The *OFFICIAL* Russia Is About To Invade Ukraine Thread

[LogGrad98]

Even if we didn't retaliate I think the world would be so mad at putin that they would be ostracized to a degree that would devastate them.

Yeah I think the retaliation would end up being economic, or in some other way damaging to Russia, but I doubt we would respond with a nuke in kind. That would open it up for Putin to go ham on nukes and we would have no choice but to respond in kind at that point. I really don't know what the best response would be if Putin wiped out Berlin. I could see us entering into a conventional war, like in Ukraine right now, but then will Putin just continue with nukes? I don't know, hard to guess where that would go, but I honestly do not think it is outside of the realm of possibility for what Putin is capable of. I would not be surprised to hear that a bunch of his advisors are restraining him right now, especially with the tanks on the way to Ukraine.

 

[gandalfe]

Yeah I think the retaliation would end up being economic, or in some other way damaging to Russia, but I doubt we would respond with a nuke in kind. That would open it up for Putin to go ham on nukes and we would have no choice but to respond in kind at that point. I really don't know what the best response would be if Putin wiped out Berlin. I could see us entering into a conventional war, like in Ukraine right now, but then will Putin just continue with nukes? I don't know, hard to guess where that would go, but I honestly do not think it is outside of the realm of possibility for what Putin is capable of. I would not be surprised to hear that a bunch of his advisors are restraining him right now, especially with the tanks on the way to Ukraine.

If he nuked Berlin, or Paris (altho I agree Berlin is more likely) or London or anything outside of Ukraine, we would destroy him, period. That would bring the full force and fury of NATO down. Would we respond with more nukes? I wouldn't rule it out. If it was inside Ukraine, that's a bit more iffy, because, obviously, they are not part of NATO.

I think there's a reasonable chance that Russia actually doesn't have any nukes any more, given how much other stuff have been stolen and sold by the generals. We know SOME nukes went missing, why not all of them?

 

[LogGrad98]

If he nuked Berlin, or Paris (altho I agree Berlin is more likely) or London or anything outside of Ukraine, we would destroy him, period. That would bring the full force and fury of NATO down. Would we respond with more nukes? I wouldn't rule it out. If it was inside Ukraine, that's a bit more iffy, because, obviously, they are not part of NATO.

I think there's a reasonable chance that Russia actually doesn't have any nukes any more, given how much other stuff have been stolen and sold by the generals. We know SOME nukes went missing, why not all of them?

I like the thought that they don't have any more, but I really doubt it. I am sure they have enough to cause pretty substantial devastation.

And I am not sure what form a retaliation would take. If we marched in there and sent all the branches then the next nuke might head to Paris or London or...Washington? At that point a nuclear response would likely be deemed necessary. And we might win that kind of fight, but at what cost? That is why I think we would most likely respond in the form of sanctions. I don't think we have the overwhelming force to engage in anything like a blitzkrieg, so once we started an incursion he would just keep launching nukes. And if he unleashed all they had at once, then we might be at a disadvantage if we were focused on traditional warfare.

Terrifying to think about, unless you are a nihilist at heart, in which case I just find it very interesting.


Quick article from the BBC

Putin threats: How many nuclear weapons does Russia have?

A look at Russia's nuclear arsenal and basic guide to nuclear weapons and their destructive power.

www.bbc.com

What does 'nuclear deterrent' mean and has it worked?​

The argument for maintaining large numbers of nuclear weapons has been having the capacity to completely destroy your enemy would prevent them from attacking you.
The most famous term for this became mutually assured destruction (Mad).
Though there have been many nuclear tests and a constant increase in their technical complexity and destructive power, nuclear weapons have not been used in an armed confrontation since 1945.
Russian policy also acknowledges nuclear weapons solely as a deterrent and lists four cases for their use:

• the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of the Russian Federation or its allies
• the use of nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction against the Russian Federation or its allies
• an attack on critical governmental or military sites of the Russian Federation that threatens its nuclear capability
• aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy

 

[Red]

Maybe it has to get to this point:

“Europe must fight. The realisation has been slow in coming. Yet almost one year after Russia invaded Ukraine, most western governments finally understand Kyiv’s war for survival is their war, too. It’s a fight to the death for Ukraine, but also for European democracy, rights and values. It’s a fight against the historical evils of fascism and imperialism embodied by Vladimir Putin, a dictator for our age.

Europe must fight. It really has no choice. As Russia doubles down, threatening a huge new offensive, a turning point approaches when tragedy turns to ruin – or triumph. This moment, when the war has become familiar and wearying, is the moment of maximum danger. From Sweden, Spain, the Netherlands, France, Poland and the Baltic republics, the flow of arms is turning into an urgent torrent.”

Ukraine is fighting for all of us. Now Europe must fight too | Simon Tisdall

As Russia threatens another offensive, this is the moment of maximum danger. Ukraine’s allies must move fast and decisively

www.theguardian.com

 

[Al-O-Meter]

I think there's a reasonable chance that Russia actually doesn't have any nukes any more, given how much other stuff have been stolen and sold by the generals. We know SOME nukes went missing, why not all of them?

