Here
and
Now

opinions

Putin waves nuclear sword in confrontation with the West

17 Comments
By JOHN DANISZEWSKI

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

17 Comments
Login to comment

But the deeper context seemed to be his great desire to show the world that Russia is a powerful nation, not to be ignored. Putin talks repeatedly about the humiliation of Russia after the Soviet collapse. By waving his nuclear sword, he echoed the bluster with which the Soviet Union had stared down the United States and earned, in his mind, respect.

He's gone mad....strutting around in his many palaces and huge yachts...

To suggest the use of nuclear weapons that would bring about the end of the world is the mark of someone who has "gone off the deep end"....

While he is sending troops to rape and pillage in Ukraine, his own people suffer from his and his oligarch cartel looting their national wealth....

The world must stand up a madman, just like they did in the 1940's...

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Putin "might/violence is everything" and doesn't think any nations without that sword under other nuclear power's umbrella are independent sovereign nations. For Putin the sword is not for deterrence but for threatening and/or actual usage.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

An interesting article that entirely fails to mention that one of Putin's stated aims for invading Ukraine was to pre-empt apparent Ukrainian attempts to weaponize the plutonium-239 remaining in the Chernobyl complex, by capturing it.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Neither NATO nor anyone else has any desire to invade a square inch of Russia. The 'national security' line is paranoia or propaganda.

Putin is way past rational. The US simply don't know how demented he actually is. Russian leaders don't age well. Usually they are shuffled off stage before it becomes too obvious/dangerous.

If push comes to shove, Ukraine has about 10 nuclear weapons at its disposal.

These are Western Russia's rust-bucket nuclear power stations, running way past their safe parameters and well beyond their expected lifespans. It's astonishing that none of them have gone into meltdown of their own accord. It wouldn't take much.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I listened carefully to Putin's message... He never once uttered the word nuclear...

Hackers would be enough. Nuclear is messy and even madmen know that...But Nukes strikes fear into the sheeple... You need public opinion on your side if youre trying to get war funding and support...

The media however, will gladly put words in anybody's mouth for a handful of mouse clicks...

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Interesting that Russia is one of the few countries that still possess low-yield tactical nukes for small scale battlefield use.

Under the MAD and non first strike policy, the US only has a deterrent of strategic nuclear weapons.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

An interesting article that entirely fails to mention that one of Putin's stated aims for invading Ukraine was to pre-empt apparent Ukrainian attempts to weaponize the plutonium-239 remaining in the Chernobyl complex, by capturing it.

Yeah, I’m sure Hitler had a list of BS reasons for invading Poland too, doesn’t mean the media in the free world had to publish them.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Zichi.

Russian leaders always go this way, but they usually get removed before things go this far.

Russia is an insecure nation. Corruption is endemic, so bribes get you everywhere. As well as the nuclear power plants Russia is vulnerable to fires in the summer. And gas pipelines make a big bang when they are damaged.

Whatever the Americans say, they will have people in Russia, and there may be covert Western military support in Ukraine at key points, with decent military hardware. Ukrainians will also find it easy to 'invade' Russia rather more quietly than their nation was invaded, and do some damage.

This isn't 1956 or 1968. The rest of the world has moved on. Putin will be replaced by the Russians, or his country will become a lot more North Korean this year.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Under the MAD and non first strike policy, the US only has a deterrent of strategic nuclear weapons.

I believe you are misinformed. The US has never formally adopted a "no first use" policy regarding its nuclear weapons. Likewise the US has a very large number of small tactical nuclear weapons in the 50-150 kiloton range, more than any other nation has than perhaps Russia. The entire inventory of B-61 gravity bombs is in the process of being refurbished and modified with a JDAM guidance kit including the required movable control fins to greatly improve accuracy. In the context of a NATO war, those weapons would be issued to the air forces of the Netherlands, Germany, UK and Italy to use in addition to being used by the USAF and possibly US Navy.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The scenario Mr. Putin has to fear most is seeing himself, his senior leadership and his nuclear arsenal destroyed by non-nuclear weapons. This is not fantasy but was a topic of serious discussion towards the end of the Cold War. By the very late 1980s it became increasingly possible to accomplish. Something like the B-2 or upcoming B-21, the first five of which are being built now with a planned first flight in a few months, can fly undetected into Russia and, using conventional heavy penetrator guided bombs that can weigh up to 15 metric tons each (a B-2 can carry two such bombs), destroy leadership targets in Moscow including deeply buried bunkers, and with other lighter (but still heavy) and more numerous high explosive heavy penetrator weapons destroy ICMB silos and the missile inside. All aspect LO tactical jets like the F-35s and before it the F-117 would hunt the mobile missile systems like RT2-PM and RS-24 and chip away at their numbers steadily. US Navy subs would destroy their SSBNs which are always tracked. Modern precision guided munitions and all aspect stealth aircraft make this possible. It could be that the nuclear balance could be tipped rapidly against the Russians without ever having to resort to the use of nuclear weapons by the NATO powers, thus deterring the Russians (or the Chinese?) from initiating a nuclear war.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The virtue of using stealth aircraft instead of launching ballistic missiles is that stealth aircraft would give the Russians no warning they were under attack until munitions were exploding and it was too late to respond. Launching one's ICBMs is highly detectable and gives the opponent plenty of time to launch their own before they lose them. Launch before lose is the flip side of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). But if one can catch the enemy unawares, kill their leadership and destroy their command and control infrastructure in a conventional first strike by stealth aircraft, then directly attack their nuclear assets with conventional weapons a nuclear war can possibly be averted.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

SO,

WHAT would Putin do if the "fractured" west decided individually, and as individuals, to send a nuclear response to even one exposure of the very first missile bunker that Putin may choose to let open?

Guessing, he would see a fractured, multiple unit response each of which would dwarf his "just joking" attempt.

It is SO heart warming and

emotionally welling

to see response from all over the western world, and many others besides, coming forward to condemn this despot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites