Posted on 09/27/2022 5:08:16 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
An ally of President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday outlined the scenario of a nuclear strike on Ukraine, saying that the U.S.-led NATO military alliance would be too scared of a 'nuclear apocalypse' to directly enter the conflict in response.
Dmitry Medvedev, a former president who now serves as deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, said Russia had the right to defend itself with nuclear weapons if it is pushed beyond its limits and that this is "certainly not a bluff".
Putin last week ordered Russia's first mobilisation since World War Two and backed a plan to annex swathes of Ukraine, warning the West he was not bluffing when he said he would be ready to use nuclear weapons to defend Russia.
"Let's imagine that Russia is forced to use the most fearsome weapon against the Ukrainian regime which had committed a large-scale act of aggression that is dangerous for the very existence of our state," Medvedev said in a post on Telegram.
Medvedev's remarks quoted the exact terminology of one of the conditions of Russia's nuclear strike doctrine: "aggression against the Russian Federation with conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened".
The 57-year-old Putin ally, who once presented himself as a reformer who was ready to work with the United States to liberalise Russia, has recast himself in recent months as the most publicly hawkish member of Putin's circle.
Since Russia invaded Ukraine, he has repeatedly raised the threat of nuclear chaos and used insults to describe the West.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Don’t worry. Joe said the US would strike back if Russia did this.
As par, the propaganda brigade has come on shift parroting today’s narratives and talking points, much like how the vast majority of the propaganda ridden media works.
Found a very informative podcast vid that beautifully and perfectly illustrates it:
For anyone interested, start at about the 14:54 mark, and try not to chuckle to yourself.
‘Who Controls the News Controls the World’
https://www.corbettreport.com/newscontrol/
Russia policy has been the Samson option.
Im not aware of it doing limited strikes. It may strike out at the world if it decides to do one.
In no way do I want to minimize the danger - desperate people do desperate things. But I find it remarkable that there are Russia apologists in this website who still claim that everything is going according to plan. Drafting your population and threatening everyone with nuclear weapons is not exactly a sign that everything is under control.
If he does decide on nuking Ukraine, someone will put a smart bomb through his window before he gets a chance to launch anything or I would hope someone in his circle would stop him. Russia would cease to exist.
All good points. I wonder if the pro Russian voices on here are really individuals or just Russian bots.
They’ll pop off a micro nuke....say <1kt over a BN sized unit to test the waters.
I don't know what "too weak" means, but he's definitely employing the madman theory. He's hoping we decide he's crazy enough to actually push the button and leave him the hell alone to conquer Ukraine because we are afraid of him nuking Warsaw or London or Oklahoma City.
Obviously he doesn't want to use nukes or he already would have.
But getting back to your original point, the person who looks weak here is Putin. Putin didn't start by making nuclear threats against his smaller, weaker neighbor. He only started down this path when his army was destroyed leaving him with no good options.
Actually, Putin introduced the nuclear threat on the day he launched his invasion, February 24, 2022, and then three days later put his nuke forces on alert, Feb. 27.
Excerpts:
Russia's possible use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine is something of a tortured topic ...
The problem here is that most people's perception of a nuclear strike is as some sort of massively invasive attack against multiple targets of great value, but that is not necessarily the case. This is especially true in regard to Russian combat doctrine and potential strategy in which just detonating a nuclear weapon in anger, regardless of its yield or target, can be used as a tactic to solidify gains, not land a major blow against the enemy. This concept is often referred to as 'escalate to de-escalate.' ...
Escalate to de-escalate would be used to basically freeze the conflict. Here's how it has been theorized as working in the past outside of the Ukraine context ...
It's a very risky and guileful strategy that says more about Russia's wanting conventional fighting capabilities than it does about its nuclear capabilities ...
Once the referendums 'pass,' Putin can declare he had no choice but defend Russian lands at all cost, especially if his conventional forces crumble ...
And of course, winter is also coming. Fighting on foreign soil under those conditions will be worse than what Russian forces previously experienced. Logistics will also be more challenging. Add in low morale, thousands of resentful and untrained conscripts incoming, and worn-out or destroyed equipment with adequate replacements in short supply, and further disaster is likely on the horizon.
So where in Ukraine would Russia drop a nuke?
The “decision making centres”?
Some inconsequential town in the conflict zone?
Cities in the annexed Oblasts that just refuse to accept Russian takeover?
The stooge will die of starvation like the rest of Moscow when the food supplies are dissipated
Drafting your population and threatening everyone with nuclear weapons is not exactly a sign that everything is under control.
_________________________________________________
Maybe....maybe not. The US drafted people in WW1, WW2, and Vietnam. Threatening the opposition with a nuclear strike has been part of US deterrent strategy since the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. Let’s not read too much into this.
The French should counter that threat
“Threatening the opposition with a nuclear strike has been part of US deterrent strategy since the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology.”
Only when attacked, Russia is threatening to introduce nukes for use in invasions of other countries, the normalizing of nukes in regular wars of conquest.
“Russia is deluding itself if it thinks it can get away with lighting off nukes anywhere and get away with it Scot free. “
Maybe not scot free.
But there will be NO MILITARY RESPONSE.
Only when attacked, Russia is threatening to introduce nukes for use in invasions of other countries, the normalizing of nukes in regular wars of conquest.
_____________________________________________________
The use of the first atom bomb was used to prevent an invasion....during a war that was - for all practical purposes -already won. The idea that the Russians will use a bomb willy-nilly due to some kind of set-back is just gaslighting.
That is bizarre, you are carrying this anti-America thing too far in service to Russia.
The use of the atomic bomb was to defeat the island nation that attacked us, end WWII, and save half to a million American lives and another million or more Japanese lives, and the bombs and their use were all new and uncertain, this is the 21st century, Russia isn’t murdering its people by the tens of millions today.
I don’t know what kind of Bishop you are but you are promoting the idea of Russia using nukes to invade territories they want and to normalize the use of nukes in common warfare.
No one is attacking Russia, Russia is not under threat of ceasing to exist, you cannot justify Russia using nukes as just another tool for conquering its neighbors.
Just a simple “thank you” for your post!
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.