Is Putin Truly Ready to Push the Nuclear Button? Washington calls Moscow's bluff

[Social Media]

 

Tensions between Russia and the West have escalated further following reports that Ukraine has used six ATACMS missiles supplied by the United States, striking targets deep within Russian-occupied territory. This development comes on the heels of a chilling warning from the Kremlin, suggesting that such actions could trigger a nuclear response under an updated doctrine approved by Russian President Vladimir Putin. The question now looms: will Putin act on these threats?  

 

In principle, he now has the option. With changes to Russia's nuclear doctrine officially approved, Putin has lowered the threshold for deploying nuclear weapons. The new guidelines allow for the use of nuclear force in response to attacks using conventional weapons, such as missiles, aircraft, or drones, by any state. Notably, these criteria appear to encompass the US-supplied missiles used by Ukraine.  

 

Adding to the alarming rhetoric, Moscow has redefined an attack on its territory by a non-nuclear power—like Ukraine—backed by a nuclear power, such as the United States, as equivalent to a joint assault. This doctrine represents a stark escalation in nuclear posturing and raises questions about how far Putin is willing to go.  

 

Despite the dramatic shift in rhetoric, several factors suggest that Russia is unlikely to escalate the conflict to a nuclear level. For one, Putin’s most significant ally, China, has consistently signaled its opposition to the use of nuclear weapons. Beijing’s disapproval carries considerable weight, as Moscow relies heavily on Chinese diplomatic and economic support amidst the strain of international sanctions.

 

Moreover, the timing of any nuclear escalation would likely be politically disastrous for Moscow. The current signals from the United States indicate that Donald Trump, a potential future president, remains committed to his promise of negotiating a swift resolution to the conflict—an outcome that could favor Russian interests. A nuclear strike would undoubtedly derail any such diplomatic opportunities, alienating Russia further from the international community and potentially jeopardizing long-term strategic goals.  

 

Nevertheless, there remains an undercurrent of unpredictability. Few anticipated Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, an action that defied conventional wisdom about the Kremlin’s willingness to take high-stakes risks. Over a thousand days later, the stakes are even higher, and the West must once again rely on its ability to correctly interpret Moscow's intentions.  

 

As the war drags on, the specter of nuclear escalation underscores the precarious balance of global power and the profound risks associated with miscalculation. While compelling arguments suggest that Russia will not resort to nuclear weapons, the world watches nervously, hoping that this dangerous gamble does not spiral into catastrophe.

 

Based on a report by Sky News 2024-11-21

 

 

 

[harryviking]

he will N OT push any button....it probably wont work anyway. He will be shunned by even those helping him today if he does. It will be the end game for Russia and he knows it!!

[pattayasan]

Nuclear, schmuclear. Next he'll be saying he's gonna use chemical weapons.

[roquefort]

Biden playing the ultimate game of Russian roulette.

[Denim]

Considering what the aftermath of Chernobyl looked like you would have to be truly mad to want to see vast areas of your country turned into a nuclear wasteland. It is not any kind of victory but an admission of defeat.

[frank83628]

27 minutes ago, roquefort said:

Biden playing the ultimate game of Russian roulette.

But with the lives of 100,000's of innocents, not his

[frank83628]

42 minutes ago, harryviking said:

he will N OT push any button....it probably wont work anyway. He will be shunned by even those helping him today if he does. It will be the end game for Russia and he knows it!!

You need to update you opinion of Russia, the cold war ended a long time ago

[RichardColeman]

I do not think he will do it, BUT, I also do not think he will agree to any peace that means Russia having to pay trillions in reparations to the Ukraine for the damage they have done by starting the war. He is egotistical and would rather continue a war than lose face and money

[pattayasan]

10 minutes ago, Denim said:

Considering what the aftermath of Chernobyl looked like you would have to be truly mad to want to see vast areas of your country turned into a nuclear wasteland. It is not any kind of victory but an admission of defeat.

 

Yes, Putin should think about the inevitable consequences of his first use if nuclear weapons. If he hasn't his generals have surely reminded him.

