What David Patreus said about Russia using nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

[speak easy]

Retired general David Petraeus predicts the US would destroy Russia's military in Ukraine and sink its naval fleet if it used nuclear weapons

Speaking to ABC News on Sunday, Petraeus, who served as CIA director and commander of coalition forces in Iraq, spelt out how he believed the US would respond in the event of the nuclear attack by Russia, though said he had not spoken to US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan about the issue.

"Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a NATO, a collective effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black Sea," said Petraeus.

https://www.businessinsider.com/petraeus-us-would-destroy-russian-army-ukraine-if-nukes-used-2022-10

[brer cat]

1. This is scary to contemplate.

I don't think there is any question that Biden/NATO would respond strongly to a nuclear attack by Russia, I just hope that we never get to that point. A nuclear attack is something I hope Putin doesn't seriously contemplate.

[speak easy]

2. I've heard a number of commentators talking about sinking Russia's Black Sea Fleet.

It would not be an attack on Russian territory, so to speak, but certainly a declaration of war.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

18. It would be an attack on Russian territory,

any nation's ship at sea is considered sovereign territory.

[thomski64]

41. A declaration of war..

..would then leave the Tucker Carlsons of the media in actual legal treason territory. Not that they aren't already... Also, too one of those fan blade
cruise missiles into Putin's dacha, would be an
appropriate jesture..

[Mariana]

122. No, they would not be in legal treason territory.

The Constitution defines the crime of treason. Speech in support of the enemy is not included. Even during a declared war, people have the right to express their opinions.

[Lovie777]

3. NATO.....

in general.

[PJMcK]

4. What Patraeus didn't add to his thoughts

If Putin were to use nukes of any type, Patraeus says the West (i.e., the U.S.) would destroy Russia’s forces in Ukraine and Crimea as well as sinking the Russian Black Sea fleet. What he doesn’t say is this:

What will Putin do in response?

The escalation that would follow leads to Armageddon. Putin has gone all-in with his war. He’s very unlikely to back down because this has become existential for him. If he loses this war, in any way, he’s in big trouble with his supporters. I think he’s committed to his war such that he’ll burn everything down if he can’t win.

This is an extremely dangerous time for the world.

[Irish_Dem]

7. That's the point of the message by Petraeus. Use nukes and it will not go well for Russia.

It is one thing to lose the war, another thing altogether to lose Russia.

[70sEraVet]

25. "If he loses this war ...... he's in big trouble with his supporters"

If he loses the war, he'll be in big trouble with some VERY powerful oligarchs, who have been losing ENORMOUS sums of money due to international sanctions (not to mention the luxury yachts, mansions and private jets that have been confiscated). They won't be satisfied with merely throwing him out of a window!

[Texin]

50. Well right now, those "supporters" aren't very happy with how things are going

with Putin's war of choice. If there is any single group that would be powerful enough to usher in his end, it's them (and there are certainly more and more of that group that are "falling" out of high buildings for criticizing him).

[Yorkie Mom]

52. This right here!

[Irish_Dem]

5. The US is sending Putin a message from a retired general and former CIA director.

Hopefully Putin will think twice before using nukes.

[GoCubsGo]

11. I think he's actually sending it to the people surrounding Putin.

Putin may give the order, but they're the ones who have to carry it out. The question is: Are they as crazy as he is? I tend to think not, for the most part. Hopefully, there would be a coup rather than following those orders.

[Irish_Dem]

13. Yes good point. The Russian generals got the message I am sure.

Generals respect other generals and listen.

[oldsoftie]

36. I believe the RU generals are in constant contact with US/Allied officials.

I would LIKE to think that an order by Putin to use nukes would result in Putin being taken out in some manner &/or the order being ignored.

[Irish_Dem]

75. There was talk that the RU generals were refusing to take the calls from US generals.

But I don't believe it.
Especially now.

[oldsoftie]

79. I don't either. I think that would've "leaked" to major news orgs if true

And by NOW it would seem that the Generals would be more interested in self preservation. I mean, we've openly announced that there are open lines of communication, so they wouldnt have to worry about being labeled a traitor for talking to us
Hopefully

[Irish_Dem]

84. Russian generals must know their lives and wealth are at stake.

Last edited Mon Oct 3, 2022, 09:05 PM - Edit history (1)

RU generals were sent by Putin to the frontline to be killed by Ukrainians.

