Is Vladimir Putin happy to risk nuclear war to avoid admitting defeat?

Putin must be aware that if he DID use nukes on Ukraine he and the rest of Russia would be consider a pariah. I could easily imagine that all of Europe, and hopefully the U.S., would ban any and all trade with Russia.
I moreover, I hope that that left wing liberals finally get their head out of their a** and recognize that communism is evil incarnate.
 

Been There said:
I sill don’t understand why Putin isn’t doing more bombing on Ukraine’s infrastructure. He could inflict some serious pain by taking out more bridges, railroads and roads. This would slow down the movement of weapons coming in from other countries. That would make an immediate difference. It’s almost as if he is intentionally attempting to keep the war going.
Click to expand...
Well because he is enjoying seeing the death of civilian Ukrainians! Someone in Russia needs to kill Putin,and end all those civilian deaths!
 
senior chef said:
Putin must be aware that if he DID use nukes on Ukraine he and the rest of Russia would be consider a pariah. I could easily imagine that all of Europe, and hopefully the U.S., would ban any and all trade with Russia.
I moreover, I hope that that left wing liberals finally get their head out of their a** and recognize that communism is evil incarnate.
Click to expand...
You don't get it, the right-wingers love Putin because Trump does. Now the moderator here should delete your post and mine as they are both political.
 

Last edited:
https://original.antiwar.com/David_...ons-pointless-war-on-behalf-of-a-fake-nation/

So let’s be clear: Washington’s dunderheaded intervention in the intramural spat between Russia and Ukraine and the accompanying global Sanctions War is the surely the stupidest, most destructive project to arise from the banks of the Potomac in modern times. And the architects of this perfidious folly – Biden, Blinkin, Sullivan, Nuland, et. al. – cannot be condemned harshly enough.
Click to expand...
 
In response to a previous post, a brilliant negotiator does not go to the table with people in high places showing any arrogance nor rudeness nor any inkling that they don't "like" them. "Fake It Till You Make It" is how it works for brilliant negotiators who want to save the world from the likes of Putin who has his finger hovering over the nuclear button under his desk.

Even if they don't feel like it, savvy negotiators smile, are friendly, show respect, shake hands, etc till they win their negotiation talks. The media may choose to call this a showing of "Love for Putin" which is opposite of truth because we all know what game some in the media are playing, which destroys the world instead of saving the world. We were so close.

If someone goes to the negotiation table with arrogance and disrespect, they won't be taken seriously, will be laughed at, considered weak, and will be shown the door, not a deal.
`
 
Last edited:
He probably isn't. After all he has a nice palatial home and kids from what I understand. But, I do think there is a 20% chance he may go nuclear on the mistaken belief that there won't be an consequences.

One other thing. There is a thing in marital life called the exit-affair. One partner wants to leave but doesn't have the guts to tell the other. So she has an affair, hubby finds out, and starts divorce proceedings. Putin might just start a small exit-war with NATO.

He instigates a small battle or two with NATO, then pulls back saying he will give up the goal of taking Ukraine since he is a great peacemaker as compared to the evil NATO war mongers. He wasn't defeated. He sacraficed his goals in the name of peace. What a guy!
 
senior chef said:
Putin must be aware that if he DID use nukes on Ukraine he and the rest of Russia would be consider a pariah. I could easily imagine that all of Europe, and hopefully the U.S., would ban any and all trade with Russia.
I moreover, I hope that that left wing liberals finally get their head out of their a** and recognize that communism is evil incarnate.
Click to expand...
Just so you know: Russia is no longer Communist, the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Additionally, it's now the right wingers that are in love with Putin and Russia.
 
Harry Le Hermit said:
Militarily, it is clear Putin is on the defensive. However, the more this continues, the more the western alliance is in disarray. The European
Union is struggling and failing to keep everyone on the same page. There is Hungary being a big obstacle and likely Italy becoming an obstacle very soon.

