Putin threatens with nuclear weapons (1 Viewer)

[Juks]

In his speech ahead of his attack on Ukraine tonight, Putin threatened the Western world with the devastating consequences if we interfere. It can only be interpreted in one way. He is ready to use nuclear weapons (“consequences we have never seen”...)


The thing is that as long as the Ukraine manages to withhold it’s ground these initial weeks, the country has a great chance of resisting the Russian attack. The population is motivated and prepared for resistance, the size of the army is as large as the Russian attack force and the West will continue to supply Ukraine with ammunition and weapons.

A defeat or prolonged war is not in his world of performance so the question is, if the Ukraine withstand the assault, will he then also use nuclear weapons to make a quick completion of the invasion and will the Russian military let him do so or will he be removed from within?

 

[Cordelier]

In his speech ahead of his attack on Ukraine tonight, Putin threatened the Western world with the devastating consequences if we interfere. It can only be interpreted in one way. He is ready to use nuclear weapons (“consequences we have never seen”...)


The thing is that as long as the Ukraine manages to withhold it’s ground these initial weeks, the country has a great chance of resisting the Russian attack. The population is motivated and prepared for resistance, the size of the army is as large as the Russian attack force and the West will continue to supply Ukraine with ammunition and weapons.

A defeat or prolonged war is not in his world of performance so the question is, if the Ukraine withstand the assault, will he then also use nuclear weapons to make a quick completion of the invasion and will the Russian military let him do so or will he be removed from within?

People operating from a position of strength don't threaten.

They don't have to.

 

[Juks]

People operating from a position of strength don't threaten.

They don't have to.

You are being an optimist. Putin has shown that he is not a man that threatens without being ready to carry the threads out. Question is : If the west (Nato, US) does not get involved (which they won't) and Ukraine still is able to hold their stand, will he use nuclear weapons?

 

[Cordelier]

You are being an optimist. Putin has shown that he is not a man that threatens without being ready to carry the threads out. Question is : If the west (Nato, US) does not get involved (which they won't) and Ukraine still is able to hold their stand, will he use nuclear weapons?

Well, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, "Of course I'm an optimist... I can't see the point of being anything else."

He's bluffing... which means his position is weaker than he wants to admit. Of course, that doesn't make the situation any less dangerous - it's a short step from weakness to desperation.

But nevertheless, an opponent's weakness can still be capitalized on.

 

[NWRatCon]

Putin is delusional. He exhibits the same approach as Hitler, but consider how weak Russia actually is. 3/4th of the Russian army is being employed in this attack, and he still has fewer troops. Despite the size of the country, Russia's economy isn't even in the top 10. Its military is 4th, it is true, but once sanctions take hold, what's he going to buy or build arms with? Plus, I don't think the Russian people will rally to his side. This may be his Waterloo.

 

[Nilhus]

The population is motivated and prepared for resistance, the size of the army is as large as the Russian attack force and the West will continue to supply Ukraine with ammunition and weapons.

The population doesn't have the mentality of the mujahideen or the veitcong. They are normal people who want peace. Most likely they'll prefer to be under Russian influence rather than experiencing a prolonged conflict.

if the Ukraine withstand the assault, will he then also use nuclear weapons to make a quick completion of the invasion and will the Russian military let him do so or will he be removed from within?

No. Your idea is absurd!

People operating from a position of strength don't threaten.

They don't have to.

So the US is not operating from a position of strength? As it's threatening all the time. Then, should people not be warned not to do stupid things? Nuke them directly?

 

[AmNat]

In his speech ahead of his attack on Ukraine tonight, Putin threatened the Western world with the devastating consequences if we interfere. It can only be interpreted in one way. He is ready to use nuclear weapons (“consequences we have never seen”...)


The thing is that as long as the Ukraine manages to withhold it’s ground these initial weeks, the country has a great chance of resisting the Russian attack. The population is motivated and prepared for resistance, the size of the army is as large as the Russian attack force and the West will continue to supply Ukraine with ammunition and weapons.

A defeat or prolonged war is not in his world of performance so the question is, if the Ukraine withstand the assault, will he then also use nuclear weapons to make a quick completion of the invasion and will the Russian military let him do so or will he be removed from within?

The Ukrainian Army will be non-existent by Monday.

 

[Cordelier]

The population doesn't have the mentality of the mujahideen or the veitcong. They are normal people who want peace. Most likely they'll prefer to be under Russian influence rather than experiencing a prolonged conflict.

