You must log in or register to comment.
“Supposed red lines have turned pink over time,” a European official told Semafor in June. Some Russian experts suggested that because of diminishing Western fears, Moscow ought to consider more aggressive responses, such as setting off a nuclear weapon to “convince our opponents of Moscow’s readiness to escalate,” a member of a Kremlin-affiliated think tank argued. The objective would be to “to re-establish deterrence,” a Russian nuclear policy researxher wrote on X.
If setting of that nuke was done immediately that would’ve been clear. Setting that of after two weeks would only give the signal that week long raids are no problem and Russia just isn’t fast enough to handle that.
Nukes are for having, not for using. Once you press that launch button everything and everyone you love is dead as well as yourself.
For nuclear attack on another country you would be right.
For an invading army inside borders is would be a scenario like this: there would be a very clear warning to leave or we will nukes at that hour the same day as the border was crossed. A warning goes out for citizens to evacuate. The missile silos are visibly readied to show you’re serious. Warning goes out to other countries that this is an internal matter and not aimed at anyone else. Then you fire If the invaders haven’t left. There would not be a second attempt at invading.
It’s what people assumed when Putin said last year that Russian nuclear doctrine allowed two possible thresholds for using nuclear weapons: retaliation against a first nuclear strike by an enemy, and if “the very existence of Russia as a state comes under threat even if conventional weapons are used”.
That’s how you strongman. Instead Russia is in denial for a week and then comes with “maybe we should do something?”
I think Putin and his military leaders are aware of the existence of wind. So I’m guessing they won’t be doing that.
Seems that way. The whole point of nuclear threats is the “To preserve our way of life I’m willing to make this sacrifice.” attitude. That’s what being a Cold War kid taught me. Can’t do that if you’re afraid of the wind.
Putin’s bluff has been called many times by now and his cards have been found wanting.
Yeah, that’s a good point to bring up. It would still be pretty risky though I would think. I don’t know what the policy of the US and other nuclear powers is exactly but I doubt anyone would be taking Russia at it’s word as to where the nuke was going. Hopefully we never have to find out though.
The invaders would get the hint when citizens get an evacuation signal and bombers go airborne or silos are opened. The international community would be yelling at Ukraine to get the f out there as fast as they can. No actual nukes would be fired.
Instead there wasn’t even opposition to speak of and just vague threats speech #7 from Putin.
I suspect we might get at least 10% more serious about sanctions and consider possibly confiscating more yachts, maybe.
Does that include storm shadow missles?
Semafor - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Semafor:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