The remaining generals must have that fact on their minds.

Additionally they are quite wealthy due to pilfering military funds.

They could lose it all if Putin continues on a destructive path.

[oldsoftie]

103. True; I hadn't thought of their wealth. But I'm sure THEY have!!

[Irish_Dem]

106. Their dachas, mistresses, Swiss bank accounts, all of it.

[oldsoftie]

108. They wont wanna give up DAT ASS!!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

110. They need to do a Lavrentiy Beria on his ass. nt

[bluestarone]

43. That's the way i see it as well

If it were pooty's choice, i fear FULL SCALE world wide nuclear war. (end of times like scenario) The message was to those surrounding pooty! The message is basically, (:YOU GUYS BETTER STOP HIM!

[Ilsa]

12. This is the chess move. Someone

in the administration asked him to appear as a retired expert guest in warfare and strategy to lay it out for Russian leadership.

[Irish_Dem]

26. Exactly, retired (USArmy) general and former head of the CIA laying it out clearly.

Biden recently stated that if Putin uses nukes the US would take strong action.
But didn't give the specifics.

Biden sent out Petraeus to talk man to man with the Russian generals and lay it all out.
Just so there is no doubt.

It is well known in the US military that retired generals speak out when they are asked to do
so by active duty military or the US president.

[Ilsa]

29. 👍🤝👏 I Like. nt

[MarineCombatEngineer]

31. +100. nt

[speak easy]

58. "every ship in the Black Sea"

It is the Russian Navy who will be paying the most attention.

[Irish_Dem]

74. Biden has 100,000 US troops stationed across Europe. NATO has 40,000 on the Russian border.

The Russian Army better be paying attention too.

https://www.axios.com/2022/03/23/where-100000-us-troops-are-stationed-europe

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/05/18/nato-now-has-40-000-soldiers-on-europe-s-border-with-russia

[Strelnikov_]

117. Excellent point . . . Note how there was no mention of 'invasion'

Simply that all Russian assets in Ukranian territory, pre-2014, will be destroyed by the (now apparent) much superior NATO air assets.

Very measured.

Essentially, NATO becomes Ukraine's air force.

[Irish_Dem]

119. Good catch, I missed that point about pre-2014 territory.

Yes I agree, very measured, calm, specific.

Yep, NATO comes in and takes care of business.

[DarthDem]

6. Petraeus

Is speaking as a warfighter. It's easy to think about escalation, but it's also easy to think of paths where this does not escalate. And where Mr. Putin knows that his threats are empty.

[Irish_Dem]

8. He is also a former head of the CIA. He is talking shit with Putin, psy-ops war.

[Irish_Dem]

101. Petraeus is speaking honestly to Putin. And letting him know it is over and time to leave Ukraine.

Petraeus is saving lives.

[Chainfire]

9. I believe that Putin has conscripted the 300,000 troops because he knows that he can't use

tactical nukes on the battlefield, so he plans to win with human waves like the Soviet Union did.

[speak easy]

10. But unlike WWII, the slaughter will be live on social media.

Putin would need to shut down the net to stop people watching the war on Telegram.

[Irish_Dem]

27. Putin may have to get total control of the Russian media.

And shut down reality.

[maxsolomon]

65. He's already done that.

there is no independent Russian media left. there hasn't been anything to counter the state narrative in most of Russia for years.

[Irish_Dem]

68. If the troops are communicating on social media, everything is not shut down.

Putin has a bit more work to do on that score.

[Mister Ed]

44. And also, unlike WWII, the soldiers would not be defending their home.

They'd be much less likely to make such a staggering sacrifice just to support the invasion of another land.

[Irish_Dem]

16. Yes but the meat grinder approach is useless with the UKR superior modern war strategy/tactics.

Putin is just buying time until he can freeze out Europe so they will insist Zelensky surrender.

[Chainfire]

32. The Human wave worked, in part, because the Soviet Troops were fighting to liberate their homeland

from a truly evil invader. They also had a quality that is not present today; stoicism. It was a quality that was highly valued in the Soviet troops at the time. Their stated theory was that, "A man who is destined to be hung can not drown."


