News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

Perhaps the goal then wouldn't be to sink his fleet, but to remove him, and all those associated with him from this plane of existence.

AoD

My fear here is that because of past Western appeasement in response to Russian escalation, Putin may now be underestimating Western resolve and response, creating a terrible spiral.
 
My fear here is that because of past Western appeasement in response to Russian escalation, Putin may now be underestimating Western resolve and response, creating a terrible spiral.
Then perhaps it’s time for the West to stop acting exclusively in the background as quartermaster to Ukraine and to demonstrate its military power and resolve. An US-led NATO armoured corps. rolling into Ukraine, remaining exclusively in the northern oblasts that border Belarus, excluding the Chernihiv Oblast that borders Russia. This Western force is placed to ostensibly guarantee against Belarusian aggression. Both Ukraine and NATO invites both India and China to participate in some peaceful role.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't worry too much. I've not once heard anybody say anything like this. And if they do, I would consider the bigots a bigger security threat.

No doubt it is, but it peeve me to no end when members of my broader community engages in traitorous activities.

AoD
 
Last edited:

The Ukrainians are warning that Russian nuclear threat is rising. The Americans are asking India and China to intercede. This is not good.
I've said from day one that this exact scenario that Russia would consider the use of nuclear weapons.

No they don't need a pretext, and yes any pretext would be beyond flimsy, but dictators love making it look like there brutality and horrible decisions are justified. It's domestic politics 101.

It's also why the annexation of Ukrainian territory is not insignificant. No it doesn't change the situation on the battlefield, but it does change the Russian calculus. Look at all the pomp and ceremonies they're preparing in Moscow for this event. It is meant to be a considerable achievement and change to the domestic sphere, it's meant to reframe the conflict, and open up numerous options that previously "weren't available" to the Kremlin.

Despite the US saying they see no change in the overall risk, their rhetoric suggests otherwise. The fact that they've been more vocal about how they have articulated to the Kremlin what sort of responses a nuclear strike would entail, and more publicly warning against it suggests that they do in fact believe that risk is now elevated.

That said, I don't think Putin is ready to use nukes just yet. If he can stabilize the front that risk subsides for now. Should he fail to stabilize the front in the coming months alongside his mobilization (which unfortunately I believe is highly likely) then that threat will be quite high.

There should be no mistake, Putin knows he will be threatened if he uses nukes, but if he is feeling threatened and like he's on the verge of losing anyway, it's a gamble there's very little reason for him not to make.

Though again, we are not at this point YET.
 
Looking at further information, the situation could be significantly worse than I mentioned even a few hours ago. There must be some new intelligence.



I firmly believe that NATOs response would be determined by the size of and the willingness to use nukes by Russia.

One low level tactical nuke would likely elicit a surgical strike to send a message. Multiple high yield tactical nukes fired off at will would likely lead to a larger conflict.
 

Back
Top