon]

3. No.

He would go nuclear in a heartbeat. He may even be considering it now. He would see it as justified revenge against a world that would not let him have his own way.

He is not a normal human being. If he had one bit of respect for life, he would not be bombing residential neighborhoods with a vengeance right now. He has no soul. If he can't have his way he will destroy the world.

That said... NATO should be giving Ukraine more weapons capable of shooting down high flying Russian bombers. They have already orchestrated a deal for Poland to give jet fighters (the type that Ukrainians know how to fly) to Ukraine, for just that purpose. They should be arriving soon if they haven't already.

[RussBLib]

4. it could be done

We have a robust missile-defense system. If nukes get launched, it's possible they could be neutralized. I say possible. I mean, we have spent billions on it.

I wonder if T**** wanted to launch any nukes and I wonder if there are sufficient safeguards in place to have prevented it.

[Jazz Jon]

5. It couldn't be done

Russia has tens of thousands of nuclear warheads with multiple ways to deliver them. If even a small fraction of those are delivered, the world is over.

[dalton99a]

9. Best estimate is 1,500 deployed:

All figures for nuclear weapons are estimates but, according to the Federation of American Scientists, Russia has 5,977 nuclear warheads - the devices that trigger a nuclear explosion - though this includes about 1,500 that are retired and set to to be dismantled.

Of the remaining 4,500 or so, most are considered strategic nuclear weapons - ballistic missiles, or rockets, which can be targeted over long distances. These are the weapons usually associated with nuclear war.

The rest are smaller, less destructive nuclear weapons for short-range use on battlefields or at sea.

But this does not mean Russia has thousands of long-range nuclear weapons ready to go.

Experts estimate around 1,500 Russian warheads are currently "deployed", meaning sited at missile and bomber bases or on submarines at sea.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60564123

[Jazz Jon]

13. OK

1,500 ready to go is better than tens of thousands. But it would only take about 100 detontated on the same day to give fatal radiation poisoning to everything on the planet. NOT TO MENTION the several 100, minimum, that other countries would launch in retaliation. Fusion H bombs today (except for "battlefied" tactical nukes) are ten times more powerful (at least) than the early fission A bombs that were dropped on Japan. That's a pretty high radiation loading for the people and ecosystems that didn't get vaporized on the first day. They don't call it "mutually assured destruction" for no reason. I fully believe Putin is evil enough to take out the planet. It almost makes me angry enough to take out the whole planet just to get to him. Almost. Luckily, I don't have access to the "football", nor do I have retinas that match the commander in chief.

[marie999]

7. The US missile defense system would work against North Korea or Iran, not Russia.

[radius777]

10. Which is why we need to upgrade all of our systems,

so that Russia knows very clearly that any aggression against the US or NATO is doomed to fail.

[dalton99a]

6. The asshole might very well start a nuclear war and call it his beautiful solution to global warming

There is no depth to his depravity.

Putin is evil.

[radius777]

8. Any external attack against the Russian homeland would

go nuclear pretty quickly, IMO.

The best way to take him out is for his own people to do it. This is why we need to ramp up the sanctions to include oil/gas. Then wait a few months as their economy crumbles and unrest starts to grow amongst the population as well as the elites and generals.

The way to have prevented this altogether was to have made it clear to Putin/Russia a long time ago that any/all former Soviet states that want to join NATO would be allowed to do so regardless of what he wanted. Putin played us pure and simple. He convinced the gullible and the corrupt that his victimhood narratives were valid - and now Ukraine is paying the price.

[Turbineguy]

11. Well....

everybody except the republican party.

[smirkymonkey]

12. There has got to be some way of taking out Putin - without a World War.

Not the entire Russian army, but Putin. Certainly, someone (and their henchmen) are greedy enough and close enough to him to end Putin's life for a very big payoff and a guarantee of a life of luxury and safety. They are all so corruptable and the western world could guarantee their freedom and comfort.

Couldn't that be an angle to consider? I don't really think this war (or accompanying sanctions) is something that the Russian people want, and if he is taken out, it might give them the strength they need to refuse to ever have such a dictator again. Especially the younger people. They wouldn't mind being rid of him. It's probably the only chance in their lifetimes that they could imagine it.

Is a Ceausescu situation out of the question? Or a Mussolini one? Everyone hates him. Nobody would avenge his death. The entire world wants him to stop. Even most of his own people.

[Igel]

14. It's not.

China's not against.

India's quiet.

Pakistan, not so much.

African countries? Officially not that anti, and talk of mercenaries involves money.

South America? No clue.

The *Western* developed world is fairly united.