5 ms·

>call Putin's nuclear bluff. And what do you think would be the outcome?

by wackro 5y ago

k__ 5y ago
Someone in power in Russia would see the issue and "remove" him. The replacement could then spin it as being a good replacement and play by the rules of the west.
- jcadam 5y ago
  When has Russia ever had a transfer of power that didn't involve the use of force?
  - g8oz 5y ago
    Yeltsin to Putin.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - nobody9999 5y ago
    >When has Russia ever had a transfer of power that didn't involve the use of force? Kruschev --> Brezhnev Brezhnev --> Andropov Andropov --> Chernenko Chernenko --> Gorbachev Gorbachev --> Yeltsin Yeltsin --> Putin Putin --> Medvedev Medvedev --> Putin Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_leaders_of_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_leaders_of_Russia
    - MrVitaliy 5y ago
      This list is missing Stalin wiping out most of his opposition and things like https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-14589691 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-14589691
      - nobody9999 5y ago
        Right. Which is why I didn't include him on the list. What's your point?
    - jcadam 5y ago
      Point taken. Though Putin to Medvedev and back wasn't really a transfer of power :) Also, if you haven't seen "Death of Stalin", it's an excellent dark comedy, if a bit historically inaccurate.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - euroderf 5y ago
    As a general rule, over the decades (centuries?), every change of leadership in Russia has been at least a bit less bloody than the previous one. Some dare call it "progress" :-P
mullen 5y ago
Nothing. A Nuclear Bluff is just that, a Bluff. Putin can't win in a nuclear war and if he uses nukes anywhere, he is done for. No one is going to have anything to do with him or Russia on any level after that.
- stickfigure 5y ago
  No one is going to have anything to do with Putin after launching a nuclear first strike because he'll be dead. Along with most of the population of Russia and a big chunk of the rest of the world too. And Putin knows this. Thus, it's a bluff.
  - david422 5y ago
    Unless he's got terminal cancer and decides he's going out with a bang. He does seem to have some jowls. I mean the guy is blatantly lying to everyone and acting irrationally as is. The problem with poker is sometimes people go all in even with shit hands.
  - namelessoracle 5y ago
    Not necessarily. There is a very real chance that a nuclear strike on a purely military target will cause a flinch by the other side. Lets say Putin nukes a carrier group at sea. This wont trigger an immediate counter attack like launching ICBMs would. Biden/whoever would have to order launching the nukes. Follow this for any usage of tactical nuclear weapons. Will he decide to end life in America and most of the world over a carrier group? There's a non zero percent chance he would flinch at that. Your argument is that nobody would have anything to do with Putin, but we already pretty close to that point. Backing Putin in a corner makes him MORE dangerous, not less. Putin could do all kind of things to completely undermine as well. What happens if he decides that the world uniting against Russian means Russia no longer need to adhere to the Non Proliferation Treat and offers "free" nukes to whoever aligns with his new order? It's already understood geo politically that "no nukes" means the West and China get to bully you whenever they want. So why not take the offer? There's all kinds of ways this could get worse without all life ending.

>call Putin's nuclear bluff. And what do you think would be the outcome?

by wackro 5y ago

>call Putin's nuclear bluff. And what do you think would be the outcome?

k__ 5y ago

Someone in power in Russia would see the issue and "remove" him. The replacement could then spin it as being a good replacement and play by the rules of the west.

jcadam 5y ago
When has Russia ever had a transfer of power that didn't involve the use of force?
- g8oz 5y ago
  Yeltsin to Putin.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- nobody9999 5y ago
  >When has Russia ever had a transfer of power that didn't involve the use of force? Kruschev --> Brezhnev Brezhnev --> Andropov Andropov --> Chernenko Chernenko --> Gorbachev Gorbachev --> Yeltsin Yeltsin --> Putin Putin --> Medvedev Medvedev --> Putin Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_leaders_of_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_leaders_of_Russia
  - MrVitaliy 5y ago
    This list is missing Stalin wiping out most of his opposition and things like https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-14589691 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-14589691
    - nobody9999 5y ago
      Right. Which is why I didn't include him on the list. What's your point?
  - jcadam 5y ago
    Point taken. Though Putin to Medvedev and back wasn't really a transfer of power :) Also, if you haven't seen "Death of Stalin", it's an excellent dark comedy, if a bit historically inaccurate.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- euroderf 5y ago
  As a general rule, over the decades (centuries?), every change of leadership in Russia has been at least a bit less bloody than the previous one. Some dare call it "progress" :-P

mullen 5y ago

Nothing. A Nuclear Bluff is just that, a Bluff. Putin can't win in a nuclear war and if he uses nukes anywhere, he is done for. No one is going to have anything to do with him or Russia on any level after that.

stickfigure 5y ago
No one is going to have anything to do with Putin after launching a nuclear first strike because he'll be dead. Along with most of the population of Russia and a big chunk of the rest of the world too. And Putin knows this. Thus, it's a bluff.
- david422 5y ago
  Unless he's got terminal cancer and decides he's going out with a bang. He does seem to have some jowls. I mean the guy is blatantly lying to everyone and acting irrationally as is. The problem with poker is sometimes people go all in even with shit hands.
- namelessoracle 5y ago
  Not necessarily. There is a very real chance that a nuclear strike on a purely military target will cause a flinch by the other side. Lets say Putin nukes a carrier group at sea. This wont trigger an immediate counter attack like launching ICBMs would. Biden/whoever would have to order launching the nukes. Follow this for any usage of tactical nuclear weapons. Will he decide to end life in America and most of the world over a carrier group? There's a non zero percent chance he would flinch at that. Your argument is that nobody would have anything to do with Putin, but we already pretty close to that point. Backing Putin in a corner makes him MORE dangerous, not less. Putin could do all kind of things to completely undermine as well. What happens if he decides that the world uniting against Russian means Russia no longer need to adhere to the Non Proliferation Treat and offers "free" nukes to whoever aligns with his new order? It's already understood geo politically that "no nukes" means the West and China get to bully you whenever they want. So why not take the offer? There's all kinds of ways this could get worse without all life ending.