Big "if".
“The U.S.’s ground-based tactical nuclear capability was retired in the early ‘90s following the collapse of the Soviet Union”
The reason we gave up tactical nukes is because we never found a case where they would be useful.
Enemy forces are unlikely to be cooperative and stand all in one place for long enough and far enough away from any of your own forces for such a weapon to make sense.
“Russia does (if their maintenance is up to par) Big “if”.”
That “If” is also a big risk. What happens if Russia launches a nuke and like so many of their other missiles it doesn’t go off?
Now Ukraine is nuclear armed.
At least all those big shots who are making the global war decisions are going to be safe underground ... and their friends .. and family .. w 100 yrs of food ... in large cities .. w 10s of thousands to talk too
"Russia does (if their maintenance is up to par)"
Big "if".
Highly unlikely since the collapse of the USSR. They know no one is likely to attack them so long as they stay in their box. So if they limited their foreign escapades, they'd have no need for nukular bombs. and no one would be the wiser they'd let their PMCS lapse.
But that plan doesn't account for Pootie-Poot going off the deep end and trying to retrieve a former Soviet satellite state by force.
Regardless, they're not likely to use them in the Ukraine in the first place because a burglar doesn't burn down the jewelry store before he tries to rob it. And then there's that whole "prevailing westerly wind" thing. Elsewhere, maybe, but not in the Ukraine.
Yeah, who wants to pull the trigger on a 50 year old nuclear device?