4 ms·

You'd have to ask yourself: once a country becomes so deranged that it's willing to nuke non-aggressive neighbors to remove a "threat", is it really safe to jus

You'd have to ask yourself: once a country becomes so deranged that it's willing to nuke non-aggressive neighbors to remove a "threat", is it really safe to just back down and potentially show weakness to that nation? What if they decide that further strategic aims can be accomplished with additional nuclear strikes? I'm not saying I know the answer. But this is what strategists on the US/NATO side would be thinking about, and Russia sure knows they would be thinking about it. It would be madness to gamble on this strategy working out in the long run.

eternalban 5y ago
The P5 issues a joint statement on Jan 3rd, 2022 that they won't use nuclear weapons. I am not sure if this is an annual announcement for P5 or just well wishes for 2022 by the nuclear armed permanent members of UNSC. (possibly /s) Obviously Russia would not start a nuclear war. It will simply take steps that either need to be conventionally opposed or dare US/NATO to go nuclear. Sanctions are hoped to collapse the economy of Russia and put the fear into the Chinese and other fence sitters. It's like running the clock down in a game. US probes for incremental steps (the famous "salami slicing") to ramp up counter force. Nothing should happen until we have Russia's promised counter-sanction response this Tuesday. After that next move is getting planes into Ukraine and possibly NFZ. What follows will be a non-nuclear hypersonic attack on NATO airfields used. And so on. Until someone lobs a nuke.
- matthewdgreen 5y ago
  >Obviously Russia would not start a nuclear war. It will simply take steps that either need to be conventionally opposed or dare US/NATO to go nuclear. I think the major conclusion from the Ukraine war is that the Russian army is not in a particularly strong condition, and certainly would not fare well against superior NATO forces (particularly the air forces.) And this is assuming they are not further degraded by a long, bloody occupation in Ukraine. Nuclear first-use is a move from weakness, not strength.
  - eternalban 5y ago
    I have no idea about their condition. That's state level knowledge and requires military training, & I'm just a dog (with an interest and some talent in CS ;) on the internet and pretty much assume most if not all info prepared for me by the media (of all sides) is dog food. At least that's what it tastes like to me :)
- Koshkin 5y ago
  > Obviously Russia would not start a nuclear war. Oh no, that wouldn't be their objective. Which would be rather 1) military (obliterate resistance) and 2) political (show the resolve to use whatever means they deem necessary).
micromacrofoot 5y ago
Is it safe to back down and allow Russia to take Ukraine? A similar thing seems to be happening now on a smaller scale. We have a rough idea that they have larger ambitions. I don't think the west would back down if Poland were attacked, but again I have to ask... who specifically would retaliate on the behalf of Estonia and Latvia? I guess it would be a true test of NATO membership, but based on their reluctance to shut down Ukrainian airspace I don't see it happening. Also, keep in mind that Russia is already spreading FUD about Ukrainian dirty bombs (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-without-evidence-says-ukraine-making-nuclear-dirty-bomb-2022-03-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-without-evidence...).
- shawabawa3 5y ago
  > who specifically would retaliate on the behalf of Estonia and Latvia? All of NATO NATO have been quite clear that the line is attacking a NATO member. Russia is pushing that line by invading a country they believed was about to join NATO, but they have not yet attacked a NATO country
- chasd00 5y ago
  If all of NATO wasn't brought to bear to defend Estonia or Latvia then NATO is worthless. I understand your point though, risk civilization over very small nations with low populations? I think the answer still has to be yes.

eternalban 5y ago

The P5 issues a joint statement on Jan 3rd, 2022 that they won't use nuclear weapons. I am not sure if this is an annual announcement for P5 or just well wishes for 2022 by the nuclear armed permanent members of UNSC. (possibly /s) Obviously Russia would not start a nuclear war. It will simply take steps that either need to be conventionally opposed or dare US/NATO to go nuclear. Sanctions are hoped to collapse the economy of Russia and put the fear into the Chinese and other fence sitters. It's like running the clock down in a game. US probes for incremental steps (the famous "salami slicing") to ramp up counter force. Nothing should happen until we have Russia's promised counter-sanction response this Tuesday. After that next move is getting planes into Ukraine and possibly NFZ. What follows will be a non-nuclear hypersonic attack on NATO airfields used. And so on. Until someone lobs a nuke.

matthewdgreen 5y ago
>Obviously Russia would not start a nuclear war. It will simply take steps that either need to be conventionally opposed or dare US/NATO to go nuclear. I think the major conclusion from the Ukraine war is that the Russian army is not in a particularly strong condition, and certainly would not fare well against superior NATO forces (particularly the air forces.) And this is assuming they are not further degraded by a long, bloody occupation in Ukraine. Nuclear first-use is a move from weakness, not strength.
- eternalban 5y ago
  I have no idea about their condition. That's state level knowledge and requires military training, & I'm just a dog (with an interest and some talent in CS ;) on the internet and pretty much assume most if not all info prepared for me by the media (of all sides) is dog food. At least that's what it tastes like to me :)
Koshkin 5y ago
> Obviously Russia would not start a nuclear war. Oh no, that wouldn't be their objective. Which would be rather 1) military (obliterate resistance) and 2) political (show the resolve to use whatever means they deem necessary).

micromacrofoot 5y ago

Is it safe to back down and allow Russia to take Ukraine? A similar thing seems to be happening now on a smaller scale. We have a rough idea that they have larger ambitions. I don't think the west would back down if Poland were attacked, but again I have to ask... who specifically would retaliate on the behalf of Estonia and Latvia? I guess it would be a true test of NATO membership, but based on their reluctance to shut down Ukrainian airspace I don't see it happening. Also, keep in mind that Russia is already spreading FUD about Ukrainian dirty bombs (https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-without-evidence-says-ukraine-making-nuclear-dirty-bomb-2022-03-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-without-evidence...).

shawabawa3 5y ago
> who specifically would retaliate on the behalf of Estonia and Latvia? All of NATO NATO have been quite clear that the line is attacking a NATO member. Russia is pushing that line by invading a country they believed was about to join NATO, but they have not yet attacked a NATO country
chasd00 5y ago
If all of NATO wasn't brought to bear to defend Estonia or Latvia then NATO is worthless. I understand your point though, risk civilization over very small nations with low populations? I think the answer still has to be yes.