Will Putin use tactical nukes?

[phoenix2020]

No he will not.

If he did, he would lose the entirety of China's economic support in less than 24 hours, resulting in the war ending within 36 hours, and thus Putin would meet a rather violent end at the hands of his own people within 48 hours.

 

[lurchadams]

Simple question. I just wanted to see who gets this question right.
(Clue, you can check my posts from before the invasion for the correct ansewer)

He doesn't need to. He's already leveling cities using conventional artillery. Why would he need nukes?

 

[Lursa]

If you had asked this question 1 month ago i would have said no.

Now i am not so sure. If Putin was pushed back to the Russian border, with Ukranian forces entering Russia, it's possible, and downright scary.

Why would Ukraine forces enter Russia? IMO that would be a very bad mistake and not only unnecessary, but useless.

(By 'enter' I mean offensively)

 

[lurchadams]

Since such an action would completely isolate Russia, causing anyone who is tolerating their current behavior to turn on them, it would be a disaster for Russia. It would necessitate the total destruction of their economy.

The invasion of Ukraine has exposed Russia's conventional military as a paper tiger. I would not be surprised to learn that their nuclear force is more of the same.

I think people already have turned on Russia. Also, inside Russia they're jailing a lot of war protestors. I don't think Putin's going to make it out of this one. He bit off much more than the evil **** can chew. Good riddance.

 

[Lursa]

Here's the thing to keep in mind though. Putin did not create this Russian nationalist political wave, he keeps riding and driving, there are others of similar ilk and we don't know them hardly at all. We don't unnecessarily want to throw raw meat at those piranha either. We need to pay attention to that NATO charter, and we need to make sure we pay attention to what constituties an 'act of war' and what does not. No direct military confrontations.

One thing that people, including Putin perhaps , seem to believe is that we'd (the international community) end the sanctions if Ukraine either was forced to surrendered or was taken. Putin doing more damage to Ukraine, like using tactical nukes, wont change the fact that, I surely hope, we wont end the sanctions unless there is an independent Ukraine.

So using the nukes wouldnt change that...their economy descent and isolation would continue. WIth a very angry and resisting Ukraine to still deal with.

 

[yankintx]

Why would Ukraine forces enter Russia? IMO that would be a very bad mistake and not only unnecessary, but useless.

(By 'enter' I mean offensively)

I was using that as an example of what i believe would prompt Putin to push the button. As long as the War is contained within the Ukraine without NATO boots i don't believe he would launch the missiles.

But who knows with this guy, he believes his own BS, which makes him unpredictable.

 

[EnigmaO01]

Well that's just it...what's the point? IMO the only real target for a nuke would be Ukraine itself. Anywhere else would be another act of war.

Would Putin nuke his prize? A good part of it is already contaminated. It's a major agricultural region that's very valuable. IMO no. If it's that tactically focused, I dont think the rest of the country would stop resisting and he risks damaging all that ag. land and pipeline.

Actually I have been told the tactical nukes produce relatively low levels of radioactivity vs. the ICBM's.

 

[Centrist]

This is from yesterday on Russian State Propaganda TV (also shared on the main Ukrainian invasion thread).

The red army can't even encircle Kyiv however the logic of these "experts" is that they can reach Paris in a few days.

 

[Lursa]

Actually I have been told the tactical nukes produce relatively low levels of radioactivity vs. the ICBM's.

I'm only partially referring to radioactivity but it would still be a factor, esp. re: agricultural areas. And because of that, as others have pointed out, Russia can do pretty much the same amount of damage without nukes.

 

[BahamaBob]

I think people already have turned on Russia. Also, inside Russia they're jailing a lot of war protestors. I don't think Putin's going to make it out of this one. He bit off much more than the evil **** can chew. Good riddance.

While you are mostly right, they are still selling billions of dollars' worth of crude oil and natural gas. Using a nuke would pressure those customers to look elsewhere.

 

[DarkWizard12]

According to who? What does that mean?

everybody

How are you measure size of adversity?

population.

 

[EnigmaO01]

I think people already have turned on Russia. Also, inside Russia they're jailing a lot of war protestors. I don't think Putin's going to make it out of this one. He bit off much more than the evil **** can chew. Good riddance.

Don't **** with elderly Russian women whose main reason for living is baking pirozhki!

 

[DarkWizard12]

I see your point, but imo, the world can't let him get away with that.

sounds like ego. "instigate ww3 because we just can't let putin do what he does."

No. I don't want to die for your ego. You want to hold putin to account, you are free to go to ukraine and fight him yourself.

 

[Antiwar]

No. Because even though he's 100 ibs of crazy in 50ibs bag, even he knows it'd be the end of him.

What logic is this notion based on? Hopes and wishes? Millions of people have sacrificed their lives fighting in wars. Then there are Kamikaze pilots, suicide bombers, and the 9/11 terrorists.

P**** is already risking the end of his political career, if that's the angle you're going to take.

 

[Centrist]

This bluffing game.

All the Rambos of the internet that want NATO boots on the ground for Zelensky ---> I have a scenario.

I heard this argument that "Putin is bluffing".

What If he is not, ---> there are 2 scenarios then:

a) He shows he means business and NATO in the name of deescalation pulls out. Do you have any idea what that will do for the NATO alliance? It will mean the end of credibility and nobody will trust it.
b) He shows he means business and NATO responds. It is not a video game, the devastation will be unimaginable. Civilians deaths and humanitarian crises like never seen before.

In my view, is no place for Biden to be listening to hawkish advisers now and maintain calm. I assume people did not elect another Trump. He has a great ally in the NATO leader and together with Turkish and Israeli diplomats, not showmen, a cease-fire solution hopefully can be reached.

 

[MaryP]

sounds like ego. "instigate ww3 because we just can't let putin do what he does."

No. I don't want to die for your ego. You want to hold putin to account, you are free to go to ukraine and fight him yourself.

It's not ego. I don't want the whole planet to die.

 

[yankintx]

Actually I have been told the tactical nukes produce relatively low levels of radioactivity vs. the ICBM's.

I don't think it matters if one is inside ground zero, radiation poison is a terrible way to go out.

We use to do the bomb drills in grade school, the whole under the desk routine lol. I don't think anyone actually believed it would help.

 

[DarkWizard12]

It's not ego. I don't want the whole planet to die.

ok, so world war 3 is a bad thing. Maybe, just maybe, it's a good idea to pull back from russia, and think about where our approach was wrong. Because there were experts who were predicting a military invasion for the last 10 years(even longer) there, and the US gov was still caught off guard. These people clearly haven't been listened to, and maybe it's past time for us to do so, so we can figure how to fix this.

 

[Peter]

If he does use tactical nukes then he's even more mad than I thought he was.
He also has the problem of where exactly would he use them that wouldn't end in massive civilian casualties.

 

[MaryP]

ok, so world war 3 is a bad thing. Maybe, just maybe, it's a good idea to pull back from russia, and think about where our approach was wrong. Because there were experts who were predicting a military invasion for the last 10 years(even longer) there, and the US gov was still caught off guard. These people clearly haven't been listened to, and maybe it's past time for us to do so, so we can figure how to fix this.

Ukraine is already offering neutrality. What's taking Russia so long to accept it if this was actually the cause? I think it's a justification to cover pure aggression. Putin's explanations that Ukraine has always been Russia's is a clue.

 

[Peter]

I don't think it matters if one is inside ground zero, radiation poison is a terrible way to go out.

We use to do the bomb drills in grade school, the whole under the desk routine lol. I don't think anyone actually believed it would help.

It's mostly just for morale.
The nukes that will be used now are so powerful that anyone anywhere near an explosion is most likely going to die unless they have a desk made from unobtanium. If you live anywhere near a military base then it's bad news I'm afraid unless you have a really, really good bunker filled with loads of food, water and an air filtration system.

Being in the UK I'm shit out of luck as the whole country is going to get completely spanked into the stone age.
Ireland won't fare much better as they have clouds of radioactive death to look forward to from the smoking rubble that is the UK.

Anyone who does manage to miraculously survive would most likely wish they hadn't.

 

[Centrist]

If he does use tactical nukes then he's even more mad than I thought he was.
He also has the problem of where exactly would he use them that wouldn't end in massive civilian casualties.

The open sea?

from

His first strike would demonstrate intent. He could drop a low-yield bomb on an empty forest or the open sea, just to show he means business. As a next step, he could nuke a specific enemy weapons depot, army base or battalion — in any case, not yet an entire city. The variable yields of tactical warheads make such fine-tuning possible — you can play with scenarios on this Nukemap.

Full analysis:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...d4fb2c-aa7b-11ec-8a8e-9c6e9fc7a0de_story.html

 

[upsideguy]

I said 'yes'. One of the issues that seems to be confounding 21st century Americans is the failure of imagination. So, let's imagine.

Yes, there are far too many with overactive imaginations that create fantasies, I am not talking about that. But, there are often far too many of us that believe history is indicative of future; because we have exercised rational restraint in the past, we will do so in the future. That type of mentality had many of underestimate how much damage Trump could actually do in four years or had us believe Putin in his right mind would never invade a country like Ukraine.

Well, what if Putin does use nukes? I don't believe I have ever seen a time in my lifetime where the possibility as moved so far toward plausibility. It is pretty scary stuff that we should not be afraid to think about. It is said that those the live by the sword shall perish by the sword. Since WWII, we have lived by the awesome power of our nuclear arsenal. I do believe that we will one day perish by it. The more I study Revelations, the more i read that it well describes nuclear holocaust.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Ukraine is already offering neutrality.

that's not what I see.

What's taking Russia so long to accept it if this was actually the cause?

things are fast paced, but last i checked, they made 3 demands and ukraine refused.

There was also that mishap with the ukrainian diplomat being murdered by kiev security so....whatever that's about.

I think it's a justification to cover pure aggression. Putin's explanations that Ukraine has always been Russia's is a clue.

you think Putin just woke up one day and decided to invade ukraine, huh?

 

[MaryP]

that's not what I see.

things are fast paced, but last i checked, they made 3 demands and ukraine refused.

There was also that mishap with the ukrainian diplomat being murdered by kiev security so....whatever that's about.

you think Putin just woke up one day and decided to invade ukraine, huh?

More or less. He wanted it, convinced himself he was justified in having it, and acted accordingly after giving the world several excuses to pick from. After all, it worked in Georgia and Crimea.