As Russia Digs In, What's the Risk of Nuclear War? 'It's Not Zero.'

14,646 Views | 204 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by whiterock
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/world/europe/ukraine-russia-nuclear-war.html

As Russia Digs In, What's the Risk of Nuclear War? 'It's Not Zero.'
A series of shifts in Russian statements about using nuclear weapons has led some analysts to believe that the Kremlin sees a nuclear exchange as a viable strategy.
A major war raging on Russia's and NATO's borders. Increasingly bold Western military support. Russian threats of direct retaliation. A mood of siege and desperation in the Kremlin. Growing uncertainty around each side's red lines.
As Russia and NATO escalate their standoff over Ukraine, nuclear strategists and former U.S. officials warn that there is a remote but growing risk of an unintended slide into direct conflict even, in some scenarios, a nuclear exchange.
"The prospect of nuclear war," Antnio Guterres, the United Nations secretary general, warned this week, "is now back within the realm of possibility."
Leaders on both sides emphasize that they consider such a war unthinkable, even as they make preparations and issue declarations for how they might carry it out. But the fear, experts stress, is not a deliberate escalation to war, but a misunderstanding or a provocation gone too far that, as each side scrambles to respond, spirals out of control.
The war in Ukraine heightens these risks to a level not seen since the Cuban Missile Crisis, and in some ways is potentially more dangerous than that, some experts say.
NATO forces, intended as defensive, are massing near Russian borders that, with much of Russia's military bogged down in Ukraine, are unusually vulnerable. Increasingly paranoid Kremlin leaders, faced with economic devastation and domestic unrest, may believe that a Western plot to remove them is already underway.
Russia has said that it considers the weapons and other increased military aid that Western governments are sending to Ukraine tantamount to war, and has implied that it might strike NATO convoys. Over the weekend, Russian missiles struck a Ukrainian base mere miles from Polish territory.
"The chance for nuclear weapons employment is extremely low. But it's not zero. It's real, and it might even increase," he said. "Those things could happen."
The Kremlin has turned to nuclear saber-rattling that may not be entirely empty of threat. Russian war planners, obsessed with fears of NATO invasion, have implied in recent policy documents and war games that they may believe that Russia could turn back such a force through a single nuclear strike a gambit that Soviet-era leaders rejected as unthinkable.
The outcome of such a strike would be impossible to predict. A recent Princeton University simulation, projecting out each side's war plans and other indicators, estimated that it would be likely to trigger a tit-for-tat exchange that, in escalating to strategic weapons like intercontinental missiles, could kill 34 million people within a few hours.
Alexander Vershbow, NATO's deputy secretary general from 2012 to 2016, said that Western leaders had concluded that Russian plans to use nuclear weapons in a major crisis were sincere, raising the risk from any accident or misstep that the Kremlin mistook for war.
With Russian forces struggling in a Ukraine conflict that Moscow's leaders have portrayed as existential, Mr. Vershbow added, "That risk has definitely grown in the last two and a half weeks."

Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The risk is never zero.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
At this point I am less concerned about Putin pushing the nuclear button than the US administration provoking a senseless escalation .

Unless the United States does something incredibly stupid ( still again ) .....this war in Ukraine should draw into its inevitable conclusion without Armageddon .
muddybrazos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ukraine should've conceded before this turned into an invasion.
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
muddybrazos said:

Ukraine should've conceded before this turned into an invasion.
Live free or die!
"Stand with anyone when he is right; Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong." - Abraham Lincoln
PacificBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Joe Biden is our only fear. He should be selling ice cream.
STxBear81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I see Russia pushing all the buttons and intimidating the West til they submit. Don't see coward Joe or UN doing anything Russia will have Ukraine amd Baltic countries before it's over.
However if we do get involved it will be the end for Russia. Our military means business and we would devastate them via air and on ground. Although our President won't do it.
We beat Russia they will be done until the next ruthless dictator rises. Those commies will kill Putin amd leaders if they are going down
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
arbyscoin - the only crypto you can eat.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BornAgain said:

I see Russia pushing all the buttons and intimidating the West til they submit. Don't see coward Joe or UN doing anything Russia will have Ukraine amd Baltic countries before it's over.
However if we do get involved it will be the end for Russia. Our military means business and we would devastate them via air and on ground. Although our President won't do it.
We beat Russia they will be done until the next ruthless dictator rises. Those commies will kill Putin amd leaders if they are going down
Trump thinking
whitetrash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PacificBear said:

Joe Biden is our only fear. He should be selling ice cream.
Not feasible. He'd eat all the inventory.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
william said:




One of the best movies ever made .
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

william said:




One of the best movies ever made .
I haven't whipped it out in a while.

.... might just this fin de semana.