There are significant numbers of people, very upset over the cost of energy and overall impact on their lifestyles. These are countries and citizens that when placing blame... have the U.S. as the permanent "default setting." There have been marches, which have quickly been labeled as Putin's rabble rousers, as would be expected by their ruling elite. (Sound familiar)?

However, the turmoil is still in its infancy, and more than a few EU leaders have warned of significant social unrest, as their economies unwind.
Click to expand...
Putin's use of a nuclear weapon would immediately get everyone on the same page, and I'm sure he knows that.

"Putin has sometimes been called an expert in the strategy of “escalating to de-escalate” – averting conflict by threatening a massive retaliation." .......I think his long-time experienced high-ranking military officers get credit for that. But most of them are gone, now.

For me, the question of a nuclear attack is "How would we respond?" Nuclear Shock & Awe? I'm sure that would be a no. Targeted conventional weapons retaliation? Wait & See? Humanitarian Aid? Throw money at it? Pretend it never happened or that we're not sure what that was or where it came from.

Seriously, I wonder how we'd respond? And with everything that's going on with this situation, that's the thing that worries me most.
 
Murrmurr said:
Putin's use of a nuclear weapon would immediately get everyone on the same page, and I'm sure he knows that.
Click to expand...
Yes, there would be wide spread public condemnation. Privately not so much, imo. We seem to think Russia is a pariah, but most of the world's population distrusts and/or despises the western alliance more than Russia. By western alliance, that would mean the U.S.

Even our allies in the western alliance would stab us in the back at first chance.
Murrmurr said:
Seriously, I wonder how we'd respond? And with everything that's going on with this situation, that's the thing that worries me most.
Click to expand...
We would likely pressure Ukraine to negotiate away Donbas and hope for peace thereafter. We have everything to lose and Russia has a long history of not caring about its own people.

I put my rose colored glasses away, a long time ago.
 
Harry Le Hermit said:
Yes, there would be wide spread public condemnation. Privately not so much, imo. We seem to think Russia is a pariah, but most of the world's population distrusts and/or despises the western alliance more than Russia. By western alliance, that would mean the U.S.

Even our allies in the western alliance would stab us in the back at first chance.

We would likely pressure Ukraine to negotiate away Donbas and hope for peace thereafter. We have everything to lose and Russia has a long history of not caring about its own people.

I put my rose colored glasses away, a long time ago.
Click to expand...
We'd still have *friendly* allies until the threat of further nuclear attacks ended.

Putin would want Crimea also. I'm not sure even a nuclear attack would deter the Ukrainians. I think they're willing to fight to the death. A lot of them would run to Mother Russia, of course.

"We have everything to lose" What? Financially? World status-wise?

I think our navy would want to go all-in on the Black Sea, or wherever it is Putin's navy keeps their big boats, and with conventional weapons. They'll want to, but that doesn't mean they'd be allowed to. If they did get the nod, I'm sure it would come too late to matter.
 
Last edited:
Murrmurr said:
We'd still have *friendly* allies until the threat of further nuclear attacks ended.
Click to expand...
That's where those rose colored glasses need to be removed. Europeans want their economy back and nothing else matters. In other words, they will turn on the USA to get the Gas turned back on.
Murrmurr said:
Putin would want Crimea also. I'm not sure even a nuclear attack would deter the Ukrainians. I think they're willing to fight to the death. A lot of them will run to Mother Russia, of course.
Click to expand...
He already has Crimea.
Murrmurr said:
"We have everything to lose" What? Financially? World status-wise?
Click to expand...
The collapse of the western alliance, trading blocs, rules, regulations, etc. This is about a lot more than Ukraine. Always was.
Murrmurr said:
I think our navy would want to go all-in on the Black Sea, or wherever it is Putin's navy keeps their big boats, and with conventional weapons. They'll want to, but that doesn't mean they'd be allowed to. If they did get the nod, I'm sure it would come too late to matter.
Click to expand...
Currently Russia and China had their big boats sitting off the Alaskan coast. It was part of the Vostok Exercise. Generally speaking the Russian Submarine force can be found in such "remote" places as the Sargasso Sea.
 
