If you want to support the channel, please consider subscribing to my newsletter on www.logicofwar.com. And remember to be careful about attempts at impersonation scams in the comments section where someone uses my profile picture from a different account. I will never ask you to contact me on private platforms like Telegram or WhatsApp.
you seem pretty daft: 1. 2 nukes on kiev and the war is over 2. Dear russian slaves and meat, NATO has attacked (for added effect stage a false flag operation) us and we beat them by sending nukes. they are now scared and defeated
can you be abit less dellusional. after so many years of hyping of ukraine, can you just acknowledge defeat is inevitable without NATO entering the war, in which if NATO enters the war, we will have WWIII and a nuclear exchange? you are not helping the Ukrainian by lying about their conditions, the more you hype them up, the more europe will see thing as under control and the less money and resources they will focus on Ukraine. it is way better to be honest and tell them the truth, then to lie and prolong the slatemate. NATO must consider the possibility of a nuclear war.
@@lagrangewei Why Ukraine has already liberated 50% of Ukraine. Europe is ramping up the defense industry, the US aid will keep coming. Russia has two years left in the fight, if the west start sanction India and Russia the support to Russia will be gone. Russia is alone in this against Ukraine supported by the richest and biggest military power in the world. If we in the west decide that Russia will lose, then Russia will lose, if Russia uses 1 nuke Putler and Russia is over as a nation. There is no way out of this for Russia anymore, Surrender or total downfall is whats waiting Russia.
Anyone old enough to remember the Cold War knows nuclear weapons are useless in reality. How long would it take for any of Russia's neighbors to normalize relationships and resume trade? China, India, all the Russian friends in Africa or Middle East would fear being branded a pariah, being cut out of global trade and turn their backs on Russia as soon as the fist bomb blew.
@@tomk3732. Yeah. Bizarre. It's like listening to interviews with Ben Hodges. He was the highest ranking American NATO member in Europe but he has absolutely no idea about Russia, Putin, Russia's military strategies, Russia's M.I.C. capabilities, Russia's military equipment, Russia's economy... NOTHING!! It's unbelievable. I watch these experts get it wrong over and over and over again and wonder, are they really this incompetent? Or are they lying?
@@tomk3732 Then you should rather watch Russian state TV, instead of wasting your time here. The facts being presented there are probably more to your liking. But Z-patriots seem to be constantly drawn towards YT-channels like this one, like moths are drawn towards a flame. Somehow, they simply can't stay away. 😆
@@jojjeja9371 Will never happen, Ukraine and the west will never trow away a world order since 1946 that would open up for dictatorships and, pure evil like Russia, China, North Korea and Iran to do as they want to their neighbors. Thats not even a possibility. Russia is weak and the sanctions bites like never before, we are slowly boiling the frog. Russia has all ready lost this war they just don’t understand it. Russia has a life line by China and India. A lufe line that will end the day the west says stop or we will not bye your gods anymore. These country’s are going down to if they don’t stop supporting the genocide in Ukraine. And if Ukraine would lose against all odds that means WW3 and boots on the ground for Nato. The west has has 30/1 in resources and military power and as you know the will to support Ukraine has gone up the last month. When Ukraine liberates their lands from the Russian Nazis, Russia will collapse. China will then take a big bite of Russia and all the country’s inside Russia that want to leave Russia, like the stolen parts of Georgia, Chechenia, and many other minority’s Russia will brake up in pieces. These regions hate Pution because he send them first as canon food and don’t pay their familys. And I don’t care what you heard at RT or some other Russian fake Nazi state media. You don’t invade other country’s thats a fact. 500 000 dead or wounded Russian soldiers 709-1800 dead a day compared to 100 000 dead UA-soldiers, a totally failed invasion of Ukraine, a Russian Black sea navy taken out by a country without a navy. And last Ukraine has all ready taken back 50%. Yes Russia will take some small grounds the upcoming weeks but then the US aid will arrive, and Europe are starting up the war production at the same time as Russias war industry will be blown to peaces now when the ban on bombing Russia with western weapons are lifted. Russia is weak and have all ready sold their soul to china. Putin is wanted iver half of the world, Nato has started to expend even more. The Russian economy and export is falling like a dead bird and you think Russia is winning 😂😂😂 Ukraine don’t need to win the war, they need to hold the line, Russia will destroy itself from the inside. Let’s see what happened now when 7 Nato country’s is about to send its soldiers in to Ukraine to release them to the front, and when the mobilization is on. Russia is digging its own grave in Ukraine just like they did in Afghanistan. We all know when Russia are afraid and we are doing something right and that when Russia starts threatening the worlds with nukes.
For those of us who remember the Cold War, this kind of threat is familiar and not something we tend to worry about. For the younger ones who have never known constant nuclear threats, this kind of threat is scary. If we are heading into another cold war, everyone is going to have to get used to these threats because they will be far more constant, even without a war going on.