- SK BHJ

{ eating baked lays }
arbyscoin - the only crypto you can eat.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
Every expert disagrees with your assessment. Russian war doctrine says nukes can/should be used.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

whiterock said:

It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
Every expert disagrees with your assessment. Russian war doctrine says nukes can/should be used.
True

However the tactical use of nuclear weapons in Europe against a Russian attack has also been the longstanding doctrine of NATO.

It just doesn't get near as much press.
Wrecks Quan Dough
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wear a mask. Save lives.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's effectively zero. Unless or until Muslim crazies get nukes on a large scale with ICBM or hypersonic delivery systems.
BellCountyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
Yet that is exactly what we are doing other than giving them money we really don't have.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nuclear war is a line China won't let Russia cross.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Nuclear war is a line China won't let Russia cross.
Not sure want makes you think that .

Mao repeatedly demanded that Nikita Khrushchev supply him with nuclear weapons so China could launch a strike against the US.

Khrushchev was aghast at the prospect of a nuclear war.

Mao was unconcerned ........called Khrushchev a coward to his face.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

ATL Bear said:

Nuclear war is a line China won't let Russia cross.
Not sure want makes you think that .

Mao repeatedly demanded that Nikita Khrushchev supply him with nuclear weapons so China could launch a strike against the US.

Khrushchev was aghast at the prospect of a nuclear war.

Mao was unconcerned ........called Khrushchev a coward to his face.
Xi isn't Mao, and China is a different country from 60 years ago. They are slowly overtaking US dominance without having to fire one bullet. Russia will now become dependent upon China for their economic survival, and then China holds dominion over a good portion of Europe. Fortunately, China still needs the US as a trading partner.

Putin's efforts to prove Russia's relevance and strength will ultimately be its downfall, but it won't be at the hands of NATO or the West.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
The two assumptions that hobble your analysis in almost every post:

1. Things only ever happen as planned.

2. If the left doesn't like it, assume it's good and double down accordingly.

Same kind of thinking that got us into Iraq. Some people never learn.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
The two assumptions that hobble your analysis in almost every post:

1. Things only ever happen as planned.

2. If the left doesn't like it, assume it's good and double down accordingly.

Same kind of thinking that got us into Iraq. Some people never learn.


If he gets triple vaxxed and double masked that'll fix everything. Don't worry.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

whiterock said:

It's never zero, and scarcely higher now than before the war started.

If Putin thought starting a war in Ukraine had the remotest chance of triggering thermonuclear war, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

Two things are driving the chatter about looming Armageddon: 1) the radical left, who never wants to risk political capital on any conflict that does not involve domestic culture wars; and 2) moderates and libertarian conservatives who perceive Dems & Republicans as a "uniparty" who seek military engagement for financial and political gain.

Putin miscalculated and is bogged down. We should open the floodgates of military aid and let the Ukrainians maul him, for a number of reason, not the least of which is demonstrating to China that Taiwan is not to be ****ed with.

Mearsheimer et al are right on the geopolitics of Ukraine but wrong on the question of self-determination. Yes, Ukraine is a shatterzone adjacent to Russia but their future is their own and we gain nothing by abandoning them to a slow strangling by the Russian bear. Tyrants most of all must understand that we will not alligator arm an aspiring democracy.
Every expert disagrees with your assessment. Russian war doctrine says nukes can/should be used.
You are mis-hearing and then mis-interpreting what they're saying. (and some of them are just plain wrong). In a Cold War scenario, where Russian troops were pouring thru the Fulda Gap, the risk of use of nuclear weapons was quite high because Russian doctrine allows field commanders to decide if/when to use tactical nukes in battle. Virtual certainty that tactical nuclear weapons (artillery) would have been employed on European soil. Very likely that such would escalate to theater nukes (short-range ballistic missile) as well. Much political contention in European parliaments about USA deploying Pershing II systems (for reasons mentioned previously). Whether or not that would have invited intercontinental nuclear exchanges between Russia and the USA was much topic for debate, which was never and will never be settled because it is a hypothetical. Don't know your age, but the Cold War was mine and I was an active participant in the silent part of it.

In the current situation, Russian tactical use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine poses no threat to US troops or soil, as US troops are not in battle with Russian forces. Further, neither Russian troops or Russian soil would be at risk of a US counter-strike, since US forces are not engaged in Ukraine.

The scenarios where the war in Ukraine invited a wider nuclear war are simply not realistic. Russia is not going to take ANY action to invite NATO into the conflict. NATO all along has clearly signaled it will not commit forces to the conflict, as long as the conflict stays in Ukraine. Putin knew that. He also knew, as I have noted in other threads, that NATO itself would be a formidable barrier for any NATO nation to touch, much less enter the Ukraine crisis, as any unilateral action at all would risk Article 5 protections, which were of most concern to the smaller nations closest to the conflict (Poland, Baltics, et al...). In other words, Putin knew he would get a one-on-one cage match with Kiev. Ergo his choice to go in. He paid no attention whatsoever to all the pre-war drama. He knew his hands were free to act as he wished.

