Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Lahis]

If Putin nukes Kyiv, the rest of the world is not gonna retaliate. The primary focus is gonna stop a cascade effect and everybody will be afraid to start retaliation upon retaliation.

So yeah, Russia could nuke Ukraine for free, but then again, what would it do? If they nuke Kyiv, it will only push the front lines to be even more aggresive and zealous to get retaliation back, yet if they nuke the front lines, Russia will end up destroying more of themselves than what they do Ukraine.

World needs to retaliate if Russia uses nukes.

It shouldn't be with nukes for obvious reasons, but Russia needs to be destroyed with conventional weapons. Otherwise nuking civilians will become totally acceptable conduct of war.

[Gorsameth]

If Putin nukes Kyiv, the rest of the world is not gonna retaliate. The primary focus is gonna stop a cascade effect and everybody will be afraid to start retaliation upon retaliation.

So yeah, Russia could nuke Ukraine for free, but then again, what would it do? If they nuke Kyiv, it will only push the front lines to be even more aggresive and zealous to get retaliation back, yet if they nuke the front lines, Russia will end up destroying more of themselves than what they do Ukraine.

If you think the world would allow Russia to open the nuclear Pandora's box then you really haven't been paying attention.

[Makabreska]

World needs to retaliate if Russia uses nukes.

It shouldn't be with nukes for obvious reasons, but Russia needs to be destroyed with conventional weapons. Otherwise nuking civilians will become totally acceptable conduct of war.

I mean, if you try that, then Russia will shoot more nukes. So I don't think that's probable.

Putler has back against the wall. Ukraince advance keeps going on and bridge bombing was a huge humiliation. So he answers in the only way he knows and can. Targetting civilians.

- - - Updated - - -

If you think the world would allow Russia to open the nuclear Pandora's box then you really haven't been paying attention.

How are they gonna prevent first strike? Cats out of the bag after first launch.


And now Lukashenko announces deployment of joint forces with Russia. Shit's escalating fast.

[Gorsameth]

How are they gonna prevent first strike? Cats out of the bag after first launch.

You prevent a first strike by repeatedly explaining the concept of MAD, even if the response would be non-nuclear, and that striking first will definitely mean the end of you and everything you hold dear.

[Makabreska]

You prevent a first strike by repeatedly explaining the concept of MAD, even if the response would be non-nuclear, and that striking first will definitely mean the end of you and everything you hold dear.

Do we really think that other powers would respond in kind if Russia nukes Ukraine?

[Nymrohd]

If Russia uses nukes and no one does anything, what is stopping Pakistan from doing the same?

[Makabreska]

If Russia uses nukes and no one does anything, what is stopping Pakistan from doing the same?

Well, other countries WILL do something about it. I just really doubt they will send their nukes flying. And India apparently has their own.

[Gorsameth]

Do we really think that other powers would respond in kind if Russia nukes Ukraine?

As I said, the response doesn't have to be nuclear per-se but yes I do believe that. No one, absolutely no one wants to wake up in a world where the use of nuclear weapons is 'acceptable' as anything but an absolutely last resort against an existential threat.

[Flurryfang]

If you think the world would allow Russia to open the nuclear Pandora's box then you really haven't been paying attention.

Allow? What do you mean allow? Its not like he is gonna come out and openly say, that he will do it. If a nuke is ever used in the Ukrainian war, it will be sudden and without warning, and nobody outside of russia will have been able to stop it.

Will he be allowed to use a 2nd or more? Thats a different question, but he can open that box whenever he wants.

[Lahis]

Do we really think that other powers would respond in kind if Russia nukes Ukraine?

If they don't, it is free pass to any dictator to start dropping nukes on dissidents.

[Flurryfang]

World needs to retaliate if Russia uses nukes.

It shouldn't be with nukes for obvious reasons, but Russia needs to be destroyed with conventional weapons. Otherwise nuking civilians will become totally acceptable conduct of war.

And who would do it? Who would be ready to start a nuclear war? If "the World" retaliates against russia, it will without a doubt deal to further retaliation from Russia, and that leads to retaliation from the world and.....We both know where this leads.

And if the world retaliates with something else but nukes, it will still be somewhat the same. If Russia uses 1 nuke and gets attacked by the world, unless there is a near instant rebellion in the army, it will just lead to russia using more nukes. Sure, there will only be one side of the conflict that uses nukes in that scenario, but i don't think it is that brighter of a scenario.

[Makabreska]

If they don't, it is free pass to any dictator to start dropping nukes on dissidents.

This is not a binary thing, when you either retaliate with nukes or don't retaliate at all. USA won't start dropping their warheads on Russia if a third country takes a hit, they will simply put a much tighter sanction squeeze on them with the rest of the world.

[Gorsameth]

And who would do it? Who would be ready to start a nuclear war? If "the World" retaliates against russia, it will without a doubt deal to further retaliation from Russia, and that leads to retaliation from the world and.....We both know where this leads.