Coldwar times are over ...! Remember Russia is not big threat to us its china wait n watch on coming October brics + expansion n their plan to kill dollar dominance with centralised currency bwn southeast asian african and middle eastern countries... west hegemony nearing its end !
Oh, we are already in a cold war with Russia. Hints: continuous cyber attacks, misinformation, assassination in Germany, exploding ammo storage in Bulgaria, extensive drone usage on oil platforms in the north sea, buying up real estate in Finland close to military installation, etc etc
I believe that knowledge about nuclear weapons and how (and why) they can be used is the key to cope with a new cold war - at the end of the day, war is still business and ned to give an outcome ;)
Served in the DK Army 4 years 63-67 as engineer large part of the training was decontamination as the Russians was expected to hit our radars towards the Baltic Sea as later told by the Polish after 91 the plan was to use a 2megaton bomb first if did not succeed then a 5megaton half the main island would be destroyed as soldiers were told if they came life expectancy would be approximately 4 hours glad they were broke and stayed home,never imagined these times would come the Russians have never been rational and trustworthy now in Canada since 70 and glad for 👍it 🇩🇰🇨🇦👨🏼🦳
Appreciate the (relatively) short format of these analysis videos. There are quite a few other excellent channels like Perun and Wlliam Spaniel who do explainers but they all produce one hour long materials that not everybody has the time to listen to. You fill a much needed gap for people interested in the conflict.
He is spokesman of NATO. He's a Danish NATO officer, he can't say one word that contradicts anything that NATO, or the Danish govenrment, says. But he might be more well-spoken than the childish "reporters" you know from your own country, Edited for typos
@@MeBallerman Oh that's such a good argument, I had better watch RT for half an hour to balance out my opinion, there's no reason at all that Russia might want to twist the facts and bend the narrative when they are obviously doing so well
That is now called "strategic ambiguity". You never when the other side has set the thresholds of its red lines. Happened with Ukraine in 2008, 2014 and 2022. In all those occasions, the West ignored Russia's previous warnings, later followed by disbelief. The current Israeli-Iranian crisis is another example. Israel never expected such a reaction from Iran.
Love your logical analysis of the situation as always! It really does help process the noise and see clearly! Please continue with your excellent work!
In order to preserve non proliferation countries must not only make it clear that they would respond strongly if one were used, but also clearly and transparently ignore nuclear blackmail. If we want to keep a lid on the number of nuclear powers, it must be clear to all countries that there are no real advantages to possessing them.
Yeah, but it is clear from North Korea that is advantageous to possess them if you are going to be isolated regardless. At least with the current dynamics, nuclear proliferation is going to occur. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are probably the current lineup. If Taiwan falls, you've got South Korea, Japan, and Indonesia.
Anders didn't mention it but the US and president Biden already made it clear if Russia uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, then the US will respond 'very strongly' to it (making sure Russia will regret having done it) and China too already signalled to Putin what will happen if he dares to use nuclear weapons
@@richdobbs6595 Taiwan will be one of the first if Russia gets away with the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine - and China told Putin they won't like it one bit
@@embreis2257 That was my thinking. Taiwan, South Korea and, Japan probably have everything you need to start a nuclear program and detailed plans on how to get that program started ASAP. Both China and North Korea really don't want that to happen
@@dpelpal As I understand it, they took whatever little funding they had and used it to maintain and even grow their nuclear deterrent as best they could during that time to the detriment of their conventional forces. I do not think Russias nuclear forces are are anything to scoff at... But im also certain they will not use them in this stage of the. conflict. Putin may be the lowest form of life on earth but hes not going to commit suicide.
@@dpelpal As i understand it, they took whatever little funding they had and used it to maintain and even enhance a core of their nuclear deterrent. We should not underestimate their nuclear arsenal. Theyre still bluffing, but their nuclear forces are no joke.
Yeah, his viewpoint is refreshing and very wrongheaded. He has no idea what he's talking about. He's just a goofball with an opinion that happens to be wrong. Remember what they told you Ukraine was going to win Ukraine is going to be completely destroyed. They already have 500,000 dead people.
@@krede77 You did say that nothing was happening, hence my question. But your second post makes alot more sense. Guess we will just have to wait and see.. Im sure there is alot of cloak and dagger in this game.
here in Bulgaria, nothing is being done, Russian bots have taken over almost all internet resources, hundreds of fake publications, fake news, disinformation - every day, everyone knows where the bot factories are, who the trolls are, and none of our services react??? Desperate!!
Recently a man was investigated by the russian police during a putin rally. The man said, "Putin gave me the happiest childhood you could ever have!" The policeman looked at him and said "You're 60, putin wasn't president when you were a child!" The man looked at him and said "yes! He wasn't there, this is why I had a happy childhood!"😂
@@dpelpal Putin never said Kyiv in 3 days. You can actually search the whole catalog of RUclips videos right now and you won't find it. That statement was said by western media over and over again.
I really appreciate your insight and analysis of these important issues. You deliver the material well and are a true professional. Keep up the good work!
