I don't think that's a viable idea. If we nuke Moscow, they'll nuke something of equivalent value to us, probably multiple EU capitals. The same is true of Fra

I don't think that's a viable idea. If we nuke Moscow, they'll nuke something of equivalent value to us, probably multiple EU capitals. The same is true of France. If Russia nukes Paris, France will nuke Moscow. If Russia nukes Paris and Marseille, they nuke Moscow and St Petersburg, etc. The countries that claim to believe that they can use tactical nuclear weapons will probably stop very quickly once people respond to them with approximately equivalent nuclear destruction. Nuclear weapons are mostly irrelevant, provided that you have them. If you and your opponent have them, what matters is the balance of your conventional forces and your willingness to respond to any nuclear attack proportionally, and to persist in whatever you were doing before. The French and Russian ideas about deterring non-nuclear attacks etc. are threats, and threats are something to ignore, because the threatened act can always be performed whether or not the demand was met. If someone points a gun at you and tells you to do something you don't want to, why would you do it-- he can shoot you even if you do, so you ignore threats of that sort.