Provision of sophisticated weapon systems by NATO nations to Ukraine has already been done.
Such did not invite a nuclear response.
Given the nature of the weapons systems...capabilities, cost, threat profile....jet fighters are not an escalation.
Polish jets to Kiev is not going to cause Russia to launch nukes at ANY Nato nation.
Such is really quite silly.
Putin is not a madman. He's quite clear-eyed, and is merely acting within the envelope he (correctly) knows conditions afford him.
Putin knows he is no match for Nato or the USA.
He has no chance of defeating them; engagement with them would court either defeat or destruction.
People hyping nuclear war between Nato and Russia are just waiving their skirt.
Not going to happen.

There is ZERO chance that Putin would have invaded UKR if he though such would expose his country to a nuclear response from the USA. We must steel our nerves and do exactly what the envelope affords us, and that is to feed military equipment and munitions to Ukraine, openly and unreservedly, to make Russia bleed profusely. The bear has a tiger by the tail and we have nothing to gain by letting the bear smother the tiger. Now is the time to teach Putin lessons about deterrence: 1) that the West will not alligator arm support for democracy, anywhere, at any time; and 2) that we will not hesitate to facilitate the destruction of a Russian Army in a place the Russian Army should not be.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Canada2017 said:

ATL Bear said:

Nuclear war is a line China won't let Russia cross.
Not sure want makes you think that .

Mao repeatedly demanded that Nikita Khrushchev supply him with nuclear weapons so China could launch a strike against the US.

Khrushchev was aghast at the prospect of a nuclear war.

Mao was unconcerned ........called Khrushchev a coward to his face.
Xi isn't Mao, and China is a different country from 60 years ago. They are slowly overtaking US dominance without having to fire one bullet. Russia will now become dependent upon China for their economic survival, and then China holds dominion over a good portion of Europe. Fortunately, China still needs the US as a trading partner.

Putin's efforts to prove Russia's relevance and strength will ultimately be its downfall, but it won't be at the hands of NATO or the West.
Westerners get blinded by their own economic ideals.

China is still communist ......with its inherent contempt for the individual.

They will continue to sit back ....profiting from any expansion of the war.
jupiter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"It's just the flu!"
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

muddybrazos said:

Ukraine should've conceded before this turned into an invasion.
Live free or die!
better red than dead

All these trite little sayings. Those saying them seldom consider what ideas are worth fighting for.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

ATL Bear said:

Canada2017 said:

ATL Bear said:

Nuclear war is a line China won't let Russia cross.
Not sure want makes you think that .

Mao repeatedly demanded that Nikita Khrushchev supply him with nuclear weapons so China could launch a strike against the US.

Khrushchev was aghast at the prospect of a nuclear war.

Mao was unconcerned ........called Khrushchev a coward to his face.
Xi isn't Mao, and China is a different country from 60 years ago. They are slowly overtaking US dominance without having to fire one bullet. Russia will now become dependent upon China for their economic survival, and then China holds dominion over a good portion of Europe. Fortunately, China still needs the US as a trading partner.

Putin's efforts to prove Russia's relevance and strength will ultimately be its downfall, but it won't be at the hands of NATO or the West.
Westerners get blinded by their own economic ideals.

China is still communist ......with its inherent contempt for the individual.

They will continue to sit back ....profiting from any expansion of the war.
And not just profiting, but continuing to change a world power dynamic.
Cobretti
How long do you want to ignore this user?
we don't need multiple ukraine/russia threads. pick one and stick with it.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Maybe refrain from clogging them all up with trash opinion/reaction tweets.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Maybe refrain from clogging them all up with trash opinion/reaction tweets.
Hey, if you can do it anyone can. You don't get to monopolize making trash posts.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Maybe refrain from clogging them all up with trash opinion/reaction tweets.
Amen to that!
Wrecks Quan Dough
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Maybe refrain from clogging them all up with trash opinion/reaction tweets.
Crap filter.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

HuMcK said:

Maybe refrain from clogging them all up with trash opinion/reaction tweets.
Hey, if you can do it anyone can. You don't get to monopolize making trash posts.

You and Rawhide/Amal/etc are bottom tier and can barely form coherent thoughts. Cobretti has actually been sharing useful some information to go along with the reaction tweets.
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Wangchung said:

HuMcK said:

Maybe refrain from clogging them all up with trash opinion/reaction tweets.
Hey, if you can do it anyone can. You don't get to monopolize making trash posts.

You and Rawhide/Amal/etc are bottom tier and can barely form coherent thoughts. Cobretti has actually been sharing useful some information to go along with the reaction tweets.
I wear condemnation from the likes of you like a badge of pride.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.