Harry Le Hermit said:
That's where those rose colored glasses need to be removed. Europeans want their economy back and nothing else matters. In other words, they will turn on the USA to get the Gas turned back on.

He already has Crimea.

The collapse of the western alliance, trading blocs, rules, regulations, etc. This is about a lot more than Ukraine. Always was.

Currently Russia and China had their big boats sitting off the Alaskan coast. It was part of the Vostok Exercise. Generally speaking the Russian Submarine force can be found in such "remote" places as the Sargasso Sea.
Click to expand...
I should have specified...if the attack were somewhere within Europe, and it would be. I'm certain the EU would be more worried about a sustained nuclear attack than they are about gas money.

"He already has Crimea." From his perspective.

He's got a concentration of large, armed boats on the Black (or maybe Red) Sea. And our navy is well aware of those movements. I honestly don't think our military doesn't have a plan, however, our leaders suffer a great lack of imagination and focus. Also, it concerns me that, among our top military advisors, the dinosaurs way out number the evolved.
 
Last edited:
mrstime said:
Do you think the free world should have just allowed Putin to take Ukraine?
Click to expand...

Did you read the article or just the title? I suspect you know little or nothing about 'Ukraine'; start here to educate yourself. It's fascinating and I think you will enjoy the read. The territory currently called 'Ukraine' only became an independent country in 1991 with the dissolution of the USSR. The current boundaries were established by Lenin, Stalin and Kruschev. So Stockman is correct to call it a 'fake nation'.

From another article by Stockman I posted previously What the hell was Washington thinking:
What in the hell were those bloody-minded Washington/NATO neocons thinking? At any time in the last nine months they could have had a diplomatic settlement with Russia that would have:
  • Avoided/ended the war in Ukraine, thereby saving tens of thousands of Ukrainian lives and hundreds of billion of economic cost and destruction;
  • Allowed the Russian speaking population of the Donbas a substantial degree of self-governance and autonomy from the hostile government in Kiev;
  • Permitted the historic Russian territory of Crimea to remain under Russian control per the wishes of the overwhelming share of its Russian-speaking population;
  • Kept NATO out of Ukraine and its missiles away from Russia’s doorstep;
  • Removed NATO missile bases from the the old Warsaw Pact countries, where NATO had expanded in breach of Washington’s solemn promise made at the time of the German reunification to not extend NATO "one inch to the east" .
Would this have furthered the national security of the US and Europe, permitted Europe’s then flourishing peaceful commerce with Russia to continue and avoided the current global plague of soaring energy and food prices caused by the Sanctions War?

Yes, it would have. In spades!
Click to expand...

The war actually started in 2014 and Washington's pawprints are all over it.
 
Harry Le Hermit said:
Yes, there would be wide spread public condemnation. Privately not so much, imo. We seem to think Russia is a pariah, but most of the world's population distrusts and/or despises the western alliance more than Russia. By western alliance, that would mean the U.S.

Even our allies in the western alliance would stab us in the back at first chance.

We would likely pressure Ukraine to negotiate away Donbas and hope for peace thereafter. We have everything to lose and Russia has a long history of not caring about its own people.

I put my rose colored glasses away, a long time ago.
Click to expand...
You think Canada would stab you in the back?
 
I think this recent faux annexation vote is an indicator Putin or Russia may be getting ready to call it. Once annexed they do can do all sorts of stuff including prepare for another invasion down the road. None of this is going to stand but could be 'a' sign they want it to end.

And this pipeline damage or sabotage. I would say false flag by Putin/Russia but they stand to lose if a peace is declared and Europe lifts some sanctions so they can get the gas flowing. And why not just shut it down. Most scenarios I still come back why don't they just completely shut it down for leverage.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top