[pattayasan]

1 minute ago, RichardColeman said:

I do not think he will do it, BUT, I also do not think he will agree to any peace that means Russia having to pay trillions in reparations to the Ukraine for the damage they have done by starting the war. He is egotistical and would rather continue a war than lose face and money

 

It's his decision to make.

[roquefort]

11 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

But with the lives of 100,000's of innocents, not his

Of course. It's a proxy war, don't forget.

[frank83628]

2 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

I do not think he will do it, BUT, I also do not think he will agree to any peace that means Russia having to pay trillions in reparations to the Ukraine for the damage they have done by starting the war. He is egotistical and would rather continue a war than lose face and money

Why would he pay reparations? Has the USA ever paid reparations?

[frank83628]

Imagine if this was on the other way round and what hypocrite US would be saying. 

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/17wh5twkcM/ 

 

[dinsdale]

No button will be pushed it's standard blustering. What will happen is an increase in missile and drone attacks on Ukraine. De-escalation is what's needed not escalation. 

[OneMoreFarang]

There is a difference between using nuclear weapons and using nuclear weapons. Will Putin use big size nuclear weapons and target the USA or UK? No.

But how about a little nuke somewhere in Ukraine? How will Ukraine and the rest of the world react if he would do that? A lot of talking, sure. But will anybody react with a nuclear strike against any Russian territory or assets? I don't think so.

That means Putin has a nuclear option, and if it's only to show the world that he can.

[pattayasan]

5 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

There is a difference between using nuclear weapons and using nuclear weapons. Will Putin use big size nuclear weapons and target the USA or UK? No.

But how about a little nuke somewhere in Ukraine? How will Ukraine and the rest of the world react if he would do that? A lot of talking, sure. But will anybody react with a nuclear strike against any Russian territory or assets? I don't think so.

That means Putin has a nuclear option, and if it's only to show the world that he can.

 

If Putin uses small nuclear weapons in Ukraine, NATO uses big nuclear weapons in Russia and Putin knows it.

[nobodysfriend]

The use of nukes would trigger a response with nukes .

He knows this and I do not think that he wants it .

It would mean the end to his regime .

He is playing poker and bluffing ... I hope .

[herfiehandbag]

1 hour ago, pattayasan said:

Nuclear, schmuclear. Next he'll be saying he's gonna use chemical weapons.

The Soviet Union had a vast store of chemical weapons - in particular nerve agents ,persistent, to deny the use of facilities such as airfields and logistics facilities on a long term basis, and non persistent nerve and blood agents to kill large numbers of unprotected troops and civilians quickly. A significant proportion of their artillery,  ammunition had chemical filling, and Soviet doctrine regarded it as simply another option along with high explosive and other fillings and fuzing options. Soviet doctrine was to use chemical weapons well before nuclear ones.

 

The Russians retained, and have brought out of storage to use, much of the materiel and equipments from that era, tanks, armoured vehicles, (which were designed to be used on a chemical battlefield), along with the traditional artillery (122mm and 152mm calibre) and rocket systems that would deliver it.

 

It is no stretch at all to imagine, in fact I would say that it is almost certain, that they retain the munitions, and would be prepared to use them.

 

It is "low tech", requires relatively little training to use (if you can load a high explosive shell you can load a chemical one) and fire it.

[Sandboxer]

The clueless uneducated blue collar western trash AN demographics which are really strongly represented in this thread are going to be very disappointed right around the middle of January.😂

 

 

[Presnock]

40 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Why would he pay reparations? Has the USA ever paid reparations?

The US rebuilt Japan and Germany after WWII, not only rebuilt but enabled them to become world economic successes.  

[jippytum]

Permission for western missiles pemitted to be fired directly into Russia is an escalation of the conflict. 

However this will strengthen the bargaining

 power of President Trump when he assumes office. 

Ukraine have been resticted to retaliation with one hand tied behind their backs for too long. 

[lordgrinz]

Back to the Cold War, nice.

[john donson]

nuclear bomb, will the fallout not hit russia in the face?

