5 ms·

Are you saying that objectives and timelines are the _only_ factors that can be used to evaluate leadership rationality? In what circumstances is it rational fo

Are you saying that objectives and timelines are the _only_ factors that can be used to evaluate leadership rationality? In what circumstances is it rational for Putin to trigger a large-scale, first-use nuclear exchange that would probably kill hundreds of millions of people? Edit: I can see how it might be rational for Putin to threaten to use nuclear weapons. But I can't understand how that extends to actually using them.

pydry 5y ago
To save his own skin.
- andyjohnson0 5y ago
  > To save his own skin. So Russia as a functioning society is destroyed in the inevitable counter-attack. How does that benefit Putin? How does that allow him to go on living in the way that he clearly wants to?
  - pydry 5y ago
    I think he probably visualizes the gradual encroachment of NATO ending up with a bayonet shoved up his ass a la Libya. He apparently watched the Gadaffi video obsessively and he was certainly publicly outraged about it, particularly in light of the broken promises the west made to gafaffi that he'd be left alone. In the 2000s he probably would have felt somewhat safe losing power. I think after that video his attitude was probably that if Russia loses its military power and he loses power in Russia he will die a messy and horrible death. And hes been in this state for over 10 years now. Theres probably some truth to the notion that COVID isolated him but I think Libya contributed most to his paranoia. Im pretty sure this puts nuclear weapons strikes on large population centers on the table.
- arethuza 5y ago
  He'd also have to be confident that he personally could survive a counter strike - which would be quite a decision to make.
  - aerostable_slug 5y ago
    What counterstrike? If he pops a small, relatively clean nuclear weapon over a Ukrainian airfield, the United States will almost certainly not retaliate against the Russian homeland — that path nearly inevitably leads to general war. This is doubly true if Putin decides to cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP event. We are in a serious policy vice and the odds of him resorting to a nuclear demonstration are non-zero and grow by the day. Even the best outcome of that scenario likely means a massive proliferation crisis as countries around the world put plans into effect to join the nuclear club ASAP.
hunglee2 5y ago
alright i will have a go at this: Let's say Putin's core objective is 'not letting US win' - this is the only thing he cares about. War goes badly, but this core objective doesn't change. If he wants to achieve this objective, armageddon would achieve it - everyone loses, so US doesn't win. That is better than Russia loses, US wins, so it is rational in this frame to push the button.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  But that isn't what he wants. He doesn't want the US to lose; he wants Russia to win. He thinks he needs NATO to collapse for that to happen, but the end goal is Russia winning, not NATO losing. He can't get Russia winning by a nuclear war. The larger problem is that he is increasingly surrounded by people who tell him what he wants to hear, not what is true. That might lead to a situation where he thinks Russia can win by a nuclear war.
  - hunglee2 5y ago
    my example was illustration of how triggering nuclear war could be a rational decision. I do not have any privileged access to Putin's objective

pydry 5y ago

To save his own skin.

andyjohnson0 5y ago
> To save his own skin. So Russia as a functioning society is destroyed in the inevitable counter-attack. How does that benefit Putin? How does that allow him to go on living in the way that he clearly wants to?
- pydry 5y ago
  I think he probably visualizes the gradual encroachment of NATO ending up with a bayonet shoved up his ass a la Libya. He apparently watched the Gadaffi video obsessively and he was certainly publicly outraged about it, particularly in light of the broken promises the west made to gafaffi that he'd be left alone. In the 2000s he probably would have felt somewhat safe losing power. I think after that video his attitude was probably that if Russia loses its military power and he loses power in Russia he will die a messy and horrible death. And hes been in this state for over 10 years now. Theres probably some truth to the notion that COVID isolated him but I think Libya contributed most to his paranoia. Im pretty sure this puts nuclear weapons strikes on large population centers on the table.
arethuza 5y ago
He'd also have to be confident that he personally could survive a counter strike - which would be quite a decision to make.
- aerostable_slug 5y ago
  What counterstrike? If he pops a small, relatively clean nuclear weapon over a Ukrainian airfield, the United States will almost certainly not retaliate against the Russian homeland — that path nearly inevitably leads to general war. This is doubly true if Putin decides to cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP event. We are in a serious policy vice and the odds of him resorting to a nuclear demonstration are non-zero and grow by the day. Even the best outcome of that scenario likely means a massive proliferation crisis as countries around the world put plans into effect to join the nuclear club ASAP.

hunglee2 5y ago

alright i will have a go at this: Let's say Putin's core objective is 'not letting US win' - this is the only thing he cares about. War goes badly, but this core objective doesn't change. If he wants to achieve this objective, armageddon would achieve it - everyone loses, so US doesn't win. That is better than Russia loses, US wins, so it is rational in this frame to push the button.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
But that isn't what he wants. He doesn't want the US to lose; he wants Russia to win. He thinks he needs NATO to collapse for that to happen, but the end goal is Russia winning, not NATO losing. He can't get Russia winning by a nuclear war. The larger problem is that he is increasingly surrounded by people who tell him what he wants to hear, not what is true. That might lead to a situation where he thinks Russia can win by a nuclear war.
- hunglee2 5y ago
  my example was illustration of how triggering nuclear war could be a rational decision. I do not have any privileged access to Putin's objective