I suspect that the untrained and therefore undisciplined Russian troops will be as big, or a bigger, danger to their officers than the Ukrainians; and the officers will know that. I believe that these troops will find the first opportunity to surrender as long as the Ukrainians prisoners with some respect. (the word gets out)

Putin is failing in almost every aspect of waging war. The first lesson here; don't put a mid-level KGB officer (or a corporal) in charge of your army. The second lesson is don't put military leaders in their positions because of their loyalty, but because of their professionalism. Ass kissing may work inside the Russian Army, but it fails miserably on the battlefield.

[Irish_Dem]

42. Yep. Putin thinks he is Stalin and this is the Battle of Stalingrad.

And yes of course I think we are going to see the conscripts doing some officer fragging.
And surrendering.

Putin is failing because he is fighting the war like a KGB agent, not a military professional.
And he has a corrupt general staff.

[rubbersole]

19. For that to work one has to feed and arm conscripted troops.

Pootie doesn't seem to be pulling that off.

[Irish_Dem]

28. Not if he is just sending them to the front line to be killed.

Why waste food, supplies, uniforms, bullets on men who are going to be killed right away?

[ancianita]

14. Did Petraeus mention anything about Russia's remaining nuclear submarines across the oceans?

If you come for the king, better not miss or worse, wound.

[Irish_Dem]

17. We don't like to talk about Russian boomers off the coast of the US and Europe.

At the beginning of the invasion, Putin put his troops on high nuclear alert, so we can assume the Russian subs
are positioned accordingly.

[ancianita]

20. Don't like to talk about reality? Okay.

[Irish_Dem]

33. The US did the same thing in WWII.

The Japanese bombed and sent torpedos from subs on the West Coast of the US during WWII.

It was kept secret from the US public and no one talks about it even today.

We know there are RU subs off the eastern coast of the US now and it is downplayed.

There are also US boomers on their tail all the time.

[ancianita]

38. I see. Thanks. Now I get what you meant by "we don't like to talk about..."

[Marcuse]

48. There has been some "talk".

[ancianita]

60. lol okay. But not authoritative talk

This doesn't help our credibility. Just sayin'.

[Irish_Dem]

71. I have to watch this movie.

I am a big WWII buff but have not seen this.
Usually I like drama, not comedies.

But this is Spielberg and has a great cast, I have to watch it.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

80. It's pretty darn funny.

I have it in my DVD library in my truck and I'll pull it out and watch it from time to time.

[Irish_Dem]

85. Thanks. I just put it in my Amazon Prime watch list.

I rarely watch comedies, but this looks good.

Speaking of comedies have you seen Down Periscope?

I am a huge fan of submarine movies, so I watched this even though it was a comedy.

It was so good I watched it twice.

It is with Kelsey Grammer who was quite good in the role.

Yes it is a bit dated, but very well done I think.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

87. I have that one also in my library,

my favorite scene is where they fool William H. Macy into thinking they're just a bunch of drunk fisherman.

[Irish_Dem]

90. Yes so many good scenes.

I cannot pick out one, that is why I had to watch the whole movie again.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

91. Have you seen the movie Hunter/Killer with Gerard Butler yet?

If not, I would highly recommend it, it's full of submarine action.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1846589/

[Irish_Dem]

93. Oh yes I loved it. Great movie.

First movie I had seen with Gerald Butler.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

94. He is a great actor, comedy and action, good guy, bad guy,

he's just an all-around great actor.

My favorite movie of his is Den of Thieves.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1259528/
If you like action movies, this is a great one.

[Irish_Dem]

95. Thanks I just put in my watch list.

Have you seen Angel Has Fallen?
I am also going to watch that one too.

Olympus Has Fallen is very good.

I don't like all the shooting in action movies, but I like a good plot and suspense.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

96. Angel has fallen is a great movie also.

He just has so many great movies.

[Irish_Dem]

99. Yes he is good. Going to watch Den of Thieves now and then Angel.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

100. Enjoy.

[Irish_Dem]

102. Thanks.

Five minutes in and bullets are flying.

Thanks I am going to have a Gerald Butler movie nite!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

23. And you can be sure that there are US/NATO Hunter/Killer subs

shadowing and ready to sink them if they show any signs of preparing to launch their missiles.

