if putin uses nukes...

[myohmy2]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11234251/America-hit-Russias-military-devastating-strike-Putin-nukes-Ukraine-says-general.html

...looks like we can do a lot of Russian military damage without resorting to nukes...

...ever wonder what the situation would look like today if putin's good friend trump had won in 2020 (or might win in 2024)?

...would trump still believe putin over our intelligence services?

...probably...

[pwb]

1. Trump gave Putin the go ahead

IMO.

[Lovie777]

2. Russia will certainly be affected and highly exposed to fall out radiation ....

but Putin is one crazy motherfucker who obviously don't care for his Motherland.

The population of Russia is on a spiral down fall. I wonder why?

[louis-t]

3. What good would a nuclear devastated Ukraine be to Russia?

Even if he only took out a couple of major cities, he knows the retaliation would be severe.

[honest.abe]

4. That's an interesting strategy.

This does make sense as it will make Putin think more than twice about using nukes on Ukraine. He was probably thinking he could get away with a "small" nuke in western Ukraine. The US and other western nations would be reluctant to use nukes in retaliation and Ukraine might be forced to give in. But this massive non-nuclear threat seems to be the wisest most effective deterrent in this situation.

[EndlessWire]

15. I think he may try

to set off one of the Ukrainian nuclear plants, in order to be able to blame Ukraine for the nukes. He's evil.

[honest.abe]

17. Very possible.

[sarisataka]

21. You cannot "set off" a nuclear reactor

Like a nuclear weapon. They are very different in design and effect.

[EndlessWire]

25. You can damage them. n/t

[sarisataka]

26. Yes and that could cause radioactive contamination

But it would not be mistaken for the use of a nuclear warhead.

[Turbineguy]

5. Putin may make the Republican party moot.

[sarisataka]

6. And Russia would meekly accept such a strike

No risk of escalation... none at all

[honest.abe]

9. I think the idea is to deter Putin from using nukes at all.

He might think he could get away with using a small nuke as the US and other western nations would be reluctant to start a nuclear shooting match with Russia. However if he thinks the US is likely to retaliate with a devastating non-nuke attack then he might not go the nuke route. But who knows with a lunatic like Putin.

[sarisataka]

10. Hopefully the suggestion

That there would be consequences for using WMDs in Ukraine will deter Russia. However it is naive to assume Russia would not respond in in some way either inside or beyond Ukraine.

This is as I said back in January when no one believed Russia would attack. European wars have a history of expanding beyond borders. More effort should have been made to prevent the initial invasion.

[honest.abe]

16. What would you suggest we do if Putin nukes Ukraine?

[sarisataka]

19. It would be very conditional on what exactly they do

A tactical strike on a military target is different than dropping a megaton on Kharkiv.

Russian veto power essentially neuters the UN but it can be used as a platform to make a statement.

In January I said explicitly taking military options off the table was a mistake. We need to explicitly correct that mistake before we are forced into an extremely difficult position.

[honest.abe]

29. Lets say a nuke on a military tactical target in Ukraine.. what would you suggest we do?

[sarisataka]

30. In such a case I would attempt

A counter strike against the launch platform (air base of ship) and that unit's higher headquarters. Hit both with overwhelming conventional weapons.

If at all possible have Ukraine conduct the mission even if it means "loaning" some weapons they do not have. (e.g. Tomahawk cruise missiles)

[honest.abe]

31. So in this case would you assume Russia would not strike back?

[sarisataka]

32. On the contrary

I would raise our DEFCON if I were President and had to make such a choice. The idea it to make the counter attack painful enough to change Russia's course while hopefully avoiding a World War.

That is why I have favored deterrent actions since before the Russian invasion. Most armageddon scenarios begin with tit-for-tat exchanges. I have seen one study that concluded if even a single nuclear weapon is used a global nuclear war is inevitable. Within 36 hours we would have more dead than all of mankind's previous wars combined, the US alone would have 60-70 million killed in the initial exchanges.

Numbers like those are why I roll my eyes at the bluster and bravado of our hawks that have been champing to go at Russia for the last year or so.

[honest.abe]

34. Yeah, its a disturbing complicated situation no matter what.

Thank you for your thoughtful responses.

[sarisataka]

35. I am glad to not be

In Biden's seat. I wish I could be in Putin's and unilaterally end this fiasco.

It has been a good, if alarming, thought experiment

[Thomas Hurt]

7. I think Putin had planned this all along and the Pig was supposed to

lame NATO to make it easier. He effed that up so Putin went ahead anyway.

[thucythucy]

8. There is also Kaliningrad to consider,

surrounded as it is by NATO territory.

I imagine a total blockade of that port would also be on the table.

[EndlessWire]

24. Didn't we read that Poland

is passing out iodine pills to citizens? Nerves must be raw.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

11. There is no probably about it,

Benedict Donald would've stood aside and let Putin march right in while at the same time, preventing NATO from taking any action and refusing to send weapons systems to Ukr.

You're correct that if Putin uses tactical nukes in Ukr, our conventional forces would make short work of the Russian military, their Navy would be sitting on the bottom of the ocean or they would just refuse to leave their port, their Air Force is a joke compared to the western powers and we've all seen just how ineffective their Army is.

Let us hope and pray it doesn't come down to this and cooler heads in Moscow prevail.