No. Your idea is absurd!

So the US is not operating from a position of strength? As it's threatening all the time. Then, should people not be warned not to do stupid things? Nuke them directly?

Of course the US isn't operating from a position of strength. Not while use of force is off the table.

This is Russia's sphere of influence. If we wanted to invade Mexico, there wouldn't be a whole lot Russia could do about it, is there?

That's not to say that the US is entirely powerless. We do have a certain amount of technological know-how and a lot of economic clout.

Russia launches cyber attacks - worldwide - at will. And at little to no cost to themselves.

I wonder how well they would respond to one?

I wonder how well they would respond to being kicked out of the WTO? Or having access to the world's export markets denied to them?

 

[Juks]

We're talking about a maniac and a dictator (who looks at himself as a czar) here. His escalation and the fact that he moved 75% of his military capabilities to the area before declaring war shows that he wants the conflict to be short and effective. The question is what happens if his large troop movement does not help, but Ukraine manages to keep its borders (which is far from certain, maybe not even likely) Putin will then be like a wounded animal in a cage. A much more dangerous development than if Russia manages to defeat the opposition in Ukraine.

 

[Cordelier]

We're talking about a maniac and a dictator (who looks at himself as a czar) here. His escalation and the fact that he moved 75% of his military capabilities to the area before declaring war shows that he wants the conflict to be short and effective. The question is what happens if his large troop movement does not help, but Ukraine manages to keep its borders (which is far from certain, maybe not even likely) Putin will then be like a wounded animal in a cage. A much more dangerous development than if Russia manages to defeat the opposition in Ukraine.

Russians are great at responding to being attacked.

They're not so hot when they're the ones initiating the conflict. Just ask the Finns, the Afghans or the Chechens.

This will be the end of Putin.

 

[Nilhus]

Putin is delusional. He exhibits the same approach as Hitler,

No, that's the US, it's been invading countless countries since WW2, with no UN mandate, no nothing, just aggressive and murderous behavior!

Putin is perfectly rational and knows that if Ukraine is let to join nato(or just cooperate too much with the West), American missiles will soon be placed on its territory, closer and closer to Moscow!

I'm absolutely sure that the US would react similarly if not worse if the Russians somehow managed to topple the government in Mexico, install their own puppets then put their own missiles on Mexican soil against the US!

but consider how weak Russia actually is. 3/4th of the Russian army is being employed in this attack

Don't believe every piece of crap that you read, it can be completely false or highly misleading. Russia's armed forces have ~1 million active personnel.
We heard the "Russia is weak" refrain a lot of times, yet when it comes down to actual conflict with Russia, people panic like crazy!

 

[Nilhus]

he moved 75% of his military capabilities to the area

100% fake news

No major power would do such a mistake!

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Putin is delusional. He exhibits the same approach as Hitler, but consider how weak Russia actually is. 3/4th of the Russian army is being employed in this attack, and he still has fewer troops. Despite the size of the country, Russia's economy isn't even in the top 10. Its military is 4th, it is true, but once sanctions take hold, what's he going to buy or build arms with? Plus, I don't think the Russian people will rally to his side. This may be his Waterloo.

I genuinely struggle to see a positive outcome for Russia out of all this.

 

[Cordelier]

100% fake news

No major power would do such a mistake!

Hitler did that when he invaded Poland.

 

[MaryP]

In his speech ahead of his attack on Ukraine tonight, Putin threatened the Western world with the devastating consequences if we interfere. It can only be interpreted in one way. He is ready to use nuclear weapons (“consequences we have never seen”...)


The thing is that as long as the Ukraine manages to withhold it’s ground these initial weeks, the country has a great chance of resisting the Russian attack. The population is motivated and prepared for resistance, the size of the army is as large as the Russian attack force and the West will continue to supply Ukraine with ammunition and weapons.

A defeat or prolonged war is not in his world of performance so the question is, if the Ukraine withstand the assault, will he then also use nuclear weapons to make a quick completion of the invasion and will the Russian military let him do so or will he be removed from within?

And if he uses nuclear weapons on Ukraine, are we still going to stand and watch? How does that work? Surely there's some sort of rule about not using those ghastly things, isn't there?

 

[joluoto]

I hope not. But Putin hates to lose. If the Ukrainians pull up enough resistance I would not put it past him.

 

[MaryP]

Of course the US isn't operating from a position of strength. Not while use of force is off the table.

This is Russia's sphere of influence. If we wanted to invade Mexico, there wouldn't be a whole lot Russia could do about it, is there?

