🗣️ | UA-NATO/RU | Crisis Environment | ANALYSIS OF REPORTS

[Torch]

More sanctions. A strongly worded condemnation from the UN. That's it. Here is how nuclear-armed nations would react to a Russian use of a nuclear weapon in Ukraine:

Pakistan: Our nuclear weapons are only for killing Indians, so we don't care.
India: Our nuclear weapons are only for killing Pakistanis, so we don't care.
Israel: Our nuclear weapons are only for killing Muslims, so we don't care.
China: Bad Putin! Bad boy! However, it doesn't affect us, so we don't care.
North Korea: Doesn't affect us, so we don't care. (But can we have some of the scientific data from that?)
France: Bad Putin! Bad boy! We care, but we're not going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine.
UK: Bad Putin! Bad boy! We care, but we're not going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine.
US: Bad Putin! Bad boy! We care, but we're not going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine. (Fuck, that was cool, dude!)
Iran: Can we have one of those, please?

Russia risks no actual military repercussions for using nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The only POSSIBLE exception to this would be if a NATO country was impacted by direct radiation or fallout, and even then I don't think it's likely.

The overall general global nuclear threat is rising, even if there's no indication that something is imminent. Personally, my own DEFCON level hasn't dropped below 4 since Russia invaded.

Holy Sheet Batman! You are on a roll!

That is one of the best (and funniest) post I have seen in a long while.

(To everyone Im not invested and only got caught up in this post now.)


I was going to cut and paste your best remarks but decided the whole thing is awesome. I especially agree about witnessing a nuclear detonation and how the ban has increased not decreased the chance of employment.

I never thought about it. That is definitely an unintended consequence to the above ground ban treaty.


Your hit list on global reactions was dead on

Hmmm, you are wise today. Still waters… etc.

 

[Torch]

This is the difficulty with what we discuss here. There is almost an infinite number scenarios that could come to pass.

 

[william]

How much warning would we get?

Russia's nuclear warning to Nato

https://twitter.com/x/status/2097147338678489101

Russia is openly identifying military facilities in Norway that it could target in a future conflict, escalating its rhetoric against NATO as the alliance strengthens its northern flank and expands long-range capabilities close to Russia.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2097010791979397391

China asked Ukraine to refrain from striking Vladivostok during the Eastern Economic Forum in order to ensure the safety of its delegation, according to Kyodo News, citing sources. The episode shows that Ukraine’s deep-strike capability is now significant enough to factor directly into diplomatic planning by major powers.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2096954411360592320

Lavrov claims 'real war' with Germany has begun
"Basically, this is, in essence, the beginning of a real war. They expelled the consulate general from Bonn... The Russian House in Berlin is being closed. I remember that before the start of World War II, the Great Patriotic War, to be more precise, the Germans also closed their diplomatic missions... They want war again," Lavrov cynically said.

According to him, Russia will draw conclusions from the statements made by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
"He is essentially going to declare war on us. And the lessons of history have not been learned at all. It turns out that these metastases of Nazism are beginning to break through. This is a dangerous phenomenon. It seems to me that the Russian leadership will draw the appropriate conclusions," Lavrov added.​

MSN

Zakharova: US launchers for short- and intermediate-range missiles in Norway will be subject to special attention from Russia’s strategic deterrence forces. Moscow views the appearance in Europe of US launchers for intermediate- and shorter-range missiles as "yet another step in the endless chain of highly destabilizing actions by NATO countries aimed at striking deep into Russian territory," Zakharova said. According to her, the Mk-41 is capable of launching Tomahawk missiles, and its range covers a significant part of Russia's European territory, including Moscow. Zakharova added that Washington and Oslo "should not be surprised that the locations of these systems are now under the special attention of Russia’s strategic deterrence forces, which includes planning for the combat use of relevant strike weapons in the event of an armed conflict."

https://twitter.com/x/status/2096967911873052760

I’m warning as clearly as I can: we may be entering the final window to stop this war from breaking out beyond Ukraine’s borders. Putin is under rising internal pressure to go kinetic, to go beyond the borders, whether covertly or overtly. As I warn, This could be the last chance to avoid a kinetic strike against the West by Russia.And once those strikes begin, everything bad can happen… it is damn hard to get out of one.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2096379025694289965

Russia’s foreign intelligence chief is openly warning that the confrontation between the West and the Moscow-Beijing-Tehran-Pyongyang alignment could spiral into a large-scale conflict across Eurasia.