[Irish_Dem]

30. Exactly. I am sure the cat and mouse game is in high gear.

I wonder if Biden has given orders to the sub commanders to take action as soon as the RU missile bays are loaded?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

34. Missile bays are already loaded when the boomers leave their mooring,

but there are definite signs when a boomer is getting ready to launch, like ascending to a certain depth, missile doors opening, etc., at that point, especially in this tense atmosphere, the boomer would end up with a couple of fishes up their tail end.

[Irish_Dem]

72. I thought there was a final loading when the sub's launch team authenticates the launch order?

I assume that when Putin invaded Ukraine and put his troops on high nuclear alert, Biden did the same thing.

So I thought that automatically moves the sub's nuke missiles to final loading bay?

So high alert means some steps are removed in the launch sequence?

But what do I know, I am just an Air Force brat who is silly enough to get into an argument with a Marine.

At any rate yes Russian sub missile doors open and they will soon be drinking vodka in hell.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

76. You're thinking of Cruise Missiles,

SLBM's are city killers and are loaded into the missile tubes before leaving dock.

[Irish_Dem]

86. Good God. Yikes locked and loaded as they say.

I always thought there was an extra step, they had to go from missile bay to launch tubes.
Somewhat reassuring.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

81. I had a friend who was stationed on a Ohio class Boomer, I won't say which one,

he told me that they referred to the missile bay as Sherwood Forest because of all the launch tubes.

[Irish_Dem]

88. Jeebus God.

If the Russians open their missile doors, the sub and crew will end up like those little containers of fish food you sprinkle into fish tanks.

And the Russians know it.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

89. The Russian Admirals are under no illusions as to what will happen if they attempt

a launch and I'm quite sure that Pres. Biden and the JCoS have made it crystal clear that any indication of a launch will result in the crew meeting Davey Jones in person.

[Irish_Dem]

92. I agree. Biden, Joint Chiefs are unified in their resolve and it has gone down the chain of command

Perhaps this was done in the beginning of the invasion when Putin put his troops on high nuclear alert.
Biden put US troops on high alert too. With orders to kill with any indication of a launch.

Both Russian and US sub crews know how this could end.

[3Hotdogs]

15. Added thought. Don't you think there is a non-nuclear missile, right now, aimed to go right up

Putin's ass? I'm sure, we know where he is at any given moment.

[Irish_Dem]

22. Putin was said to be "resting" at one of his country mansions.

Most likely hiding in an underground bunker.

I doubt we can get to him. He is very well guarded and protected.

He is the richest man in the world and that buys you a lot of protection.

The only chance is to get some of his guards to flip.

[ancianita]

24. Yes. Don't know about NATO, but the US military never shows its cards.

[speak easy]

35. Which is why Patreus' comments are more like to be PsyOps than strategy.

[ancianita]

40. Cool

[Captain Zero]

63. It could be psyops for the Russian public/army

If Putin uses a nuke, our children in uniform will be eliminated in Ukraine and Crimea, and elsewhere, like on all naval vessels.

[speak easy]

64. The speculation is that he would not use nukes on the battlefield

but rather, show his determination by a (big) strategic strike on Snake Island.

What should we make of Russia’s nuclear threats?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct33ph

[Chainfire]

39. The problem is that you have to be damn sure that you get him on the first try.

Otherwise, if he survived an attack "on Russia" and on his person, you start WWIII, and cities all over the world become smoking holes of melted glass.

The best thing that could happen would be if Putin fell out of a window, or died of acute lead poisoning. His demise needs to come from inside Russia. You better believe that there are a lot of highly placed Russians that are thinking the same thing. Nobody wants a madman to get them vaporized.

[JohnnyRingo]

21. I believe the whole world would converge on Russia

For the survival of the planet Putin would have to be removed and denuclearized. I think it's that likelihood that keeps N Korea's Kim Jung Un reined in..

[BradAllison]

37. Hard to believe this is a discussion in 2022.

Then again, it hard believe a lot of things.