That's not to say that the US is entirely powerless. We do have a certain amount of technological know-how and a lot of economic clout.

Russia launches cyber attacks - worldwide - at will. And at little to no cost to themselves.

I wonder how well they would respond to one?

I wonder how well they would respond to being kicked out of the WTO? Or having access to the world's export markets denied to them?

Shut the lights off in Moscow for a few days, just to be annoying.

 

[Juks]

And if he uses nuclear weapons on Ukraine, are we still going to stand and watch? How does that work? Surely there's some sort of rule about not using those ghastly things, isn't there?

It would be a total disaster. Deaths in the millions and the land will be unlivable and unusable for decades. It also would affect the surrounding countries. The nuclear disaster in Chernobil 1986 is still traceable in the enviroment in Sweden (and we are about 1200-1500 km away). and that was a smal leak compaired to what a nuclear bomb would be. If we look at the same distance we end up in Germany, Austria and Italy and every country in between that will not be able to farm the country for decades.

Putin doesn't seem to be sensitive to any rules he hasn't made up himself.

 

[MikePrime]

It would be a total disaster. Deaths in the millions and the land will be unlivable and unusable for decades. It also would affect the surrounding countries. The nuclear disaster in Chernobil 1986 is still traceable in the enviroment in Sweden (and we are about 1200-1500 km away). and that was a smal leak compaired to what a nuclear bomb would be. If we look at the same distance we end up in Germany, Austria and Italy and every country in between that will not be able to farm the country for decades.

Putin doesn't seem to be sensitive to any rules he hasn't made up himself.

where is this 3/4 number coming from I though they have around a million active and other 2 in reserves.
A nuclear reactor leak like Chernobyl is much more damaging to the environment than a bomb.
People live in Nagasaki, people don't live in Prypyat.

 

[phoenix2020]

And if he uses nuclear weapons on Ukraine, are we still going to stand and watch? How does that work? Surely there's some sort of rule about not using those ghastly things, isn't there?

No, if he did, we would deploy at various points along the arctic circle to drive home the point.

This is a good time to level some counter-threats. Move beyond Ukraine and Moscow will enjoy a 10MT detonation. Red lines are effective deterrents if one shows the conviction to hue to them.

The challenge we specifically face are the Tucker Carlsons domestically undermining our ability to be an effective deterrent.

 

[MaryP]

It would be a total disaster. Deaths in the millions and the land will be unlivable and unusable for decades. It also would affect the surrounding countries. The nuclear disaster in Chernobil 1986 is still traceable in the enviroment in Sweden (and we are about 1200-1500 km away). and that was a smal leak compaired to what a nuclear bomb would be. If we look at the same distance we end up in Germany, Austria and Italy and every country in between that will not be able to farm the country for decades.

Putin doesn't seem to be sensitive to any rules he hasn't made up himself.

I read the opposite yesterday, to my surprise. Everyone says Chernobyl was between 40 and hundreds times stronger than a nuclear bomb. A meltdown goes on for much longer than a bomb blast. I was shocked that it travelled as far as Ireland, but the health risks have been nominal there.

 

[Juks]

where is this 3/4 number coming from I though they have around a million active and other 2 in reserves.
A nuclear reactor leak like Chernobyl is much more damaging to the environment than a bomb.
People live in Nagasaki, people don't live in Prypyat.

Sorry. but I am not with you (maybe it is me lacking in language skills) What are you refering to with: "where is this 3/4 number coming from I though they have around a million active and other 2 in reserves."?

 

[Juks]

I read the opposite yesterday, to my surprise. Everyone says Chernobyl was between 40 and hundreds times stronger than a nuclear bomb. A meltdown goes on for much longer than a bomb blast. I was shocked that it travelled as far as Ireland, but the health risks have been nominal there.

Well, it is not a subject I can say I am an expert on. Hope you are correct. The health risks has been nominal here to, but it is still traceable.

 

[MaryP]

Well, it is not a subject I can say I am an expert on. Hope you are correct. The health risks has been nominal here to, but it is still traceable.

I hope they're right, too, for everyone's sake.

This is the first time in my life that I have heard anyone, leader or civilian, talking about nukes as if they were an actual option. Just acknowledging that horror is a bridge too far.

 

[Monica33]

OP is hysterical nonsense .


All brought on by the US as usual.

This could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO, which would mean US/NATO forces right on Russia’s border--- Tulse Gabbard . A smart woman .