Visioner (@visionergeo) on X

BIG | 🇷🇺🇨🇳🇮🇷🇰🇵‼️‼️ Russia’s foreign intelligence chief is openly warning that the confrontation between the West and the Moscow-Beijing-Tehran-Pyongyang alignment could spiral into a large-scale conflict across Eurasia. SVR Director Sergei Naryshkin accused Western intelligence agencies of…

x.com

Enough with the endless propaganda and the childish black-and-white narrative that Russia is supposedly the only actor responsible for this war.We are being fed a carefully manufactured story while politicians and media outlets continue to demonize Russia and silence serious discussion about how we actually get out of this catastrophe.The most frightening part?We are sleepwalking toward a much bigger war,and the people pushing us in that direction know exactly what they are doing.

Richard (@ricwe123) on X

WAKE UP! Enough with the endless propaganda and the childish black-and-white narrative that Russia is supposedly the only actor responsible for this war. We are being fed a carefully manufactured story while politicians and media outlets continue to demonize Russia and silence serious discussion a…

x.com

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

silence serious discussion about how we actually get out of this catastrophe.

Russia can stop its war against Ukraine and give back the land they stole. That's a good way to get out of this catastrophe.

 

[GBS61]

Russia can stop its war against Ukraine and give back the land they stole. That's a good way to get out of this catastrophe.

That won't happen!

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

That won't happen!

Sadly agreed.

 

[william]

I am a big fan of this primer:

The Hafnium bomb was new to me. Hadn't heard of that one before.
Project "Sundial" was the scarcest nuclear weapon ever conceived for me. A 10,000 MT doomsday weapon that Teller drew up the plans for.

 

[william]

Not anymore. Look at the slow progression from MAD during Cold War 1 - nuclear weapons are terrifying and for deterrence purposes only - to current where openly discussing the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear armed nations is no longer taboo. The more you normalize the possibility in discussions - seriously or not - the less taboo the next step of actually deploying them becomes. That is a slow progression as well, but think about this: The last American President to personally witness an above-ground nuclear detonation was John F. Kennedy. I don't know who the last Russian leader was to witness one, but certainly not Putin, and I doubt very many people in leadership positions on either side have ever witnessed one go off. I think this is dangerous. The damage a nuclear weapon can only be visualized in the abstract. I maintain those who actually witnessed them in the mid to late 20th century would have been much less likely to casually discuss using them, let alone actually doing so.


More sanctions. A strongly worded condemnation from the UN. That's it. Here is how nuclear-armed nations would react to a Russian use of a nuclear weapon in Ukraine:

Pakistan: Our nuclear weapons are only for killing Indians, so we don't care.
India: Our nuclear weapons are only for killing Pakistanis, so we don't care.
Israel: Our nuclear weapons are only for killing Muslims, so we don't care.
China: Bad Putin! Bad boy! However, it doesn't affect us, so we don't care.
North Korea: Doesn't affect us, so we don't care. (But can we have some of the scientific data from that?)
France: Bad Putin! Bad boy! We care, but we're not going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine.
UK: Bad Putin! Bad boy! We care, but we're not going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine.
US: Bad Putin! Bad boy! We care, but we're not going to risk a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine. (Fuck, that was cool, dude!)
Iran: Can we have one of those, please?