[William769]

45. K&R.

[Wicked Blue]

46. Newsweek cites military sources on possible "decapitation strike" on Kremlin

Excerpt from Sept. 29 Newsweek article by By William M. Arkin

Biden Thinks Non-Nuclear Threats Will Stop Putin. His Military Doesn't

"Details about what "decisively" means have not been publicly revealed. The military sources tell Newsweek that there are subtle moves being made with regard to nuclear threats, including moving submarines and aircraft and drilling B-52 bombers. But they stress that non-nuclear military options—the use of conventional weapons and special operations, as well as cyber and space attack—are front and center, to include a decapitation strike to kill Putin in the heart of the Kremlin."

https://www.newsweek.com/2022/10/14/biden-thinks-non-nuclear-threats-will-stop-putin-his-military-doesnt-1747343.html

(my italics)

The following day, Newsweek published this:

Russia Says U.S. Plans for Decapitation Strike Against Putin Are 'Delusional'
By Giulia Carbonaro On 9/30/22 at 4:05 AM EDT

A decapitation strike to kill President Vladimir Putin in the heart of the Kremlin—suggested by a Pentagon officer to Newsweek as one of the non-nuclear military options considered by the U.S. Department of Defense to respond to the Russian leader's nuclear threats—is a "delusional" argument escalating a "reckless rhetoric," according to Russia's embassy in Washington, D.C.

The embassy directly addressed Newsweek's article quoting the anonymous Pentagon officer's statement, saying that the possible U.S. reactions to a Russian nuclear strike listed in the piece were "crazy options."

"I would like to believe that such delusional arguments do not reflect the official position of the U.S. military department," the Russian embassy in Washington, D.C. said. "We proceed from the fact that Washington is well aware of the escalating nature of such reckless rhetoric."

On Thursday, Newsweek published an article detailing the measures the U.S. military is considering in response to a potential nuclear strike by Russia, a prospect made more real by Putin's comment last week that recent threats of using nuclear weapons are "not a bluff."

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-us-plans-decapitation-strike-putin-delusional-1747753

[niyad]

47. Anybody else here remember gen. betray-us? You know, the one who gave

classified information to his lover?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

51. That doesn't negate the fact

that what he says is very likely the very scenario the Admin. and Pentagon are formulating.

[Duppers]

66. ✔️

But that doesn't mean he's wrong here, right?

[niyad]

77. Perhaps. But I take everything he says with a large grain of salt.

[LiberalArkie]

49. If their nuclear weapons are maintained as well as their tanks and other weapons, their bombs may

go as BOOM as they think they will.

I read somewhere that they have to have routine maintenance every 10 years or so.

[Whiskeytide]

53. I haven't seen any recent assessments of Putin's ...

… nuclear capability. His conventional military has become so corrupted and decayed that it’s hard to believe the same hasn’t occurred within the nuclear divisions. We’ve been told for decades that they were the dangerous Bear in the woods, but apparently this was mostly smoke and mirrors. I don’t know if our intelligence was fooled, or if the MIC kept it a secret to keep the funding flowing. Either way, we have to consider Putin’s ability to respond. Because he WILL respond. If he’s cornered, with a devastated military and a “no way out” scenario, he’ll have little to lose by unleashing whatever he has. Smoldering cities across Europe - and perhaps even here - are likely the end result even if we successfully put down his conventional capabilities.

[speak easy]

57. I did hear a discussion on the BBC

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct33ph

[AntivaxHunters]

54. What he fails to mention is we're all dead should that happen

I think I'll pass on this.
I'd much prefer to live.
Fuck war. All of it.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

56. So..........what?

We allow Putin to drop a tac. nuke or 2 on UKR. without any retaliation?
And what about when the radioactive cloud crosses into a NATO country?
Is NATO just supposed to sit there and take it?

I'm no warmonger, far from it, I've seen what war does, but at some point, we have to respond to this maniac if he uses nukes.

[AntivaxHunters]

59. And the end goal is vaporization?

No thanks.
What good is any of our opinions & thoughts when we're all dead and burned toast.
Literally. That is exactly what happens to us.
Nukes should have been banned decades ago. The fact they're not is a massive failure which puts all of us in immediate danger of death.

Why is it those who are older who were around for the Viet Nam war protests now seem to the same people championing endless war which is nothing but a meat grinder for the poor & working class? What happened to the anti-war activist movement? Where are you?
Thank God for young generations who are about as interested in war as they are in finding out how to untangle a cassette tape.

"The bombs in Vietnam explode at home; they destroy the hopes and possibilities for a decent America."
Martin Luther King, Jr.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

61. Again,

what is your answer if Putin decides to drop a nuke or 2 on UKR?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

62. You think that the West shouldn't respond to Putin using nukes?

You think Putin would stop at Ukr. if the West didn't respond?

That would be appeasement and the end of NATO and Europe.