And if the world retaliates with something else but nukes, it will still be somewhat the same. If Russia uses 1 nuke and gets attacked by the world, unless there is a near instant rebellion in the army, it will just lead to russia using more nukes. Sure, there will only be one side of the conflict that uses nukes in that scenario, but i don't think it is that brighter of a scenario.

Congratulations, you have discovered the problem with MAD. If someone is crazy enough to not care the world dies.
Its a pretty big flaw, but the other option is that nuclear weapons are an acceptable means of warfare, and again, no one wants that.
So we put our faith in the fact that no one is crazy enough to test MAD.

[Lahis]

This is not a binary thing when you either retaliate with nukes or don't retaliate at all. USA won't start dropping their warheads on Russia if a third country takes a hit, they will simply put a much tighter sanction squeeze on them with the rest of the world.

I have never said we should retaliate with nukes.
We need to use every other weapon to bomb the shit out of Russia for the next three generations.

[Flurryfang]

Congratulations, you have discovered the problem with MAD. If someone is crazy enough to not care the world dies.
Its a pretty big flaw, but the other option is that nuclear weapons are an acceptable means of warfare, and again, no one wants that.
So we put our faith in the fact that no one is crazy enough to test MAD.

Thats the thing. We are maybe at a point, where "somebody" is that crazy, that they think there is something to gain from a nuke. With russia being ready to set themselves so much apart from major parts of the world willingly, it might be a reality, that the idea of nuking is also well alive in the russian leadership, as an out of the crisis happening in the west.

[Gorsameth]

Thats the thing. We are maybe at a point, where "somebody" is that crazy, that they think there is something to gain from a nuke. With russia being ready to set themselves so much apart from major parts of the world willingly, it might be a reality, that the idea of nuking is also well alive in the russian leadership, as an out of the crisis happening in the west.

Russia has been shouting they will use nukes since forever.
Trump has probably come closer to wanting to press the button then Putin.
No I'm not worried in the slightest that he will actually go through with it.

[enigma77]

And who would do it? Who would be ready to start a nuclear war? If "the World" retaliates against russia, it will without a doubt deal to further retaliation from Russia, and that leads to retaliation from the world and.....We both know where this leads.

And if the world retaliates with something else but nukes, it will still be somewhat the same. If Russia uses 1 nuke and gets attacked by the world, unless there is a near instant rebellion in the army, it will just lead to russia using more nukes. Sure, there will only be one side of the conflict that uses nukes in that scenario, but i don't think it is that brighter of a scenario.

Russia can't win a nuclear war with the West. The West can win a nuclear war with Russia. Russia does not have the capability to completely destroy the West, the West has the capability to completely destroy Russia.

There are too many western targets for Russia to strike, while virtually all of Russia's infrastructure/people are in the western part of Russia.

The West will be badly hurt, but will recover and that's assuming Russia's nukes actually work, which given the state of their military is questionable, at best. There will be no tomorrow for Russia on the other hand, not in a hundred, not in a thousand years.

So if anybody should be very, very afraid of a nuclear war, it is Russia. Which is precisely why rocketman and his cronies will not launch a nuke, knowing the consequences.

[Flurryfang]

Russia can't win a nuclear war with the West. The West can win a nuclear war with Russia. Russia does not have the capability to completely destroy the West, the West has the capability to completely destroy Russia.

There are too many western targets for Russia to strike, while virtually all of Russia's infrastructure/people are in the western part of Russia.

The West will be badly hurt, but will recover and that's assuming Russia's nukes actually work, which given the state of their military is questionable, at best. There will be no tomorrow for Russia on the other hand, not in a hundred, not in a thousand years.

So if anybody should be very, very afraid of a nuclear war, it is Russia. Which is precisely why rocketman and his cronies will not launch a nuke, knowing the consequences.

When it comes to using nukes, its not about winning. Its about having the final word, cause that is what a nuke will do. It will bring everything, and i mean EVERYTHING, to a stop.

If russia used a nuke, it would not be to start a war with the west. As you said, its obvious that there is no winning such a situation, so why even try?

What they could try, is use it to stop the war completly. The rest of the world will pressure the both sides to stand down with threats and promises. Russia will be hit with more sanctions, but nobody will be able to stop russia from keeping what they have taken so far, as that will only risk the start of the war again.

So your scenario is correct, but it lives on the idea that things will escalate instead of going into a desperate holt.

[Ihavewaffles]

Is this a serious discussion? Medvedev repeated Rus nuclear doctrine, which is similiar as America's. No need to get worked up just cuz media wants to sell more news, more clicks.

Oh, good morning to ukraine!



Infracted for trolling.

[Makabreska]

Is this a serious discussion? Medvedev repeated Rus nuclear doctrine, which is similiar as America's. No need to get worked up just cuz media wants to sell more news, more clicks.

Oh, good morning to ukraine!

Figures you would suddenly activate after a month of silent humiliations. Also, figures that you would be happy that civilian targets got struck. Shame those hits wont help ruskies on the front. 4000+ km squared of territory retaken and Crimea bridge hit vs playgrounds and universities struck.