Replies

I know you are a Russian, and that English is not your native language, so your awkward diction is forgivable. I will thus respond to what I THINK you are saying.

You said: “Ukraine itself of cause (course?) is not considered any existential threat. But backed by NATO it may.”

Only if Russia attacks NATO.

“If NATO soldiers will involve then even more.”

It is not an existential threat to Russia to repel Russia from Ukraine. It is merely restoring the 2013 status quo, with which Russia apparently had no problem for over twenty years.

“And if they will be a moment when the use of tactical nuke will get great tactical gain and save lifes of Russian soldiers then commanders will use them 100%.”

Ah, so there does NOT have to be an existential threat to Russia before Russia resorts to the use of nukes.

“Especially they are already there on a tips of Iskander and Kinzhal missiles.”

So, you admit that Russia has already introduced nuclear weapons into the Ukrainian theater but just hasn’t launched them yet.

“The use of tactic battlefield low-yield nukes will be open practice very soon. Like using artillary and tactic missiles.”

It will be open practice for Russia to use them, because you are admitting that Russia cannot win a war without resorting to nukes (unless it wars against some small and defenseless and hapless third-world country).

“And Russia uses them will create the needed precedent for other countries. I guess China for one will thank Russia.”

Again, you admit Russia will resort to using nukes even if it faces no real threat.

Is there any wonder that former Soviet republics and former Soviet satellite states rushed to join NATO as soon as they were rid of the Soviet (Russian) boot on their necks? NO ONE trusts Russia. Russia’s history of abuse towards its neighbors will not soon be forgotten. It’s funny, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine actually made NATO stronger!

You mentioned China. I suggest to you that China will employ first-use of nukes against Russia before any Western country would.

“And if they will be a moment when the use of tactical nuke will get great tactical gain and save lifes of Russian soldiers then commanders will use them 100%.”

Ah, so there does NOT have to be an existential threat to Russia before Russia resorts to the use of nukes.===

First off what is an existencial treat Russia will decide not you.

And you don’t understand the doctrine. It is about usage of Strategic Nuclear Forces right away. Meaning she will not use a townbuster warheads at first place of course. That what they say in a doctrine. It is about not all nukes but only big ones like 100KT and more. Got now?

But those low-yield shells like 1Kt or less and strictly on a battlefield or near front line why not? It just like any other explosives but stronger. And not against anything around but against hardened targets or targets of big value and so on.

And using this warheads will counter the NATO superiority in numbers.

DO you remember how during Cold War 1 NATO responded on Soviet Union numbers superiority in troops and tanks? They deployed more nuke missiles. Remember Pershing missiles?

SO similar way here. Now NATO has number superiority so Russia must react accordingly.

It is not an existential threat to Russia to repel Russia from Ukraine. It is merely restoring the 2013 status quo, with which Russia apparently had no problem for over twenty years.

In 2014 NATO and the US led by Victoria Nuland engineered a coup of the duly-elected, pro-Russian government of Ukraine. This spawned the separatist movement in the Donbas and triggered an unopposed Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea. Theree has been an ongoing shooting war in Ukraine since 2014. The same team that gave us the 2014 coup is back in charge. Did that contribute to Putin's decision to invade Ukraine a second time?

No doubt they wanted to join NATO. The US becomes the guarantor of their sovereignty up to and including nuclear war. NATO expansion after the fall of the Soviet Union was a huge mistake. George Kennan said in 1997, that "expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era. Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking."

NATO expansion from 1986 until today

It’s funny, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine actually made NATO stronger!

NATO is a paper tiger without the US. The war in Ukraine has devastated the economies of NATO members and they have depleted their war reserves. The US has supplied more money and weapons to Ukraine than all the rest of NATO members combined. Let's see how many NATO countries live up to their pledges to spend more on defense. It will mean cuts to their welfare states and higher taxes. They are already under great pressure to fund benefits due to an aging population and smaller workforce.

In Germany the public is losing confidence in NATO and fear being drawn into a direct conflict with Russia. Poll: Less Than Half of Germans Support Defending NATO Allies (Feb 9, 2023)

"A new opinion poll has revealed that two-thirds of German citizens now fear being drawn into a direct military conflict with the Russian Federation, with only 45% saying that they want Germany to come to the aid of another NATO member state if it were attacked."

"The polling data, which also indicates the German population fears war and inflation more than all other issues facing the country, emerges from the results of the “Security Report 2023,” carried out by the Allensbach Institute on behalf of the Center for Strategy and Higher Leadership, the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reports."

"The security report’s results, among several other things, revealed that 85% of Germans worry about the Russo-Ukrainian war, while 86% have deep concerns over the country’s record- high inflation."

"The fear that the Federal Republic could be pulled into a war with Russia is widespread, at 63%, up from the 37% recorded in last year’s security report. Additionally, nearly half of the survey respondents (47%) reported feeling personally threatened by Germany’s participation in the Russo-Ukrainian war via its continued weapons deliveries—which now include the state-of-the-art Leopard 2 tanks—to Ukraine."

"Against the backdrop of the current geopolitical situation, the survey asked expressly how Germany’s NATO alliance obligation ought to be handled in the event of an outbreak of war affecting another NATO country."

"To this question, a minority of 45% of Germans favor getting involved militarily, in accordance with Article 5 of the NATO alliance treaty, in the event of an attack on an ally. In the eastern German states, this figure drops to a mere 30%. As for the entire country, 35% of those surveyed said it is better to “keep out of it” if a fellow NATO ally is attacked. One in five remained undecided on this issue.

"Reacting to Germany’s apparent lack of commitment to its NATO allies, Klaus Schweinsberg from the Center for Strategy and Higher Leader, the co-editor of the security report, said: “The fact that there is no clear commitment among the Germans to the alliance’s obligations in NATO is frightening.”

I watch the German news everyday along with my German wife. It is clear that support for this proxy war is waning among the German public. There are over 1 million Ukrainian refugees in the country along with tens of thousands of Afghans and other foreigners seeking asylum in Germany. Housing resources are stretched thin and Germans are suffering from the influx of refugees. My wife's friends and relatives believe that the US has ulterior motives in cutting off cheap energy from Russia so that the US can make Germany dependent on US energy at higher prices. This hurts the competitiveness of German industry and could result in offshoring to countries with cheaper energy.

NATO members Hungary and Turkey are not abiding by the sanctions on Russia. Other NATO countries are tapped out when it comes to sending money and arms to Ukraine.

Sweden and Finland entry into NATO: What exactly does the US gain with the entry of these two countries? It just increases our liability to defend the sovereignty of Europe using our nuclear umbrella. We, the American people, are the guarantors of their sovereignty up to and including nuclear war. It's a great deal for Sweden and Finland. They get the insurance policy and we pay the premiums.