3 ms·
I think the question is how does that escalate. If Putin is just taunting NATO with a few tanks crossing the border, and artillery takes out the tanks, that mig
by jacobr1 5y ago
I think the question is how does that escalate. If Putin is just taunting NATO with a few tanks crossing the border, and artillery takes out the tanks, that might be the end of it. But at want point does a broader escalation turn into a total war ... which bring in the nukes?
- chasd00 5y agoI think when one side sees it as an existential threat then the gloves come off. Russia will launch nukes before the government fell. United States would launch nukes before the government fell.
- ajuc 5y agoIt's pretty clear actually. Anything that enters NATO country - is destroyed with conventional forces. If Russia launches nukes - there's nuclear response, but at that point it's not really "escalation", just extended suicide by Russia.
- grayfaced 5y agoNATO clearly answers this, No First Use. Individual countries can deploy though. US says no first use except in response to WMDs (so bioweapons or chemical weapons). By clearly defining it, it makes it less likely to escalate to accidental MAD. We know the line, Russia knows the line. And they know the potential consequences should they choose to cross it. On the other hand Russia has recently been opening their doctrine to allow nuclear strikes in response to conventional attacks. Further they threaten nuclear responses. They're intentionally blurring the lines because they feel they can get away shenanigans in the confusion.