'Invading Ukraine was stupid, but he still did it': Putin's real nuclear threat | Defence in Depth
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Vladimir Putin started his invasion in February last year thinking three things.
Firstly that his army was fantastic; secondly that the Ukrainian army was very weak; and thirdly that the international community was too self-absorbed, complacent and apathetic to intervene.
Well, his army is shown to be subpar; the Ukrainian army, though smaller, has not been broken; so it’s only in the third area - international support - that Putin believes he can now have an effect.
Putin is trying to chip away at international support for Ukraine, and the easiest way for him to do that is to raise the spectre of nuclear war.
However, we shouldn’t be scared of these threats.
#russia #ukraine #putin #nuclear
Defence in Depth is a weekly output of high quality comment, news and analysis of the big defence stories.
For the previous episode of Defence in Depth, visit: • ‘Publicly glowing, pri...
For our podcast Ukraine: The Latest, visit: • Ukraine: The Latest | ...
Since the outbreak of war in February 2022, The Telegraph has been tracking donations and deliveries of weapons to Ukraine; for a guide on these weapons, visit: www.telegraph....
To sign up for The Dispatches Newsletter mentioned in the video, visit: secure.telegra...
Subscribe to The Telegraph with our special offer: just £1 for 3 months. Start your free trial now:
www.telegraph....
Get the latest headlines: www.telegraph....
Telegraph.co.uk and / telegraphtv are websites of The Telegraph, the UK's best-selling quality daily newspaper providing news and analysis on UK and world events, business, sport, lifestyle and culture.
#nuclearwar #belarus #ukrainewar #war #vladimirputin #lukashenko #china
![FendiDa Rappa - Clock Dat ft. Shamar Marco [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3NBU8KHdxYY/mqdefault.jpg)
Since the outbreak of war in February 2022, The Telegraph has been tracking donations and deliveries of weapons to Ukraine. Our correspondents have reported on their use on the battlefield and our experts have analysed their effectiveness. For a guide on these weapons, visit: www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/ukraine-weapons-tanks-jets-missiles-military-equipment-war-russia/
This is not a comprehensive list of all weapons in Ukraine.
I don't like that word outbreak in this context, as if the war started on its own volition without any action and responsibility from Putin.
It is correct and better to ascribe full responsibility to Putin for his war of aggression against Ukraine, always.
2 things I would like to clear, i don't like to see neither woman's nipples nor man's nipples while watching news.
@@2nd3rd1st wouldn't that outbreak go back further to the US installing leaders in Ukraine during the 2014 campaign, as well as aggressive NATO maneuvers?
@@2nd3rd1st The 2014 Maiden coup was were it really starts. The US engineered a coup against a democratically elected govt
@@uppercutgrandma4425 no.
we ignored stupidity, we ignored greed, we ignored those weaker than us, we ignored what was far from us, and then I woke up one morning and saw that everything we ignored was knocking on our door
How poetic and artistic,
marriage.
Sounds like taxes
Many young people saw this coming, but nobody choose to listen.
Exactly
Has Russia's nuclear arsenal survived the deep, existentially dangerous, corruption in it's government and military? I imagine a lot of money meant for the upkeep of the Russian nuclear arsenal has ended up in yachts and houses somewhere on the Mediterranean coast.
@AdsRuinedRUclips I was more worried about the first 253 Nuclear threats he made tbh
I have wondered the same thing. I would say that there has been neglect on a huge scale.
I asked Jake Broe to comment on this but it seems he doesn't read his comments.
@@brianfreeman8290 Jake Broe has commented on this in his videos. He suspects less than half Russia’s arsenal would work. Perhaps a lot less than half. We never want that to be tested though as some would work….
What if it did?
The Beijing dictatorship didn't call for nuclear de-escalation for the peace or justice of Ukrainians facing brutal Russia invasion, but out of the cold & hard reality that China will certainly not be spared if there's a total nuclear exchange between Russia and the West. Ironically, China's shameful role in supporting the Kremlin in the war contributes a lot to the prolonged war and possible further escalation.
no tbh i think china would just go against russia if russia launched a nuke
USA and EU haphazardly shoveling billions into a non EU or NATO country also escalates and prolongs this war.
My take is that China cynically favours a prolonged war. The weaker Russia becomes, the more dependent it is on China. The more dependent Russia is on China, the easier it is for China to exploit. Soon enough, Russia is China's jewel in the crown.
"China's shameful role in supporting the Kremlin in the war contributes a lot to the prolonged war and possible further escalation."
Last time I checked, China didn't steal billions of tax payers money to fund a war in another continent.
