War

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
You’ve been advised more than once that this is A Bad Idea, and with more than one reason why. Your persistence does not convey a good message about your paying effective attention imo.
If Russia nukes Ukraine all bets are off and it doesn't matter what I or you think about it, or perhaps even Uncle Sam. If he wipes out Kyiv in a fireball out of spite, I'll be digging a hole in my backyard and stocking up.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
You’ve been advised more than once that this is A Bad Idea, and with more than one reason why. Your persistence does not convey a good message about your paying effective attention imo.
Think about it, if Zelensky is calling for this kind of thing, he has serious cause for concern and when he is concerned, so am I. Vlad might be mad enough to do something profoundly stupid and someone who gave Ukraine assurances when they gave up their nukes had better do something about it.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Think about it, if Zelensky is calling for this kind of thing, he has serious cause for concern and when he is concerned, so am I. Vlad might be mad enough to do something profoundly stupid and someone who gave Ukraine assurances when they gave up their nukes had better do something about it.
Is Zelenskyy calling for nuclear terror? Link please.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
If Russia nukes Ukraine all bets are off and it doesn't matter what I or you think about it, or perhaps even Uncle Sam. If he wipes out Kyiv in a fireball out of spite, I'll be digging a hole in my backyard and stocking up.
This does not equate to a justification to nuke back.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
using what wmd? If conventional, no equivalency. Seriously, please stop suggesting they fight literally dirty.
I'm not suggesting anything, just looking at the possibilities and what could deter Vlad from something stupid and fatal for possibly everybody. Maybe he thinks he can nuke Ukraine and get away with it, the west won't act, but if Zelinsky has it in his power to act he will, if they don't.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
using what wmd? If conventional, no equivalency. Seriously, please stop suggesting they fight literally dirty.
If they use a nuke on Kyiv, Zelensky might not be calling the shots, since he might be dead, someone with a different attitude might be, someone whose family was incinerated.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I'm not suggesting anything, just looking at the possibilities and what could deter Vlad from something stupid and fatal for possibly everybody. Maybe he thinks he can nuke Ukraine and get away with it, the west won't act, but if Zelinsky has it in his power to act he will, if they don't.
I’m focused on your suggestion about fighting dirty.

If Russia uses a nuke, I am very confident Nato will step in and give Russia pluperfect (and probably nonnuclear) hell for it. I’m good with that. But, while I respect Machiavelli’s analysis of the politics of pragmatism, I also hold that the end does not justify the means.

The Russian use of a chemical agent, if that stands up to investigation, concerns me. That is a use of a listed wmd, and could lead to “category creep” in what is considered acceptable warfighting.

In my estimation it is not enough for Nato to escalate, but positioning a bomber wing or two in Ramstein andor RAF Fairford might have a focusing influence. I don’t know.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
It's not an ethical debate, it's total war and Christ help us.
That is where I do not necessarily agree. Do you know Kahn’s nuclear crisis escalation ladder? I found out and read about it just days ago. There are many discrete stages/levels. Unless Russia’s opening play is massive (in the estimation of our strategic warfare pros) we ought to be able to call the meeting to order with conventional strikes.

Bottom line: I think Russia using a battlefield-scale nuke or three is not obligatory total (strategic exchange type) war.
What it certainly is, is a probable guarantee of Nato ending the current Russian regime. Even then we want to leave paths open for phased stand-down by a certainly frightened command structure. All jmo

 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
I’m focused on your suggestion about fighting dirty.

If Russia uses a nuke, I am very confident Nato will step in and give Russia pluperfect (and probably nonnuclear) hell for it. I’m good with that. But, while I respect Machiavelli’s analysis of the politics of pragmatism, I also hold that the end does not justify the means.

The Russian use of a chemical agent, if that stands up to investigation, concerns me. That is a use of a listed wmd, and could lead to “category creep” in what is considered acceptable warfighting.

In my estimation it is not enough for Nato to escalate, but positioning a bomber wing or two in Ramstein andor RAF Fairford might have a focusing influence. I don’t know.
It's not a suggestion, it's a possibility, depending on what the Russians do and what NATO does in response. It's not black and white, battlefield use is different than using one on a city with mass civilian casualties. Just bear in mind that if the Russians did nuke Ukraine, Zelensky could be both a target and victim, he might not be calling the shots in the aftermath. He must have intelligence that has him concerned, watch to see if the beards come off the army and folks start leaving the cities. NATO leaders were meeting too, so something might be up.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
It's not a suggestion, it's a possibility, depending on what the Russians do and what NATO does in response. It's not black and white, battlefield use is different than using one on a city with mass civilian casualties. Just bear in mind that if the Russians did nuke Ukraine, Zelensky could be both a target and victim, he might not be calling the shots in the aftermath. He must have intelligence that has him concerned, watch to see if the beards come off the army and folks start leaving the cities. NATO leaders were meeting too, so something might be up.
It still reads to me like a recommendation. I could be wrong.
 
Top