lol at keed. what do you think line of succession is in russia? know any names in it?
1 Like
I have no idea and of course not.
so could it possibly be the same as if bush died during the iraq invasion?
2 Likes
They declare victory in Donbass and send the troops back home?
ok so seriously let’s say putin pops off a single tac nuke inside ukraine, what happens next?
I understand there is a lot of analysis arguing that this is unlikely because ukraine isn’t using massed formations of tanks/troops that tac nukes are intended to be used against, I don’t see this in and of itself as a very convincing argument that it won’t happen.
Possibly a no fly zone, probably Ukraine gets any weapons they want, definitely sanctions turned up to 11.
What happens next depends on China. If putting nukes in play would be enough to get them on board with real sanctions, that would significantly lessen the required response from the west.
1 Like
And if Germany were to immediately cut off all fossil fuel purchases from Russia. The most charitable explanation for what germany is doing right now is that they’re still dangling a carrot and a stick to keep Putin from using WMDs.
1 Like
From the US/NATO perspective, it’s important to let Putin know that something very bad is going to happen, but not exactly what that bad thing is. You don’t want to give him perfect information to weigh the pros and cons of a tactical nuke.
It’s the same concept as how you don’t want to let him know exactly where the red line is, so he can dance one inch from it (see internet trolls). Although any WMD is pretty clearly crossing the red line.
I would expect a single proportionate conventional response from NATO inside Ukraine, probably seeking to lessen whatever gain was made with the tac nuke. I don’t know if MOAR SANCTIONS is getting the message across that use of nukes is not going to fly.
Why not?
And most definitely not this. NATO is not going to do anything that might occasion an ongoing shooting war between Russia and NATO. A military response, if one did happen, would be a single strike from a remote location, along the lines of Iran’s response to the Soleimani assassination, but more destructive.
You think a massive strike inside Russia is more likely than a no-fly zone over Ukraine? I don’t see how the former is less escalatory than the latter.
Didn’t Iran’s response to the Soleimani assassination kill US personnel? That would not be true for a tactical nuke inside Ukraine. Iran also isn’t a nuclear power so the US can strike them with impunity.
1 Like
I said inside Ukraine, not Russia. You realise that “a no-fly zone” is just a polite euphemism for engaging in combat with the Russian air force. That requires not only an ongoing shooting war with Russia, but giving commanders in the field freedom to strike Russian targets. It’s an inherently unpredictable situation and that’s what makes it more dangerous than a single strike.
I missed that when I only read your reply to me. At least theoretically can be achieved without a single shot fired if the Russians think it’s not in their best interest to actually fight NATO. A strike will definitely kill Russians.
It’s hard to picture NATO troops or planes or whatever entering Ukraine, engaging Russia for a short bit, then saying “see ya guys” to the Ukrainians.
It seems more likely to me that if NATO goes in they’re going in to wipe Russia off of Ukraine soil.
I mean if we’re relying on “hopefully the Russians don’t think it’s in their best interests to fight NATO” then what are we waiting for, just deploy NATO troops in Ukraine and blow them off the battlefield.
The calculation changes once Russia has proven it is willing to use tactical nukes and NATO might have more of an interest in declaring that a red line.
The worst thing about Russia using tactical nukes is that the nuclear taboo has been broken. China, North Korea, Iran (maybe someday), Pakistan, all will be watching.
Don’t forget the good nuclear powers
They don’t need to launch tactical nukes because they have all the best conventional weapons.