@@Stand663To add to the list of why China doesn’t want a nuclear escalation is that they are downwind of many potential targets.
Fascist little pootin played all his cards. All hes got left is the nuclear bluff
The West keeps escalating. Putin's trying to tell us to back off. We can either laugh at him or take him seriously but remember the logic conclusion of escalation is nuclear war.
@@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311 Putin illegally invaded Ukraine he is the one who should back off if he never invaded we would not be having this problem
And an American reporter
@@AAB463 Not much then
@@AAB463 😂
2:42 I like that little hesitancy there. We all know, man.
Hitler thought he was acting rationally also.
Americans do too. They want to weaken Russia.
...zutreffend.
Mutual assured destruction.
There is nothing more to be said about these ridiculous threats.
Don't mean we will retaliate with nukes..other means
Correct
@@geocam2 Such a side does not exist.
I’m pretty sure I’d pick the 100 chicken sized horses 😂
I'd rather it'd be over quickly *:*
defo
Every time I see footage of Vladimir Putin in a Christian Church, holding a candle, I think of the song "Masters of War" by Bob Dylan. Putin needs to listen to those song lyrics, and take note.
“We in the west don’t like to talk about it - we actually did it 1945”. What a hypocrisy.
yes, in reply to an attack. ukraine did nothing
The Russian foreign minister boasted that Russia can totally destroy Britain one hundred times over. A British Admiral when interviewed said yes, they can, then added, and we can only totally destroy them once.
Thanks Dom, straight to the point and very informative again
Excellent words as always Dom
Never seen as much ignorance and propaganda - this guy is clueless reader of "facts" in the media and knows nothing about the true workings of geopolitics. There is a power shift happening, and its actually for the greater of humanity.
I'd be interested to see some reporting on how much the Russians have budgeted for maintenance of their nuclear arsenal over the last ten years and an estimate of how much of that funding ended up disappearing into someone's pocket.
Very good points, I cannot believe maintenance was a priority for these devastating weapons, after what we have seen over the last 13 months.
what the same as much of the funding to Ukraine has disapeared into someones pocket..?
I've read that USA spends around 50 billion dollars on maintaining their nukes.
Russian military -"for the whole thing" seems to be around 70 billion dollars (equivalent).
And it's no secret that Russia has more nukes than the US.
That doesn't leave a lot of money spent on Russian nukes.
Edit: But as powerful as nuclear weapons are, what's really needed to destroy life as we know it?
If it's like any other part of their defence spending...most of it will have been stolen
@@briancarno8837 Ukraine has launched three successful counter-offensives and is currently holding its own, no matter what the Russians are throwing against them. I should think Western aid has found its way into the right hands, or none of that would be possible.
7:00 shows how ridiculous it is that the West are complaining about Russia stationing nukes in their allies territories. How many nations have the US used to station nukes in? Double standards from NATO
Putler can only make threats. He has lost everything. Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦
Haha, I love how he gains glasses mid-sentence at 7:18
“Belarus is an independent sovereign state” yeah no
By no means was it stupid, propaganda at it's finest
Simple, straightforward and overall wonderful presentation!
If Mr Putin really is as God fearing as he may portray himself to be, I am somewhat sceptical if on the day of his demise and he turns up at the pearly gates, that St Peter would be standing there ready to congratulate the Russian leader on his deployment of nuclear weapons on the world.
I would somewhat hope that St Peter would simply point to the hole leading down, with a fiery glow at the bottom.
People like Putin always think they’re going to the Good Place, never the Bad. They never see themselves as the bad guy no matter how terrible the things they did.
Good to see the Telegraph has found someone to speak knowledgeably and with understand about this subject.
The pronunciation does matter. It is not,and never has been nucular. It is nuclear,period. What a ludicrous,but sadly unsurprising, opening from a publication that should know better.
It was a sarcastic reference to George W. Bush and pointing out that the threat is so great that it does not matter. It's black humor...
If anyone wants a very good in depth but good video on nuclear weapons and what are tactical weapons Ryan Mcbeth “nuclear weapons” search would be a good one.
Yeah, this video definitely isn’t it
Grammar??
Pronunciation???
Quibble
But this telegraph vid does not add to our knowledge. Clickbait
Poor stuff
Excellent break down of Putin’s Nuclear saber rattling. Personally, I just fall back to MAD. Mutually assured destruction worked during the Cold War and it works now.