[newbee2022]

3 hours ago, harryviking said:

he will N OT push any button....it probably wont work anyway. He will be shunned by even those helping him today if he does. It will be the end game for Russia and he knows it!!

Well, it's part of fear mongering. But if he would push the button it will be probably our doom's day.

[zig]

1 hour ago, herfiehandbag said:

The Soviet Union had a vast store of chemical weapons - in particular nerve agents ,persistent, to deny the use of facilities such as airfields and logistics facilities on a long term basis, and non persistent nerve and blood agents to kill large numbers of unprotected troops and civilians quickly.

 

[...]

 

It is no stretch at all to imagine, in fact I would say that it is almost certain, that they retain the munitions, and would be prepared to use them.

There have been numerous reports that Russia has used such weapons in Ukraine already on multiple occasions.

[Eric Loh]

Putin is at it again threatening to use nuclear weapons. His nuclear war rhetoric since launching its assault on Ukraine in Feb 2022 is sounding stale. Multiple times he has threatened nuclear respond and all can see through his bluff. It is a zero sum game for him and Russia if he use any sort of nuclear weapons and he knows it. He don't have the support of his key allies China and India to initiate any sort of nuclear retaliation. 

[pattayasan]

2 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

The Soviet Union had a vast store of chemical weapons - in particular nerve agents ,persistent, to deny the use of facilities such as airfields and logistics facilities on a long term basis, and non persistent nerve and blood agents to kill large numbers of unprotected troops and civilians quickly. A significant proportion of their artillery,  ammunition had chemical filling, and Soviet doctrine regarded it as simply another option along with high explosive and other fillings and fuzing options. Soviet doctrine was to use chemical weapons well before nuclear ones.

 

The Russians retained, and have brought out of storage to use, much of the materiel and equipments from that era, tanks, armoured vehicles, (which were designed to be used on a chemical battlefield), along with the traditional artillery (122mm and 152mm calibre) and rocket systems that would deliver it.

 

It is no stretch at all to imagine, in fact I would say that it is almost certain, that they retain the munitions, and would be prepared to use them.

 

It is "low tech", requires relatively little training to use (if you can load a high explosive shell you can load a chemical one) and fire it.

 

I agreed with everything until "would be prepared to use them". The consequences for Russia would be incalculable.

[James105]

2 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

The use of nukes would trigger a response with nukes .

He knows this and I do not think that he wants it .

It would mean the end to his regime .

He is playing poker and bluffing ... I hope .

 

I don't mind people playing poker and bluffing, but I do object to someone at the end of their presidency in the US and the idiotic war mongerers in the Labour UK party escalating a war that was on the verge of de-escalating just to test this theory.  The left have labelled Putin an evil deranged facist dictactor on one hand, then claim he is far too sensible to use the arsenal at his disposal on the other.   Which is it?  

[billd766]

3 hours ago, harryviking said:

he will N OT push any button....it probably wont work anyway. He will be shunned by even those helping him today if he does. It will be the end game for Russia and he knows it!!

Whilst I sort of agree with you, ANY nuclear strike by Russia on any NATP country (should) be followed by a massive nuclear strike and make Russia uninhabitable for the majority of the population. 

 

I can see 2 big problems.

 

1   Putin is quite old and may come to the conclusion that he will die soon anyway, so why not take the nuclear option and many millions more people with him?

 

2   The other problem is that with Trump taking over in the USA, nobody has any idea (probably Trump also) what the US response will be.

 

The US will probably try to remain neutral, until the US forces are attacked directly on the ground, at sea or on the US mainland.

 

That will be a major problem for Trump. Whether to aid his allies or his enemies.

 

It may also cause a problem in the Middle East between Israel and all the Arab states around them, which may also go nuclear.

[JonnyF]

Putin won't do anything until Trump comes to power and there is a coherent President in place that he can have a real conversation with.

 

He knows this is just Biden (or more accurately those pulling his strings) trying to create problems for Trump on day one. Akin to a child who has been ejected from the classroom dropping a stink bomb on the way out. 

 

Shame on the Dems for playing games with the lives of innocent people. Can't say I'm surprised though, we have seen there are no depths they are not prepared to sink to.