Nukes?

[Larry]

Putin.

He has put his nuclear weapons system on high alert. I think Putin's cheese may have slid off his cracker..

[Renauda]

@Larry said in [Nukes?](/post/

I think Putin's cheese may have slid off his cracker..

I’m stealing that line.

[Horace]

@Aqua-Letifer said in Nukes?:

@Horace said in Nukes?:

Who is talking about it?

Putin.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/ukraine-russia-invasion-war-putin-nuclear-forces-high-alert

Putin seems intent on framing the rest of the world as the aggressors. I hope he has a meaningful choir in Russia to preach to, because I don't think that message is landing anywhere else.

[Jolly]

Ain't gonna happen.

[Horace]

@Jolly said in Nukes?:

Ain't gonna happen.

No, I'm sticking with my prediction that the next nuke used against a population will be by a terrorist rather than a nation.

[Doctor Phibes]

@Jolly said in Nukes?:

Ain't gonna happen.

Let's hope not. A lot of people said that about the invasion.

[Jolly]

Different critter.

You. Him. Her. Anybody. If a nuke gets popped off, all Hell breaks loose. Now. And in living color.

Ain't gonna happen.

[Jolly]

During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the U.S. had already determined that if the conflict went nuclear, there would be no nation on the face of the earth with any nuclear capability that was hostile to the U.S. would be left standing.

Nobody.

That was the policy then. I wouldn't bet against it still being the policy.

[Renauda]

Jolly is correct on all points. Once the nuclear threshold is crossed there is no backing down the ladder.

[Copper]

There are nukes and then there are nukes.

There are cute little battlefield nukes, no big deal

And then there is the giant economy size

I assume we are talking about big nukes.

Big nukes attached to ICBMs

[Klaus]

I really do wonder what would happen if Putin would use a small tactical nuke.

Would the US then really send all their big nukes, and wait for the mutually assured destruction?

There is certainly a very real danger that things would escalate to that level, but I don't think it's a given.

[jon-nyc]

@Klaus No way would that kind of escalation occur just from a battlefield nuke in Ukraine. I think if they used a nuclear bomb the support to isolate them completely, which is very high already in the west, would go off the charts.

I think the real risk of major escalation would be if he tried this with the Baltics, since they're Nato states. I suspect his plan has been to wait to see if Trump returns before trying that, since Trump already publicly caved on Article 5.

[Mik]

China and India would turn on them then.

[jon-nyc]

@Klaus said in Nukes?:

I really do wonder what would happen if Putin would use a small tactical nuke.

Would the US then really send all their big nukes, and wait for the mutually assured destruction?

There is certainly a very real danger that things would escalate to that level, but I don't think it's a given.

I think it's instructive that when Putin went to nuclear high alert, the President chose not to meet him (going to DefCon 3) but rather had his people out saying that once again Putin is manufacturing a menace.

[George K]

@jon-nyc said in Nukes?:

I think it's instructive that when Putin went to nuclear high alert, the President chose not to meet him (going to DefCon 3) but rather had his people out saying that once again Putin is manufacturing a menace.

Another likely explanation is that Zelensky's had a target on his back since day one, and showing up would present a security hazard.

(I assume you're talking about the meeting near Belarus today)

[jon-nyc]

No - I’m referring to Jolly’s our President. Normally if Russia were to go on high alert the option to call him (in the poker sense) would be defcon 3. We didn’t do that.

[Jolly]

Our President is in Delaware, taking a nap in his La-z-boy.

[Klaus]

What if Putin would issue an ultimatum of the form "Either you accept defeat, or I'll level Kiev with nukes"? I think it's not entirely impossible that this happens if the war goes south for Russia and Putin feels cornered.

[George K]

https://olxpraca.com/ukraine-nuclear-weapons-russia-invasion/

The tragedy now unfolding in Ukraine highlights a broader principle that is clearly visible around the world: countries that sacrifice their nuclear deterrent in exchange for promises of international goodwill often sign their own death warrant. In a world teeming with weapons capable of destroying human civilization, nonproliferation is itself a morally worthwhile and even necessary goal. But the experience of countries that have actually disarmed is likely to lead many of them to come to a different conclusion in the future.

The betrayal of the Ukrainians, in particular, cannot be underestimated. In 1994, the government of Ukraine signed a memorandum according to which the country joined the global Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, formally renouncing the status of a nuclear power. The text of this agreement stated that in exchange for this move, “the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.”

Since then, the territorial integrity of Ukraine has not been respected. After Russia’s annexation of the Ukrainian territory of Crimea in 2014, which did not provoke a serious international reaction, Ukrainian leaders have already thought twice about the merits of the agreement they signed just two decades ago. Today they sound positively bitter about it.

[Improviso]

@Klaus said in Nukes?:

What if Putin would issue an ultimatum of the form "Either you accept defeat, or I'll level Kiev with nukes"? I think it's not entirely impossible that this happens if the war goes south for Russia and Putin feels cornered.

History will record that as the official date that WW3 started.

It won't be Biden to lead that. He will follow after someone else pulls the trigger on Putin.