Posted on 10/12/2022 3:03:23 PM PDT by Cathi
To put it simply, in the current standoff over Ukraine’s territory, Putin has the advantage as far as nuclear threats go. The ongoing brinkmanship there has revealed a serious misunderstanding on the part of some analysts and most of the media attempting to define the threats made by Biden and Putin, by relating it to the Cold War environment.
The problem is that in the realm of deterrence, the U.S. no longer has a robust nuclear response at the very low end of the weapons spectrum whereas Russia does (if their maintenance is up to par).
The U.S.’s ground-based tactical nuclear capability was retired in the early '90s following the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Those who assume that Biden’s response to Russia’s potential use of nukes must entail using our own nukes must either be ignorant or have a death wish. This is because our only recourse would be to use high yield warheads resulting in destruction on a global scale.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“We’re living a disaster every day.”
So prescient, it hurts.
And it’s disgusting that so many do not see that it’s all intentional.
What a stupid, ridiculous premise to be discussing. So what if the Russians can’t make the the fused glass bounce the fourth time? Damn fools casually discussing nuclear war like when it starts the end of the US and Russia aren’t assured. Most asinine thinking since Hitler in his bunker.
Talk about a strawman.... I don't know anyone who thinks the proper U.S. response to a Russian use of tactical nukes in Ukraine is for us to fire nukes of our own. I mean, I'm sure a few of those people exist, but they're not in power and a tiny minority anyway.
Tactical nukes were intended for use in Europe. Cold War strategy envisioned the possibility of massed Soviet divisions advancing westward from Eastern European staging areas. And the possible intensive use of CBR weaponry. The response to such potential threats was tactical nuclear weapons targeting Soviet forces and C&C targets well behind enemy lines. With the demise of the Soviet ground threat then yes the need for tactical nukes diminished.
Do not assume that we did not have an established doctrine for the use of tactical. We did. It included the above.
I know you are right about Putin, just not so sure about biden who is the definition of loose cannon.
He needs to leave pronto.
I know you are right about Putin, just not so sure about biden who is the definition of loose cannon.
He needs to leave pronto.
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.