The response don't need to be a nuke as well.. plenty of other things to do
@@jennifermoriarty2188indeed. Some analysis said that any nuclear attack on Crimea would effectively be an attack on Europe and NATO and the response would be swift and non nuclear taking out every Russian vessel and all airfields being occupied by Russians in Ukraine including Crimea..
Except it didn’t work. We only avoided mad due to sheer luck and at least two intensive negotiations by politicians on both sides who trusted each other and kept their word. We don’t have the latter on either side right now, and the former always runs out sooner or later.
100 chicken sized horses, absolutely
Supposing Russia is Very Powerful why he was afraid of beoing Ukraine going to Nato ?
Liar, liar, pants on fire. Let it be: Afghanistan or Cuba, or Iraq, or Syria...Vietnam or Korea..the US is history's greatest liar!
Well, Russia WILL keep the occupied territories. After all, these territories are inhabited to a large extent by people of Russian origin. Linguistically, even more so. And besides, who should drive the Russians out of the Donbass? Or even from the heavily fortified Crimean peninsula? The Ukrainian army? With losses of up to 180,000 men within a year. The numbers speak, albeit sadly, clearly in Russia's favour. The sooner the West understands this, the better. In my opinion, this is the reality. Even 18 freshly delivered German Leopard tanks will not change this scenario. The US will certainly soon realise that further support for Ukraine (in the long run) is not very sensible and will only prolong the unfortunately.America will turn its attention to other issues, such as the banking crisis or the ailing US economy. Like a toddler who has lost interest in a toy. History knows the truth all too well.
Победа России! 🇷🇺 ☝️👌
Putin did not invade ukraine as the Republic of Donetsk and Republic of Lugansk were no longer ukraine as the farmers and factory workers drove out the ukraine army in 2014-15.
"GRANDMA is the last thing we need to worry about" 0:22 lol
Wow, I was looking forward to watching this, but then the presenter started off by saying something completely idiotic: "The first thing to talk about is the pronunciation...(a few sentences later)... the last thing to talk about is the pronunciation." 🤦♂️
Listen to these guys on Ukraine podcast everyday - class and Dom knows his stuff !
He knows what narrative to push, that’s for sure. Not much in the way of nuance and balance, but there never is in the media these days, especially not around subjects like Ukraine or covid.
"...russia didn't newer invade ukraine, because america's dronybombers are so fast 140km/h, the united states of america did it, but they didn't allow russian army come back to russia, why? boris johnsson etc.
Fear nothing, only Fear itself⭐
fear morons with nukes
And to leave the Donbas and Lugansk people to be bombarded with ordnance for a further eight years would be even more stupid, and stop your lies it's not Ukrain that Russia is fighting, it's all of NATO.
Give me 10 min with this bald wally
There are no real facts in this video just speculation and wishfull thinking. History books will probably get it right.
Paranoia-driven propaganda.
Did it throw anyone else off that he’s not wearing glasses in some shots but it some he is?
I was looking for your comment
BREAKING NEWS | WAGNER CAPTURES BAKHMUT 20/05/23 ❤❤❤
so this time is the time for his real nuclear threats.... i was begining to believe he didnt mean any of it.
BS topic, we dont need to talk about nuclear weapons, we can perfectly finish things off the conventional way
Cincinnati Reds baseball team just got two F-16 fighters to fly over the stadium...
I wonder if Zelinsky was throwing out the first pitch.
🇺🇲🇺🇦Nato 🎗💪🎗
I’m scared asl 🤣 not tryna be vaporized man . Already been a rough year
Russia never used nuclear while America well... also moral compass of west is the least with morals.
From a Frenchman living in China and watching this video: 👍🏻
I think I'd rather fight 1 horse sized chicken than 100 chicken sized horses
To date, only one country has used nuclear weapons against civilians. And it wasn't Russia.
The number of deaths caused by Russia in the Ukraine war has likely already surpassed the deaths of Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined. Your argument is invalid.
@@Sorrycomrade now count the number of civilian deaths in eastern Ukraine between 2014 (maidan) and 2021.
Invading Ukraine wasn't just stupid, it was foolish & fatal to the Russian Country. The people are the one's who suffer. Wrong on all levels!
Война идет уже 9 лет, да будет тебе известно, и не Россия эту войну начинала. Россия ее заканчивает! по просьбе регионов, против которых украинские нацисты совершают террор в течении 9 лет!!!, убив тысячи мирных жителей , в том числе женщин , детей, стариков!!, совершая против людей пытки, разрушая их дома и инфраструктуру на протяжении 9 лет. Но ваши лживые "демократические"СМИ вам этого не покажут. Выгоднее все представить для вас, как российская пропаганда, а Путина, как "сумашедшего диктатора" .