How well did appeasement work out with Hitler in WWII?

[AntivaxHunters]

73. I don't believe in violence

and that includes war.

Sorry if that bothers you but I stand committed in my POV.
War is a racket.
How many have to die for Capitalism?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

78. I don't believe in violence either,

but sometimes violence has to be answered with violence.

It doesn't bother me, I respect your POV, even though I vehemently disagree with it.
War is a racket, as espoused by one of my fellow Marines, but sometimes it's a necessary evil to stop a greater evil.

How many would die if we don't stop Putin if he uses a tac. nuke in Ukr?

I leave you with this quote from Edmund Burke:

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

[AntivaxHunters]

82. I very much disagee

Violence is NEVER the solution.

As someone who is First Nations, my people have known nothing BUT violence.
I wish harm on no one, why would I when I've experience first hand.

Debs was right.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

83. So what is your suggested course of action if Putin

attacks Ukr with a couple of tactical nukes?

[The Protagonist]

97. Its very simple

Two potential options. 1) Open up negotiations to end the war (de-escalation), or 2) get NATO involved (escalation) that opens the door to a wider war and a potential additional nuclear exchange that goes well beyond Ukraine.

Do you have a third option? And of the two above, which would you choose?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

98. Well, considering that Putin has shown no interest of negotiations to end the war,

then that leaves open 2 options,

1. Take no action and let Putin run wild and think he can go ahead and invade other European countries, or

2. Confront him with military action.

Which would you prefer?

Of the 2 above, well since the first option is a no go, then............

[The Protagonist]

104. First off, Putin is in no position to invade other countries in Europe

His army is disintegrating, which is exactly the reason nuclear weapons are now in play. You say Putin has shown no interest in negotiations. Nor has Zelenskyy. What if a respected third party were to recommend negotiations? As far as I know no one has tried this yet. What if President Biden publicly proposed it to both parties?

A rabid dog backed into a corner is going to bite. And "bite" in this instance could very well involve nukes. Shouldn't we do everything in our power to de-escalate and prevent that?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

105. So if Putin lights off a nuke in Ukr.

what is your suggestion, especially when that radioactive cloud invades a NATO country?
Talk, talk and more talk?
How well has that worked so far?

Nope, if Putin lights off a nuke, then NATO should destroy every piece of Russian equipment in Ukr by conventional means.

You DO NOT APPEASE A TYRANT under any circumstances, it only emboldens them as witnessed by Hitler in WWII.

[The Protagonist]

107. So then NATO goes to war against Russia

Against a rabid dog who 1) has already proved he's willing to use nuclear weapons, and 2) has ICBMs which can reach anywhere in Europe or the US. If thats your best option, at least you're honest about it.

And as far as "talk, talk and more talk" it hasn't worked so far because no one has tried it so far.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

109. ...

And as far as "talk, talk and more talk" it hasn't worked so far because no one has tried it so far.

What the hell are you talking about?
Turkey has tried to talk peace, as has France, so your sentence doesn't make any sense.

Russia is, and has been at war with NATO for a very long time now, it's been a war of disinformation, assassination, subversion, interference against NATO countries, now Putin has invaded a sovereign country on bullshit lies, has murdered thousands upon thousands of innocent Ukrainians, and Russian soldiers, laid waste to cities, infrastructure, kidnapped untold numbers of Ukr. citizens, raped and murdered women and children, threatened the world with the ultimate weapons of mass destruction, and so on and so forth.

You can only negotiate if both sides are willing to negotiate, which Russia clearly isn't unless it's on their terms only.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

111. Oh, and one other thing,

Putin hasn't proven he's willing to use nukes, he's only threatened to, that's not proving he's willing to use them.

[The Protagonist]

112. See Post 83

"So what is your suggested course of action if Putin attacks Ukr with a couple of tactical nukes?" Your comment. Thats what this discussion is based on.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

113. Notice the word if?

He hasn't proven anything, he's only threatened to, again, that doesn't prove he's willing to use them.

I can say I'm willing to go out and speed in front of a cop, but that doesn't prove I actually will.

[The Protagonist]

114. I just want to make sure English is your native language

I answered the question based on "if". Thats the premise of the whole discussion. IF he launches tactical nukes at Ukraine, what should we do?

[MarineCombatEngineer]

115. What we, as in the US/NATO alliance, should do is initiate a massive bombing campaign

against all Russian forces in Ukr..