[GregariousGroundhog]

27. Indeed

From what I've read, Ukrainian MiG-29s have had a moderate amount of success launching AGM-88 HARM missiles toward the general vicinity of where they suspect air defense radars to be. The EA-18G and F-35 have better integration with the HARM missile, better ability to detect radar emissions, and better ability to jam radar emissions.

If the Russians are struggling to prevent Ukrainian SEAD missions, American ones will give them fits.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

28. +100. nt

[Irish_Dem]

41. Would the US have to take out most of the RU air defense system? Or just some of it?

Russia is supposed to have a huge AD system and a quite sophisticated.
At least on paper.

[Irish_Dem]

37. I agree, Biden means business. He told Putin not to try it and he means it.

[GenXer47]

12. the problem is Putin seems almost suicidal

in which case his red line, the existence of Russia being threatened, could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. He's playing the victim to the point of self-destruction, just like his asset in Florida.

[Irish_Dem]

38. Putin thinks he will be safe, no matter what happens.

Certainly he has made provisions for all scenarios.

He doesn't care what happens to Russia or the Russian people.

[Elessar Zappa]

40. The things is,

no one will escape the consequences of an all out nuclear war, including Putin.

[Irish_Dem]

42. Putin is the richest man in the world. He has underground living quarters.

Designed to last for a long time. Under all conditions.

[Elessar Zappa]

43. With a nuclear winter,

food growth would stop, food animals would die, the supply chain would collapse. He may survive on stored food for a while but not long.

[Irish_Dem]

44. He is not a young man, and possibly in poor health.

He figures he can last long enough.

It is said he has underground quarters of a very lavish nature.

Putin is said to be worth around $300-400 billon dollars.

We simply cannot imagine what that kind of wealth would buy.

Underground gardens, farms, livestock, etc.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

13. U.S. has sent private warnings to Russia against using a nuclear weapon

Putin needs to understand that using nuclear weapons is a line that even he should not consider crossing

Link to tweet

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/09/22/russia-nuclear-threat-us-options/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

The United States for several months has been sending private communications to Moscow warning Russia’s leadership of the grave consequences that would follow the use of a nuclear weapon, according to U.S. officials, who said the messages underscore what President Biden and his aides have articulated publicly.

The Biden administration generally has decided to keep warnings about the consequences of a nuclear strike deliberately vague, so the Kremlin worries about how Washington might respond, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive deliberations.

The attempt by the White House to cultivate what’s known in the nuclear deterrence world as “strategic ambiguity” comes as Russia continues to escalate its rhetoric about possible nuclear weapons use amid a domestic mobilization aimed at stanching Russian military losses in eastern Ukraine.

The State Department has been involved in the private communications with Moscow, but officials would not say who delivered the messages or the scope of their content. It was not clear whether the United States had sent any new private messages in the hours since Russian President Vladimir Putin issued his latest veiled nuclear threat during a speech announcing a partial mobilization early Wednesday, but a senior U.S. official said the communication has been happening consistently over recent months.

Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, wrote Thursday in a post on Telegram that territory in eastern Ukraine would be “accepted into Russia” after the completion of staged “referendums” and vowed to strengthen the security of those areas.

[OAITW r.2.0]

14. In addition to a conventional weapon retaliation, the UN ought to have a GA vote to kick Russia

off the Security Council if they employ a tactical nuke.

[EndlessWire]

20. They are now talking about perhaps

expanding the Security Council.

Here is a link to President Biden's UN speech. It's 28 minutes long:

It reminded me of the talk about expanding our own SC to counter the bias on the Court.

The next day, a member of the Security Council mentioned the suggestion and said it was a good idea. But, they move too slowly for the idea to benefit Ukraine.

It's not just about Ukraine. The Horn of Africa is in dire straits as to food, secondary to drought conditions, and the UN needs to act. But, the UN is well aware of the world opinion that they are ineffectual as to action in general, although support for the food program is heavy. So, they are now talking about restructuring the UN to be more effective, and, you know, helpful.

Biden told the world leaders that when parents can't feed their child, nothing else matters. Nothing. I think he has identified the primary path toward peace, which we all know Russia is obstructing.

[roamer65]

47. That will be the least of it.

If Russia uses a nuke in Ukraine, then I would favor the immediate stationing of NATO nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

[former9thward]

48. The GA has no power over the Security Council.

To remove Russia a whole new UN would have to be created.

[blueinredohio]

18. If we should go to war with Russia

my thought is to draft every one in white militant and supremacy groups. They like to play warrior so let them be one. See how that works for them.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

23. Problem with that is that they'll probably defect to Russia's side and fight

on their side.

[Irish_Dem]

39. That won't work out very well for them.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

45. Wouldn't work out well for them,

but it sure would work out well for us, that's less MAGAt's coming back to the US.

[Irish_Dem]

46. Yes it sure would work out for the US.

The MAGA Nazis would be Putin's problem.

[blueinredohio]

49. That was my point. Less Nazis

[treestar]

22. While we just used them, with the element of surprise

in WWII, this is a first - the threat to use them. In itself, it could be a war crime. Be interesting to look into that.

[bluestarone]

33. If russia DID use nukes THEN i first suggest that the US. with UN help with a MAJOR plan to

get Russian citizens to REVOLT like never before! Then next to last resort i say Take putin out! (any means possible) We KNOW what the LAST resort could be. So hopefully we don't get to the last resort.

[Emile]

36. Maybe Putin is thinking about giving Trump an enema?