God Bless Ukraine 🇺🇦 🇺🇸
GOD? clearly war is gods will, or there is no god. the later is obvious
Don't side with Russia
This was great as always Dom, thanks. I'd be interested to see polling on wheter people are scared of the nuclear threats or not. Personally I have zero and have never had any concern over nuclear weapon use by Russia. It would be a different story in my mind if they were the only country with nuclear weapons - but they're not. So ya polling would be interesting
I think Putin is an idiot not stupid, it is just words.
NATO did a field exercise about a decade ago, giving field commanders the power to call in nuclear strikes. They were appalled at how quickly commanders used the option. Decision was made to NEVER give field commanders this option in reality.
Having worked on Britains nuclearr deterrent and other things far, far worse, any country that struck the UK would get a response that would end their civilisation and not just theirs, their "friends" also. The firing of UK nuclear weapons is not just at the one country who strikes but at multiple ones worlwide to eradicate their mentality. That is why it is the last resort or "clean up" in the jargon.
we need to stop underestimating russia and china
“We in the west don’t talk about using nuclear weapons because our moral compass is in the right place”.
Also, the only country to ever have used nuclear weapons on human being: the US.
Wipe out Russia. Problem removed
Putin's loose talk regarding nuclear weapons is a sure sign of abject weakness.
How?
Propaganda mouth piece of the west
Simple, very clear message, reasonable points 👍
An excellent reporter! Thx
The Ukranian military is not small...............but it is smallER than the Russian military.
This guy really does a fantastic job. Big fan. 🇺🇸
Belarus is beholden to Russia
We found this really interesting and informative, albeit, there is still the possible danger, that Putin would launch nuclear weapons, regardless of the outcome, just to prove a point. This makes him a very dangerous person to deal with.
If we’re all dead as a result, he’s got no one to listen to him gloating and complaining etc
I think he'd get mainlined with polonium 210 by his inner circle first...
its very ok when the west move weapons but it sounds like not ok when russia does the same
The best 👍
Instead if talking, let's launch them!
Nice work, Dom!
What about the treaty Belarus signed in the 1990s to give up their nukes ... the same time Ukraine did as well by the way ..... ?
Very good analysis with rational sober conclusions. Many thanks!
Because he's white?
@Dell Wright Check my DNA 🧬, peasant.
or so We Hope, cross our fingers and pray. Someday somebody is going to be pushed to the edge and react. There's too many wild cards out there, North Korea, Iran and Israel, Pakistan etc.
He’s been wrong many times in the past, particularly about Putin and the outcomes of diplomatic difficulties. Let’s hope he’s not wrong again.
Glory to Ukraine !!!
Hopefully the strategic and tactical warheads are full of cardboard like the reactive armour on the museum grade tanks. Chances are someone has pocketed the budget and bought a flat or two in Knightsbridge.
The latter was probably far more damaging to the West than any nuclear threat
Re: Flat in Knightsbridge perhaps at risk of being seized over sanctions many of those who bought property in western countries was a hedge against falling out of favour in the event of government change or a economic collapse in Russia. The fact that we are now in an escalating proxy war with Russia and thus their assets being at risk seizure i rather doubt was part of their cauculations
If Belrus moved these into their country it just makes a BIG fat target on their country and just would be a real stupid idea for that country to allow.
Rather silly isn't it .
Time to see if M.A.D. works as a theory.
continues.. to work
Yay
Special facility means a secure spot to keep soldiers from stealing and scrapping whatever they can.
Putin doesn't scare me🥱.
I grew up in cold war era at its scariest 😱
Nukes were mentioned every other day.
After watching a movie called 🥺THREADS😱I that's when the terror sunk in 😂😂😂😂
Yes, Threads really seeped into the marrow.
@@mroctober3657 more info on this film please as all I get is ladies sewing
@@chiefrocka8604 Just enter Threads 1984 into the youtube search. It would probably seem quite pedestrian these days but at the time it was very effective... and depressing. Filmed in a documentary style. A kind of UK counter-part film to The Day After - an American movie about nuclear war released around the same time.
@@mroctober3657 apparently ☢ gets into the marrow too 😐
😂
This isn't Real property: Location, Location, Location, doesn't matter with Nukes . Scare tactics.
The dwarf Putler needs some more kneepad time with XI otherwise it is game over
Hmm...showing a Polaris missile launch when talking about Trident doesn't really build confidence in what is to come. And the missile is unlikely to land in your back yard, it is used to launch the warheads that will eventually "land" in your back yard. Also the difference between nuc-ular and nuc-lear is not grammar, it is pronunciation/phonetics.