I disagree with this. I believe that if Russia were to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine it would most likely be used on a strategic Ukrainian military base or staging area and the world's nuclear powers would immediately go to Defcon 1. Either the US or Europe would respond in kind on a Russian military base or staging area. At that point I don't know if it could be called off on not, I guess it depends on how heavily the machines are involved in the chain of decision making.

Russia risks no actual military repercussions for using nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The only POSSIBLE exception to this would be if a NATO country was impacted by direct radiation or fallout, and even then I don't think it's likely.

The overall general global nuclear threat is rising, even if there's no indication that something is imminent. Personally, my own DEFCON level hasn't dropped below 4 since Russia invaded.

 

[RiffRaff]

I disagree with this. I believe that if Russia were to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine it would most likely be used on a strategic Ukrainian military base or staging area and the world's nuclear powers would immediately go to Defcon 1. Either the US or Europe would respond in kind on a Russian military base or staging area. At that point I don't know if it could be called off on not, I guess it depends on how heavily the machines are involved in the chain of decision making.

Oh, I absolutely agree that if Russia uses a nuke on *any* target in Ukraine, all of the other global nuclear powers will initiate DEFCON 1, or their version of it. However, that doesn't automatically mean the missiles are in the air. DEFCON 1 is merely the "highest state of readiness" for US strategic forces. It means everything is in place to launch them within seconds and it will be the most dangerous point in the history of our species. But it does not guarantee a nuclear response against Russia.

That being said, I can't guarantee there *won't* be a nuclear response against Russia. At which point, it has been an honor working with all of you. Even the people I argue with.

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

That being said, I can't guarantee there *won't* be a nuclear response against Russia.

This brings up The Day After question: Is the US willing to sacrifice Chicago for Kyiv?

I mean, *I* am, but will Washington?

 

[RiffRaff]

This brings up The Day After question: Is the US willing to sacrifice Chicago for Kyiv?

I mean, *I* am, but will Washington?

Chicago??? Home of the Blues Brothers?????? Are you NUTS??!!??

Now, if you want to negotiate over GARY, I can get behind that. No big loss to Indiana. We've been trying to sell it to Chicago for years.

 

[Torch]

This brings up The Day After question: Is the US willing to sacrifice Chicago for Kyiv?

I mean, *I* am, but will Washington?

No. Not for a Ukraine city,

Not a Nato Ally

Not a major (non NATO) ally

The USA, China and Russia have bent each over hard during the endless regional and bushfire wars.

We (all of us) have never used tactical nuclear weapons to improve our position in these wars, nor have we use nuclear weapons to harm someone’s position in the small war.

I think the writing is on the wall and there’s a secret handshake. We only trade cities for like cities of equal or greater value. Second world cities not apply.

 

[RiffRaff]

No. Not for a Ukraine city,

Not a Nato Ally

Not a major (non NATO) ally

The USA, China and Russia have bent each over hard during the endless regional and bushfire wars.

We (all of us) have never used tactical nuclear weapons to improve our position in these wars, nor have we use nuclear weapons to harm someone’s position in the small war.

I think the writing is on the wall and there’s a secret handshake. We only trade cities for like cities of equal or greater value. Second world cities not apply.

That's the common sense answer. There is a lack thereof among world leaders right now.

 

[Publius]

Oh, I absolutely agree that if Russia uses a nuke on *any* target in Ukraine, all of the other global nuclear powers will initiate DEFCON 1, or their version of it. However, that doesn't automatically mean the missiles are in the air. DEFCON 1 is merely the "highest state of readiness" for US strategic forces. It means everything is in place to launch them within seconds and it will be the most dangerous point in the history of our species. But it does not guarantee a nuclear response against Russia.

That being said, I can't guarantee there *won't* be a nuclear response against Russia. At which point, it has been an honor working with all of you. Even the people I argue with.

But hidden in that unknown of multiple nuclear states going straight to defcon 1. Is the forever unknown of how things might go sideways or more precisely the “missteps” that lead to a spiraling escalation of retaliations.
That’s always been the perverse logic and application of MAD.


In so many ways this is very much like a bar fight. Who’s got the swinging d____ mentality or the small guy.
Who flinches first, whose ego can’t cover the checks they’ve written lol.

So it is always a massive unknown.

All that said escalating to nukes is less like breaking a bottle for a weapon or pulling a gun. And has more in common with pulling the pin on a grenade. Pulling that pin and tossing it into the fray when you damn well know you won’t make it to the door is a whole diffferent animal.

 

[Publius]

No. Not for a Ukraine city,

Not a Nato Ally

Not a major (non NATO) ally

The USA, China and Russia have bent each over hard during the endless regional and bushfire wars.

We (all of us) have never used tactical nuclear weapons to improve our position in these wars, nor have we use nuclear weapons to harm someone’s position in the small war.

I think the writing is on the wall and there’s a secret handshake. We only trade cities for like cities of equal or greater value. Second world cities not apply.

My grenade analogy

 

[Publius]

How much warning would we get?

Perversely while I agree with this assessment that there is manipulation of facts and culpabilities that Russia alone bares the responsibility for this war and state of affairs which is presented by the west. It also omits the many mistakes or oversteps by the west.

All that said I just as easily make the same case against Russia manipulating facts and causes.

Each of of us assigns a value on the validity of any “truth”. And this forms the basis of our understanding.

That’s the thing with international affairs and standoffs. Their is no supreme world court that is going to rule and consequently all parties are going to respect and adhere to the ruling.
That is the lie of the UN and Globalists.

Never make the mistake of assuming our individual nations cultural and legal traditions willl act as a trump card in settings international conflict.

Sometimes in the end it really does just come down to violence and application of force to repel or subjugate an adversary.

Sadly it’s just that simple.

 

[william]

Oh, I absolutely agree that if Russia uses a nuke on *any* target in Ukraine, all of the other global nuclear powers will initiate DEFCON 1, or their version of it. However, that doesn't automatically mean the missiles are in the air. DEFCON 1 is merely the "highest state of readiness" for US strategic forces. It means everything is in place to launch them within seconds and it will be the most dangerous point in the history of our species. But it does not guarantee a nuclear response against Russia.

That being said, I can't guarantee there *won't* be a nuclear response against Russia. At which point, it has been an honor working with all of you. Even the people I argue with. Made me laugh.

 

[william]

Perversely while I agree with this assessment that there is manipulation of facts and culpabilities that Russia alone bares the responsibility for this war and state of affairs which is presented by the west. It also omits the many mistakes or oversteps by the west.

All that said I just as easily make the same case against Russia manipulating facts and causes.

Each of of us assigns a value on the validity of any “truth”. And this forms the basis of our understanding.

That’s the thing with international affairs and standoffs. Their is no supreme world court that is going to rule and consequently all parties are going to respect and adhere to the ruling.
That is the lie of the UN and Globalists.

Never make the mistake of assuming our individual nations cultural and legal traditions willl act as a trump card in settings international conflict.

Sometimes in the end it really does just come down to violence and application of force to repel or subjugate an adversary.

Sadly it’s just that simple.

Didn't Russia at some point want to join NATO or maybe it was the EU I don't remember, and was denied? That was a mistake IMO. A paranoid person or country is dangerous because you don't know for sure what they will do.

 

[william]

Personally, I believe that if a nuclear weapon is used by Russia in Ukraine it is going to open "Pandora's Box" and all bets are off the table. Going to buy more beans and TP!

 

[Publius]

Didn't Russia at some point want to join NATO or maybe it was the EU I don't remember, and was denied? That was a mistake IMO. A paranoid person or country is dangerous because you don't know for sure what they will do.

Russia publicly balked when NATO expected Russia to conform to NATO membership guidelines for domestic changes.
It was the Wild West in Russia then.

I do not know if these were legitimate expectations of NATO for Russia. Or excessive unrealistic expecting of western economic interest to change things in Russia that were unfair or unrealistic.