Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Inmate Trump]

If that nuclear plant blows, then Putin is going to have to be dealt with much more strongly.

We can’t allow someone to be so extremely reckless that they would threaten world safety.

[Inmate Trump]

Is there any real chance that Russia’s crippled economy and anti war sentiment in general could lead to a coup in Russia with Putin being overthrown?

[Inmate Trump]

I haven’t been following this thread very closely so forgive me…

Is there any legitimate concern this could end up being WWIII?

[Inmate Trump]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-17/putin-is-likely-to-make-nuclear-threats-if-war-drags-u-s-says?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab#l0vog8o0374sqrenlh8

This article suggests US intelligence believes Putin may begin threatening nuclear strikes against Ukraine or even the West the longer his war continues.

[Inmate Trump]

Today on this fine morning, the  NYT turns its attention to giving me as I sip my coffee far more information than I wanted to know about nukes as usable “field” weapons. And if you are tired of the cliche "peace through strength," you can give a test run to "escalate to de-escalate."

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/science/russia-nuclear-ukraine.html

“Russia’s atomic war doctrine came to be known as “escalate to de-escalate” — meaning routed troops would fire a nuclear weapon to stun an aggressor into retreat or submission. Moscow repeatedly practiced the tactic in field exercises. In 1999, for instance, a large drill simulated a NATO attack on Kaliningrad, the Russian enclave on the Baltic Sea. The exercise had Russian forces in disarray until Moscow fired nuclear arms at Poland and the United States.

‘Dr. Kühn of the University of Hamburg said the defensive training drills of the 1990s had turned toward offense in the 2000s … .

‘Concurrent with its new offensive strategy, Russia embarked on a modernization of its nuclear forces, including its less destructive arms. As in the West, some of the warheads were given variable explosive yields that could be dialed up or down depending on the military situation.

‘A centerpiece of the new arsenal was the Iskander-M, first deployed in 2005. The mobile launcher can fire two missiles that travel roughly 300 miles. The missiles can carry conventional as well as nuclear warheads. Russian figures put the smallest nuclear blast from those missiles at roughly a third that of the Hiroshima bomb.” [197 words quoted]

I guess the story was precipitated by the White House disclosing that one topic of discussion at the NATO summit is what to do if Russia uses such “baby” nukes.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/03/22/world/ukraine-russia-war

“President Biden is preparing to travel to a NATO summit this week in Brussels, where the Western allies are expected to discuss how they will respond if Russia employs chemical, biological, cyber or nuclear weapons.”

What should NATO do if Putin uses a baby nuke to shake things up a bit and get things moving again? Anyone have any ideas? My idea cupboard is empty on this one.

I don't know, but the response can't be nothing.

I've been supportive of the US response thus far, and think Biden has handled things re: Ukraine extremely well. But Russia using any nuclear weaponry will have to have serious consequences. I'm just not sure what that might be that wouldn't lead to nuclear war.

[Inmate Trump]

I increasingly believe we will see at least a limited nuclear exchange of some kind at some point during this war.

If it looks like he's in danger of losing the war, or losing power outright, Putin will lash out.