Basically to sum it up, there's a minuscule risk that he will use them, and that they will even work. But if course we must not come into the sleeping mindset that there is no risk that he will do it. But it doesn't matter really because we must not stop supporting Ukraine
armisend more weapons and spend more money!! All the same, they end up on the black market in other countries.
Who used nuclear bomb first in world 😅
Glory to Ukraine 🇺🇦
⚛
The US wants to give Ukraine a chance to win back its territories, so will resist calls for a cease fire that would freeze the conflict in place and allow Russia time to build up its forces for future engagement. However there is a limited time frame. With US elections coming next year, they may have to wrap it up before next winter, because without some major progress by then, political pressure to force a cease fire will build.
It's simple, Putin didn't think any of the above. It literally thought that Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO is an existential threat.
That's not the case. In reality Ukraine joining NATO means closing the window of opportunities to annex Ukraine.
Otherwise he would have been opposing Finland and Sweden joining NATO as well
The discussion about tactical versus strategic nuclear weapons is a confused mess. We are told the popular but false bit of wisdom that there is no material distinction between the two. This theory is explained here as low yield tactical nuclear weapons have to be used in great numbers to achieve what one strategic weapon could, rendering the former pointless. This is laughably misdirected. The illustration only makes the point that tactical nukes often make rather poor strategic nukes. This is fairly true and actually supports the idea that they are importantly different. However, the reason the video is a mess on this issue is the failure to apprehend the obvious: Tactical and strategic weapons are distinct first and foremost by their intended use. Weapons intended for tactical use tend to be lower yield and, while they might be usable as strategic weapons, they are seldom well suited to such use. The example the video suggests--a huge barrage of tactical nukes to achieve strategic effect--misses the whole point. Tactical weapons use and strategic weapons use ARE different. If tactical weapons are used in Ukraine it might well be one or a handful and nuking the whole country isn't entailed or implied by use weapons use. Accordingly, the tactical use of some nuclear weapons by Russia in Ukraine is not like a strategic use. Tactical vs strategic is a meaningful and helpful distinction. Nuking armored columns east of the Dnieper is seriously different than detonating a 330kt device in the skies over Lviv. That distinction matters a very great deal and trying to persuade people that there is no such distinction is more than merely unhelpful--it is irresponsible.
Totally agree. This report is lopsided to say the least, and lacks any real nuance, balance or military analysis. The number of comments praising it goes to show how ignorant and uninformed the general public are, partly because of journalism like this, and how much they prefer to be told what they want to hear.
Putin's statements rarely make any sense to the west. But those comments aren't for the west at all but for the russian people and they make sense viewed through this lens
Clearly the deployment of strategic weapons in Belarus is a counter to possible use of force from Poland.
Invading Ukraine was essential for Russian security against an ever-encroaching American/NATO juggernaut.
It is Ukraine that is being ravaged whilst chattering classes far from the destruction cheer them on
Bs
Then Why Russia did not invade Nato country or USA?
"Firstly that his army was fantastic; secondly that the Ukrainian army was very weak; and thirdly that the international community was too self-absorbed, complacent and apathetic to intervene," sez The Telegraph.
This is incorrect -- but then The Telegraph's random maunderings, for it would be false to call them 'reports,' on Ukraine have been incorrect for two years now.
Putin thought his "special military operation," was non-military, so he sent his own forces ini without fuel and not much in the way of ammunition. He thought the Urkainian armed forces were irrelevant because they would not be involved. And he thought that The West would be cowed by a fait accompli.
Zero for three, Telegraph.
Roughly your regular score for the whole affair, beginning up to now.
Thinking about Billy Joel’s song Leningrad. It gave me hope. And along comes Vladimir Putin. I would much prefer Victor. I would much prefer hope! Victor. He made my daughter laugh and we embraced! Hope! I hope that we will end this madness. I hope that humanity will prevail!
How can it be irrelevant unhelpful and dangerous?
Lol
Danger isn't relevant?
I'd choose the 100 chicken sized horses. I reckon I could take them. A horse sized chicken however is basically a dinosaur...
And Americans invading Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc. was highly intelligent. After all, just look at how smart Biden is. He represents the American population perfectly.
RazPutin IZ imo bluffing.. playing the old soviet trope. Any Ruskie mushroom cloud is Russias undoing, EvEn more than it's current undoing. As for Lukashenko, simply tell him he goes 'second'.😉
I completely condone Russia's illegal war in Ukraine but we must acknowledge that the US has nukes in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey.