Posted on 12/27/2022 6:34:50 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
And your point is? If you're suggesting that European leaders will just automatically start following some NATO contingency plan and 'up the ante', if one or two tactical nukes are used in Ukraine, I suspect that you're mistaken. It's far more likely that they'll be soiling themselves, and looking for any option that doesn't include the potential for national suicide.
Same was said of Saddams weapons of mass destruction - but our military guys on the ground said otherwise.
DeNazification? The Russians withdrawing Wagner and stopping promoting National Bolshevism would go a long way.
Lol
That’s how Trump always starts negotiations!
So what. Send him over and see if he can fix it. They won’t, because they don’t want it fixed.
NATO being irradiated from Ukraine would certainly get a response. That response has probably been communicated—and it’s not nuclear. It would likely involve a wave of cruise missiles in Ukraine and conventional air strikes in Crimea.
Russia would lose Kalingrad and it would become an outlaw state that even China would not support.
It would be expelled from the Security Council, and all financial systems.
No, Russia isn’t going to use tactical nukes.
;>)
Yeah, reactivating V Corps and moving it closer to the Russian threat, funding and arming Ukraine, wanting Ukraine to get jets, and suggesting we send nuke subs to threaten Russia are all pretty aggressive on Trump’s part.
“If you’re suggesting that European leaders will just automatically start following some NATO contingency plan and ‘up the ante’, if one or two tactical nukes are used in Ukraine, I suspect that you’re mistaken. It’s far more likely that they’ll be soiling themselves, and looking for any option that doesn’t include the potential for national suicide.”
>>>>>>
Answer:
What I am saying is that anything massive ultra violent Russia does, some here says it’s not escalation.
But anything the victims of the Russian onslaught do to defend themselves in response to that onslaught, is systematically seen as an act of “escalation”...
This is becoming crazy.
I guess it’s the WOKE culture here in the west that has contaminated our minds. We see in the news how Democrat policies always protects criminals while at the same time pushing for ABOLISH THE POLICE agenda. They say Police only “ESCALATE” the situation. The criminals must therefore be let alone, with no response. American citizens are suffering from this mentality, but it’s paradise for the criminals.
When Russia is bombarding Ukraine with an average of 50.000 bombs and shells every single day, some on Free Republic say nothing, but when Ukraine successfully manages to launch ONE small missile or shell back into Russia in response, some here say STOPPPP THE ESCALATIONNN!
So what is going on here??
Has Russia all the rights to do anything it wants like the criminals here in the USA ?
Should we continue this WOKE policy of “abolishing the police” while also “abolishing Ukraine’s defense forces”?
All that in order to stop “ESCALATION”?
No.
We Have to say to the criminals in the USA and the war criminals running the Kremlin that there ARE red lines.
They can’t do anything they want without consequences.
So if THEY decide to use tactical nukes, there WILL be a response. It’s important our enemies believe that, otherwise there is no dissuasion anymore.
Dissuasion is the key for law and order.
Dissuasion is the key for world wide peace.
Actually, those points come from various non-propaganda type articles that I’ve read over the past year.
There are always “back channel” communications between combatants. Often times, the potential responses to actions are laid out clearly in order to avoid misunderstandings and to improve “understandings.”
This type of action took place in just about every war since WWII. In recent years this happened during the Gulf War and the subsequent invasion of Iraq. Saddam was told pretty clearly what would happen to his armies if we invaded. And it became fact.
None of what II wrote was “hyperbolic.” There are fairly plain, conventional responses to a nuclear escalation. The US and NATO are not going to destroy the world over nuking Kiev. However, nuking anyone will result in a pretty harsh and strong response from all of the nuclear countries in the world.
In essence, using even tactical nukes against a non-nuclear country is akin to someone pulling out a gun during a fistfight. It cannot be tolerated and the guilty party would be significantly punished.
Since you cannot put a country in jail; nor can you force their leadership to surrender..the reaction must be significant, swift, and isolating.
Believing the world would not react harshly—but proportionately—against such a country is naive. And we all know that Russia’s reaction would be the same “whining” persecution complex they’ve had since Europe dismissed the Tsars are uncouth brutes in the 1700’s.
It is best to isolate them, and simply not allow them to play with the rest of the world. There is no need for world wide destruction.
You can be assured this has been discussed with Lavarov and Putin at various times in the past year. Not all communications are going to find their way onto the BBC or Fox News.
It certainly is important to consider what "our enemies believe".
When the Soviet Union existed, there was a credible military threat to NATO; Warsaw Pact forces appeared capable of launching a potentially successful conventional attack on western Europe. The US kept conventional forces deployed in NATO countries, but it was widely recognized that those forces might be insufficient to stop such an attack.
The real deterrent was nuclear; it was expected that any conventional attack from the east that appeared to be succeeding would trigger a nuclear response. But that assumption was questioned - would the United States (and/or Britain and/or France) actually use nukes, if "mutual assured destruction" was a possible outcome? Good question; but apparently the Warsaw Pact leadership believed that a nuclear response was sufficiently likely, that no conventional attack was ever launched.
Several decades later, the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact no longer exist. There is no credible military threat to NATO, apart from nuclear weapons - Russian conventional forces couldn't even take Kiev, let alone Warsaw, Berlin or Paris. Although Ukraine is not a NATO member, the US and several other countries have elected to intervene in the Ukrainian conflict, and that involvement has increased dramatically in recent months.
So, what do "our enemies believe"? Do they believe (as so many westerners apparently do) that NATO has some duty, obligation or right to intervene - or do they view such intervention differently? Do they believe that such intervention threatens their own existence? If their existence is threatened, do they believe the use of nuclear weapons might be justified? And do they believe that the NATO countries will actually risk "mutual assured destruction" over Ukraine?
We know what many 'armchair experts' on FR believe - it gets quite amusing at times, seeing the same individuals who trumpet that "Putin is crazy!", also claim that Putin is somehow entirely predictable. Others post endlessly about the obvious incompetence of the Russian military, while simultaneously claiming that the very same incompetents are somehow an immediate and existential threat to London, Paris and New York. We know or can guess what any number of Americans and Europeans believe - but what do the Russians really believe? And will the disconnect between what they believe, and what NATO leaders think they believe, have unintended consequences?
;>)
It is an almost universal human weakness, to think that we know more than we really do. As noted in my post #130, we know or can guess what any number of Americans and Europeans believe - but what do the Russians really believe? And will the disconnect between what they believe, and what NATO leaders think they believe, have unintended consequences?
I would personally bet on unintended consequences...
;>)
“Several decades later, the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact no longer exist. There is no credible military threat to NATO, apart from nuclear weapons.”
>>>>>>>
Well, we are now touching something essential in our discussion, and I thank you for it.
What you explained above is the following narrative:
— Why did NATO maintain its presence while the Warsaw pact disappeared? —
I would appear for a second that NATO did something unfair to Russia by not dissolving itself.
But here comes the big misconception about that narrative:
— Indeed, the Warsaw Pact “disappearance” is a smoke screen, it hasn’t disappeared...!
What happened is that the potential lethal military strength the Warsaw pact represented back then... has only been moved a bit further to the East, within Russias true original borders. That’s it! The potential Russian threat now comes from Russia directly, that doesn’t make Europe feel one bit safer...
The Soviet military equipment, missiles, planes, tanks, most of its forces only regrouped in what we today call Russia. It’s a nicer word replacing the “Soviet Union” term. Only the wording changed!
In reality what is NATO? It is essentially the combined military strength of about 20 or so tiny European countries having a central command structure proposed by the USA.
Lets not forget that Europe (EU/NATO) is now directly bordering Russia, and vice-versa.
If we would commit the atrocious mistake dissolving NATO (which in essence is Europe’s army today), then Russia would become the sole army left in Continental Europe - with ALL its Warsaw Pact strength it collected back to Russia in 1989.
Europe without army on one side VS Russia’s huge army on the other side... Yes, such vacuum should be seen as an invitation for Russia to invade Europe!
We cant let that happen.
Russia seems unwilling to attack NATO countries. But is very willing to attack (and even annexing) non NATO countries... Look at the country of Georgia..., or the Russians occupying parts of Moldavia..., or the Russian backed attacks on Armenia..., or the sudden annexation of Crimea..., or the sudden annexation of the Donbas region..., and finally the total invasion attempt of entire Ukraine!
All those countries / regions are victims of Russias military brutality for one single reason : non of them are part of NATO !
If Ukraine had been part of NATO there wouldn’t be any war in Europe right now !
NATO is just an ARMY doing what it can to stop Russias historic massive appetite for land-grabbing and conquering other nations. Russia rests on its Absolute Imperialist Doctrine. It will never change.
No, Putin is not crazy, he is only following that typical Russian (neo-Soviet) doctrine.
The West has no structure to invade Russia. But Russia is the ideal SYSTEM perfectly conceived to invade others.
WE have to live free or die.
And that starts by protecting our borders (Mexico) AND our allies borders (Europe).
Russia can stop its invasion and escalation of the war at any time. THEY have invaded Ukraine with half a million troops and Wagner mercenaries..
There are no EU, US, Ukrainian troops in Russia.
Russia has to bring back its troops to Moscow.
“In essence, using even tactical nukes against a non-nuclear country is akin to someone pulling out a gun during a fistfight.”
Very well said. I fully agree.
And yes, if Russia uses tactical nukes against a non nuclear nation WHILE at the same time being one of the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council(!)... It would be seen as an act of chaotic madness by the rest of the world.
Nato would respond in a conventional military way against Russia in case they used tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine - especially because parts of NATO countries would be contaminated by radio-active winds. It’s like a dirty bomb attack against the west.
Thats why Russia will never do this.
Too many repercussions...
That view conflicts with reality in several significant ways. First, most of the former Warsaw Pact countries (and their military forces) are now members of NATO, including Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the former East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Romania. The military forces of those countries now support NATO, not any theoretical NATO adversary.
For a threat equivalent to the former Warsaw Pact to now exist "a bit further to the East" in Russia, current Russian military forces would have to roughly equal total Warsaw Pact forces - which is definitely not the case. For example, the Warsaw Pact could field over 50,000 tanks; Russia possesses only 12,000 (probably fewer due to combat losses). And the number of combat aircraft available to Warsaw Pact forces was approximately 8,000 - Russia's total military aircraft fleet (including non-combat aircraft such as trainers, transports, and tankers) is 50% smaller, at about 4,000 units. In addition, it is generally conceded that NATO military forces are better trained and possess better equipment than Russian forces.
There is no credible military threat to NATO, apart from nuclear weapons - clearly, Russian conventional forces that couldn't even take Kiev are no threat to Warsaw, Berlin and Paris.
“That view conflicts with reality in several significant ways. First, most of the former Warsaw Pact countries (and their military forces) are now members of NATO, including Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the former East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Romania. The military forces of those countries now support NATO, not any theoretical NATO adversary.”
I agree with you concerning the state of the Russian army today. It has been depleted and missmanaged by incompetence and by corruption - not by will.
It inherited a communist mentality where there is no responsibility, no care for maintenance, and the philosophy that the individual has ZERO value. Only the BIG GOVERNMENT has value in the Russian mind.
What makes Russia a constant threat to the west is that their leaders are STILL contaminated by the communist psych. They inherited that, it’s in their veins and they are trying to rebuild a new political system that is not much different from the Soviet Union. Lets call it “Neo-sovietism”.
Their army may be rotten to the core, but their aggressive INTENT of dominating others and land-grabbing is alive and kicking - as we can all witness . The only thing needed to be dangerous is the INTENT. Here is some proof of that :
-> Al Qaeda only needed a few cutters to bring down the Twin Towers, demolish parts of the Pentagon, and bring down 4 commercial airlines.
A few dollars was necessary and... the INTENT. That’s all !
The INTENT is what Russia HAS and that we in the West DON’T have!
You mix brutal INTENT with a dose of corruption and endless stocks of shells and bombs inherited from WWII and the Soviet Union era... and you have the adequate means to level entire cities and villages to dust. It’s what Russia is doing right now in Ukraine - our ally.
Another thing that makes Russia dangerous, they have launched the draft !
1,2 millions more young men will most probably be drafted next year, according to Russian news. At the same time, in Europe no one is being drafted... This creates a massive imbalance of forces. Russia is amassing masses of forces.
Yes Russia is becoming a dangerous military warmongering machine.
And I’m not even talking about their nuclear capability...
For months now they have threatened the the west with their nuclear arsenal.
Have you seen that clip from Russian TV where they show maps on Europe and USA and how their boast about their new supersonic missiles capable of destroying London, Paris in less than a few minutes striking distance??
Imagine if Foxnews or CNN had such anti-russian madness on America TV, it would be a scandal. But Russia gets away with it. They treat us every day like crap on Russian TV, propagating hate, making sure Russian people will hate the west for a generation.
They say WE are the imperialists, but it is RUSSIA which is invading and annexing countries, not us! We don’t annex countries. They pretend being a victim while being a total bully...
This is highly irresponsible and dangerous behavior.
Contrary to what CNN and FoxNews are saying, there is nothing “right-wing” about Putin and his friends in the Kremlin. They are all past KGB indoctrinated socialist men.
It’s time for the west to prepare its lines of defense.
This mess has barely started. The Kremlin is the architect.
Next step Communist China invades Taiwan. At least that is what would happen if we let Russia win in Ukraine. It would create a very dangerous precedent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.