Nuclear bluster and empty threats

C

Cypress

Well-known member
The Russian military in its current state is almost certainly unable to operate on a nuclear battlefield even though it has the necessary equipment and has historically trained its units to do so. The chaotic agglomeration of exhausted contract soldiers, hastily mobilized reservists, conscripts, and mercenaries that currently comprise the Russian ground forces could not function in a nuclear environment. Any areas affected by Russian tactical nuclear weapons would thus be impassible for the Russians, likely precluding Russian advances. This consideration is another factor that reduces the likelihood of Russian tactical nuclear weapons use.

https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-1
 
For their sake and the sake of the people of Ukraine, I hope that the nuke thing is way overblown.

Do you think that Putin's nutty annexation of the eastern part of Ukraine is his way of extricating his forces and ending the war?
 
Cypress said:
The Russian military in its current state is almost certainly unable to operate on a nuclear battlefield even though it has the necessary equipment and has historically trained its units to do so. The chaotic agglomeration of exhausted contract soldiers, hastily mobilized reservists, conscripts, and mercenaries that currently comprise the Russian ground forces could not function in a nuclear environment. Any areas affected by Russian tactical nuclear weapons would thus be impassible for the Russians, likely precluding Russian advances. This consideration is another factor that reduces the likelihood of Russian tactical nuclear weapons use.

https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-1
Click to expand...

Given the effectiveness of the Russian military for the past year, is anyone really sure Russian nukes would work? That the Oligarchs didn't sell off the plutonium for a profit?
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
For their sake and the sake of the people of Ukraine, I hope that the nuke thing is way overblown.

Do you think that Putin's nutty annexation of the eastern part of Ukraine is his way of extricating his forces and ending the war?
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if, should Putin give the launch order, that he isn't shot on the spot?
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
For their sake and the sake of the people of Ukraine, I hope that the nuke thing is way overblown.

Do you think that Putin's nutty annexation of the eastern part of Ukraine is his way of extricating his forces and ending the war?
Click to expand...

The conventional wisdom seems to be that this frantic annexation was intended to offset the disastrous news of the Ukranian offensive in Kharkiv and Luhansk and generate some enthusiasm among Putin's ultra nationalist base. His base was really getting upset about the conduct of the war. Putin can't afford to lose the enthusiasm of his base.

In the long term, it is hard to see what the offramp for Putin is.
 
From last January:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/4388352/uk-russia-us-china-france-no-win-nuclear-war/
vp-world-map-nuclear-1.jpg
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Given the effectiveness of the Russian military for the past year, is anyone really sure Russian nukes would work? That the Oligarchs didn't sell off the plutonium for a profit?
Click to expand...

I think Putin has been privately warned that tactical nuclear strikes on Ukranians will trigger NATO air and missile strikes on occupying Russian forces in Ukraine
 
According to several reports, including by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, as a result of the effectiveness and acceptability of USAF use of precision munitions with little collateral damage in the Kosovo conflict in what amounted to strategic destruction once only possible with nuclear weapons or massive bombing, Vladimir Putin, then-secretary of Security Council of Russia, formulated a concept ("escalate to de-escalate") of using both tactical and strategic nuclear threats and strikes to de-escalate or cause an enemy to disengage from a conventional conflict threatening what Russia considers a strategic interest.[21][22][23]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon
Click to expand...

Of course, if they don't disengage...................................
 
Dutch Uncle said:
From last January:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/4388352/uk-russia-us-china-france-no-win-nuclear-war/
vp-world-map-nuclear-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Bluster is all Putin has now. He cannot conquer Ukraine, and he cannot even capture Kyiv, assuming NATO continues to support Ukraine.

Behind all the bombast and bluster, there are signs Putin knows his back is against the wall and beneath the macho posturing he is actually begging Ukraine for a ceasefire.

Putin is rushing to claim a victory and cement slender gains and sue for peace, running a dangerous political tab, regardless of the fanfare in Moscow.

He called on Ukraine to "cease fire" immediately and "sit down at the negotiating table,"

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...time-running-out-analysis-intl-cmd/index.html
Click to expand...
 
Cypress said:
The Russian military in its current state is almost certainly unable to operate on a nuclear battlefield even though it has the necessary equipment and has historically trained its units to do so. The chaotic agglomeration of exhausted contract soldiers, hastily mobilized reservists, conscripts, and mercenaries that currently comprise the Russian ground forces could not function in a nuclear environment. Any areas affected by Russian tactical nuclear weapons would thus be impassible for the Russians, likely precluding Russian advances. This consideration is another factor that reduces the likelihood of Russian tactical nuclear weapons use.

https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-1
Click to expand...

While that may be true the fly in the ointment seems to be Putin. The man is obsessed with bringing back the old Soviet Union, this in it 'self isn't the danger his mental state and health come into play. If he knows he is dying what has he got to lose? He won't feel the effects.
 
According to several reports, including by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, as a result of the effectiveness and acceptability of USAF use of precision munitions with little collateral damage in the Kosovo conflict in what amounted to strategic destruction once only possible with nuclear weapons or massive bombing, Vladimir Putin, then-secretary of Security Council of Russia, formulated a concept ("escalate to de-escalate") of using both tactical and strategic nuclear threats and strikes to de-escalate or cause an enemy to disengage from a conventional conflict threatening what Russia considers a strategic interest.[21][22][23]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon
Click to expand...


He made that policy years ago. It's not conjecture, not bluff- it's POLICY.
 
moon said:
That's a far cry from simply defending Russia's borders from further NATO encroachment- which is what he's doing.
Click to expand...

As the self appointed defender of Muslims, you should be able to credibly explain how Putin was defending Russias borders by bombing Syrian Muslim cites into smouldering rubble.
 
Cypress said:
The Russian military in its current state is almost certainly unable to operate on a nuclear battlefield even though it has the necessary equipment and has historically trained its units to do so. The chaotic agglomeration of exhausted contract soldiers, hastily mobilized reservists, conscripts, and mercenaries that currently comprise the Russian ground forces could not function in a nuclear environment. Any areas affected by Russian tactical nuclear weapons would thus be impassible for the Russians, likely precluding Russian advances. This consideration is another factor that reduces the likelihood of Russian tactical nuclear weapons use.

https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-1
Click to expand...
I would not put it pass Putin to take the "if I can't have it neither can you" attitude. But fear of that does not mean we should stop supporting Ukraine. Putin needs to know that using nukes would ultimately cause his downfall.
 
Cypress said:
As the self appointed defender of Muslims, you should be able to credibly explain how Putin was defending Russias borders by bombing Syrian Muslim cites into smouldering rubble.
Click to expand...

Well- it's fashionable. Israeli fascists do it, US dumbasses do it, tyrannical Turks too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top