That's my answer.

Of course English is my native language, as Bruce Springsteen sang, I was born in the USA.

[The Protagonist]

116. So we're back to square 1

NATO goes to war against a nuclear power who has proven they are willing to use nuclear weapons. No talking. No seeing if we can't de-escalate. Just a massive bombing campaign that opens the door to the use of ICBMs against American citizens.

Just trying to understand your position.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

118. Again,

how has Putin "proven" he's willing to use nukes?
Saying so is not proving so.

No talking. No seeing if we can't de-escalate

Again, France, Italy, Turkey, etc have all tried to talk or de-escalate without any success.
How do you talk to a person who has no desire to talk or de-escalate unless it's on his terms only?

What's your recommended course of action IF, notice the word "IF" Putin does explode a nuke on Ukr. territory, especially when the radioactive cloud crosses into a NATO country?

[The Protagonist]

125. This is turning into an Abbott and Costello routine

Are you SURE English is your first language? Let's try it one more time:

You said..."So what is your suggested course of action IF PUTIN ATTACKS UKR WITH A COUPLE OF TACTICAL NUKES" (emphasis added)

You followed up with ...."What we, as in the US/NATO alliance, should do is initiate a massive bombing campaign against all Russian forces in Ukr.."

I said ...."NATO goes to war against a nuclear power who has proven they are willing to use nuclear weapons. No talking. No seeing if we can't de-escalate. Just a massive bombing campaign that opens the door to the use of ICBMs against American citizens."

You reply with .... "how has Putin "proven" he's willing to use nukes?"


AGAIN, ALL OF THIS IS PREDICATED ON THE HYPOTHESIS YOU POSTED. THIS IS THE COURSE OF ACTION AFTER HE'S USED THEM.

Sheesh.

My course of action? To try and de-escalate before anything. Immediate escalation risks a widespread nuclear war.

[KS Toronado]

126. Please reread the original OP

Speaking to ABC News on Sunday, Petraeus, who served as CIA director and commander of coalition forces in Iraq, spelt out how he believed the US would respond in the event of the nuclear attack by Russia, though said he had not spoken to US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan about the issue.

"Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a NATO, a collective effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black Sea," said Petraeus.

Does this answer your questions?

[sir pball]

69. No, we are not. Putin is insane but not suicidal. He will go tactical, not strategic.

I say all this sitting less than a mile from the Naval Observatory - if a full-blown nuclear exchange happens, at least I won't be around to deal with the aftermath.

In my head, if Pootie were so insane as to use tactical weapons in Ukraine, I would expect we would immediately make good on Petraeus' forecast of eliminating all Russian forces in the Ukraine and Black Sea, and I should hope we'd also sink every single Russian SSBN that can float for good measure. Then Biden would call Pootie and tell him this ends now, *or else*.

If Putin didn't listen and lobbed a nuke at DC, or anywhere in the CONUS for that matter, I expect the US would execute OPLAN 8010-12, our full-blown nuclear war plan, in its entirety. Vladmir Putin, Moscow, and the entire Russian Federation would cease to exist. I have faith Putin won't go that far for the same reason Kim doesn't - they want their empires to win and pushing that button insures they won't, regardless of if they erase the other guy or not. Can't win a Mexican standoff.

[bluestarone]

70. Where would this country be today if we didn't nuke Japan?

Give me a break. We HAVE to answer POOTY with our loudest response, or maybe YOU want to live under FULL RUSSIAN control. NOT ME!

[dchill]

55. I believe US Intelligence knows exactly where Putin is...

...at all times. I think Putin knows that. If he uses any nuke, the bluffing stage is at an end, and so is Putin.

[Duppers]

67. Agree.

[sakabatou]

120. And then the whole thing goes into MAD

[speak easy]

121. MAD means guaranteed catastrophic retaliation after a full-on first strike,

not ongoing escalation.

[sakabatou]

123. And if Russia used nuclear weapons against Ukraine

Wouldn't the US use their own? And then what? It may, or would lead to more and more strikes.

[speak easy]

124. What Petrues is saying is the U.S. would intially use conventional to

take out all the Russian Military stationed in Ukraine and Crimea, and every ship in the Black Sea Fleet.

Would this escalate into a nuclear war? Almost certainly.