Consequences for Using Nuclear Weapons

[Being]

All western voices are saying the same thing, if Russia uses nukes they will face serious consequences. I have yet to hear even hints at what these consequences might be. Anyone here want to speculate on what retaliation will look like in the event Russia uses nuclear weapons? Personally I believe the west will sanction them more. But I do wonder what remains to sanction.

[Dreadnaught]

"strategic ambiguity"

We'll mail every household in Russia a battery operated DVD player with videos promoting critical race theory and Islam. It will be Putin's nightmare.

[Lewkowski]

Reddit says we'll sink their boats, what actually will happen I have no idea.

[LittleFuzzy]

Probably the thinking goes that Russian use of nukes will be sufficient global escalation that the West will be able to push China into joining the sanctioning and that "will definitely make Russia stop"

But mostly it's just calling out nuclear threats as a Russian bluff because there's no target in Ukraine they'd really have any reason to nuke. The only tactical and strategic viability for any use of nukes is to stop the West's efforts to aid Ukraine, and any nuclear event on us does not result in dipliomatic or economic pressure. I would view it more as a warning against trying to incite/support internal Russian disorder and a response of "yeah, uhuh, what else is new?"

[Loki]

They could nuke a few minor cities with a warning of more to come. I've been worried about this since Russia started losing. I'm not convinced the consequences to Russia will be that severe. The best hope is that the proposed use of nukes would be seen a red line for some Russian elites, who'd use the opportunity to overthrow Putin.

[Steely Glint]

There's is no scenario where Russia loses this war and Putin doesn't lose power and therefore, probably, his life. Not after Friday's display. So, that probably informs a lot of his thinking. And he doesn't really have any other cards left to play as I see it.

The best (but still bad) US/NATO response is probably a conventional intervention, impose a no-fly zone and basically try and physically prevent any further nuclear strikes taking place by shooting down the planes and missiles delivering the strike (Russia probably would not use their ICBMs because the US would detect the launches, assume they were directed at them/allies and then we know what happens next), but this still carries just as much risk of escalation as it did when Ukraine was asking for it back at the start of the war.

Normally, I'd say these are just empty threats. Empty threats are sort of Russia's whole thing at this point, but with Putin doubling down on doubling down and the military situation rapidly for Russia I actually think there's a non-trivial chance they might do it. Unless, of course, all the warheads have been sold to pay for yachts.

[Dreadnaught]

The Russian chain of command could also not carry-out a nuclear order, which would be sort of ideal.

Kind of like the plot of Crimson Tide, but in reverse. And if you haven't watched Crimson Tide, go watch Crimson Tide.

[Loki]

The military chain of command is made up of inept sycophants. Higher chance the FSB steps in (perhaps egged on by Prigozhin).

[Flixy]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...david-petraeus

He's retired of course, but suggests a lot harsher retaliation.

[wiggin]

Petraeus is a very smart guy who has drunk too much of his own Kool aid.

[Hazir]

It's not a bad idea to have someone on our side spell out what could happen.

[Being]

Maybe Marco Rubio can convince the GOP to publish a pamphlet on this topic.

[Flixy]

Petraeus is a very smart guy who has drunk too much of his own Kool aid.

I thought his problem was more that he liked his own biographer too much Completely unrelated, but I did attend a lecture of his when he was an active general and he did seem like a smart guy. And instead of clicking top go to the next slide he told someone to do that for him

I do wonder with statements like that whether it's unofficial posturing intended to send a message, or whether it's his own personal opinion.

[wiggin]

I thought his problem was more that he liked his own biographer too much Completely unrelated, but I did attend a lecture of his when he was an active general and he did seem like a smart guy. And instead of clicking top go to the next slide he told someone to do that for him

I do wonder with statements like that whether it's unofficial posturing intended to send a message, or whether it's his own personal opinion.

There's no doubt that he's smart. But I doubt the US is doing signaling from a retired (and mildly disgraced) general; they have channels to do precisely that without such a convoluted approach. It's just Petraeus mouthing off when he has no decision making capability, and - more importantly - no accountability for what could possibly go wrong if he makes a bad situation worse.