Because we paid for and had oversight on the construction of the facilities where the Russian nukes were stored. The United States was very concerned that as the former Soviet Union collapsed that nukes would wander off so we rushed in with nearly half a billion dollars via the Nunn–Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction and specifically the Nuclear Weapons Storage Security Program (NWSS). We know they have some nukes left because they were in our buildings in Russia.

 

[The Thriller]

this guy…


View: https://twitter.com/ronfilipkowski/status/1619043904405540864?s=46&t=UxFF5-jTQvLEQCmU8kd3NQ

 

[Gameface]

Yeah I think the retaliation would end up being economic, or in some other way damaging to Russia, but I doubt we would respond with a nuke in kind. That would open it up for Putin to go ham on nukes and we would have no choice but to respond in kind at that point. I really don't know what the best response would be if Putin wiped out Berlin. I could see us entering into a conventional war, like in Ukraine right now, but then will Putin just continue with nukes? I don't know, hard to guess where that would go, but I honestly do not think it is outside of the realm of possibility for what Putin is capable of. I would not be surprised to hear that a bunch of his advisors are restraining him right now, especially with the tanks on the way to Ukraine.

We've done economic sanctions to greater than 90% of what can be done. Economic sanctions are wet trash. They have never stopped anyone from doing anything as far as I can tell. They also hurt the most vulnerable the most.

If there was a nuke launched at Berlin and that didn't result in NATO declaring war on Russia then there is no such thing as NATO.

I think the U.S. might make a limited nuclear response, targeting some remote area that has some sort of military or natural resource primary purpose. But on the heels of that would be full mobilization of NATO and declared war on Russia.

In reality, though, I think that if Putin edges too close to that cliff he gets done in from the inside. I don't think the launch happens because I think people very very close to him will prevent it and remove him and dance Putin's shackled self in front of NATO and say "we stopped nuclear holocaust, we will take care of Putin, just let us be the new rulers here and we'll play nice for now.

 

[gandalfe]

In reality, though, I think that if Putin edges too close to that cliff he gets done in from the inside. I don't think the launch happens because I think people very very close to him will prevent it and remove him and dance Putin's shackled self in front of NATO and say "we stopped nuclear holocaust, we will take care of Putin, just let us be the new rulers here and we'll play nice for now.

I dunno, I think Putin is pretty efficiently taking out anyone who even thinks anything against him. This article is from September, I think there are more recent examples as well.

Updated list of oligarchs and Putin critics found dead since war began

A growing number of high-profile Russians have died under strange circumstances ever since President Vladimir Putin came to power.

www.euronews.com

 

[Rubashov]

We've done economic sanctions to greater than 90% of what can be done. Economic sanctions are wet trash. They have never stopped anyone from doing anything as far as I can tell. They also hurt the most vulnerable the most.

If there was a nuke launched at Berlin and that didn't result in NATO declaring war on Russia then there is no such thing as NATO.

I think the U.S. might make a limited nuclear response, targeting some remote area that has some sort of military or natural resource primary purpose. But on the heels of that would be full mobilization of NATO and declared war on Russia.

In reality, though, I think that if Putin edges too close to that cliff he gets done in from the inside. I don't think the launch happens because I think people very very close to him will prevent it and remove him and dance Putin's shackled self in front of NATO and say "we stopped nuclear holocaust, we will take care of Putin, just let us be the new rulers here and we'll play nice for now.

He's losing the war in Ukraine why on earth would he broaden it? Its simple saber rattling.

 

[Gameface]

He's losing the war in Ukraine why on earth would he broaden it? Its simple saber rattling.

100% agree.

The question though is what does NATO do IF Russia launches a nuke? If that happens and NATO doesn't declare war against Russia then NATO was an illusion the whole time. We lose automatically if we let someone launch a Nuke and then announce economic sanctions in response.

 

[Gameface]

I dunno, I think Putin is pretty efficiently taking out anyone who even thinks anything against him. This article is from September, I think there are more recent examples as well.

Updated list of oligarchs and Putin critics found dead since war began

A growing number of high-profile Russians have died under strange circumstances ever since President Vladimir Putin came to power.

www.euronews.com

Yeah but the people standing next to him are survivors who have been playing the game for a very long time. It's the classic love vs fear question and my guess is that most of his closest people are driven by fear. If they think that a nuke launch will harm them more than Putin can then they might be willing to stop him. I have no idea, really. I don't think Putin is legitimately inspiring, his patriotism is as real as Trump's is. Which means he is leader of Russia because it's good for him, not because it's good for Russia. So the people that are close enough to see the graft for what it is aren't in this for the motherland and their undying patriotism. They are riding the bear and will do anything and everything they can to survive.

EDIT: I re-read the post and realized that I had capitalized "Patriotism" and while I DO intentionally capitalize when not technically correct, this wasn't one of those times.

 

[Rubashov]

100% agree.

The question though is what does NATO do IF Russia launches a nuke? If that happens and NATO doesn't declare war against Russia then NATO was an illusion the whole time. We lose automatically if we let someone launch a Nuke and then announce economic sanctions in response.

It would be the end of Russia as a place where people live anymore.