What a wonderfully argued explanation, I'm quite blown away by the way you simplify and explain such an overwhelming and worrying topic. I've long held the view that Putin will not (can not) use nuclear weapons, but never been able to argue clearly why, so it was a great relief to hear you break the question down with such clear and concise logic. Thank you.
After the US backed coup the whole issue for the Russians is security. if NATO enters Ukraine and install missiles...Russia has about 5 minutes to react. Whether you believe it or not Russia sees this as an existential threat and they most likely would use nuclear weapons if pressured. But contrary to what Anders says, Russia is winning and was always going to win. Obama warned against any conflict in Ukraine as the Russians ability to escalate was greater than NATO's. He was right.
Only time nuclear weapons were used, were against country losing the war already, having no allies, and with no way to retaliate. All the opposite is true of Ukraine.
Yes, Japan was losing the war when the nuclear weapons were used. But, the situation in 1945 was different than 2024, for many reasons. It's not fair to make comparisons.
I fail to see how using nuclear weapons in Ukraine is a win. For one I thought the point was to retake Ukraine. You can't occupy irradiated land. Also, the political fallout would be worse than from the bombs. Total embargo, kicked out of the UN, etc. It's hard to run a country when nobody will trade with you.
You can occupy irradiated land. In fact, it may be easier to occupy irradiated land. Besides Russia doesn't want Ukraine but to control access to Russia, and that is in Western Ukraine and Poland. Remember people never stopped working at Chernobyl, and human activity has continued in the surrounding area to this very day. I think the threat of NATO responding if Putin does such a thing will prevent tactical nukes. I believe Sullivan or Kirby have already alluded to this last time he threatened
Russians so afraid of shadows they attac eweryone, they surely live in the past. As a result they repeat it themselves, and make shadows threathening. With their foggy logic they will newe feel safe. They are a victim of their own halusination.
Nuclear weapons dont have as much radiation as people think and they would be detonated in the air so the radiation would not be absorbed as much into the ground, Japan was hit twice and safe to live in a very short time after
Playing the nuke card would be inherently risky, the US has at least eight SSBN constantly at sea, the UK one, the French one any one of which could make a mess of Russia no one is winning if all that's left is a smoking cinder.
Has this changed with the recent use of FOAB-type thermobarics by Russia in Ukraine? Those explosions (Vuhledar) are purportedly similar to what a Russian tactical nuke might achieve -- I can't tell if this is cooling off the Russian talk of (especially tactical) nukes by showing that they've always have conventional alternatives... or is it heating up ???
this expert is full of contradicing propoganda..russia cant use weapons without looking weak..yet america nuked 2 cities war crimes diud they also not look weak????????????????????????
I am seriously impressed with your logic and reasoning. To the extent that I will even forgive you for wearing a tie. (lol) Seriously though, keep up the good work! Cheers
@@46FreddieMercury91 My hatred of ties comes solely from having been forced to wear the things from primary school onwards. But it is just a personal thing. Hence the lol in my comment. But there is a tradition that professional liars wear ties, e. g. politicians. Still, I'd rather have politicians than a military coup... Cheers
Non-proliferation part is obvious, but when it comes to selling use of nuclear weapons to domestic audience cant Putin simply say something like it is to save lives of Russian soldiers that would otherwise die trying to "denazify" Ukraine using conventional means? He can point out that it worked for USA in WW2 and blame west for escalation as usual.
@@nic.h Putin has already been a president many times longer than Russian laws would've allowed when he started. Turns out he can just change the laws when he feels like it. That said, even he can't do that without some preparation, which is where he could potentially be overthrown if the change is too unpopular.
Thank you for your explenation. Since the start of the full scale war against Ukraine I thought briefly about this nuclear threat and then decided that it is a bluff. Glad my own thoughts about that are about the same as your. I wish your explenation would be broadcasted by the mass media as far too many people still fall for it.
People seem to be mistaking a warning for a threat. Contrary to what the video states, Putin nor anyone else has spoken about using nukes in Ukraine, why would they? They are doing fine on the battlefield, it is Ukraine which is getting devastated. Putin's warning was about the use of NATO weapons to attack Russian territory, the warning is that it risks Russia considering the country which supplied the weapons as a party to the war, then there will be no problem to hit them on home soil, using whatever weapons they deem fit. In that situation everyone seems to jump direct to nukes, but Russia has a lot of none nuke missiles, able to avoid NATO air defences and strike anywhere in Europe.
@@no_more_spamplease5121If the don't explode during launch, or crash, than you get a fizzle eventmor nothing. basically a radiologic spill. and no, they haven't maintained them at all. mabye a handful. many silos have even been closed permanently because the fuel, which is poisonous, has been leaking......
Perun made a video on that and the conclusion is that the probability of their nukes working is very high by the fact that they have literal heaps of fissile material , i advice people to go and watch his channel
This is difficult for the public to judge due to a lack of transparency. However, we do know that Russia has fewer financial resources at its disposal than the USA.
Back than in my childhood there was a joke: Policeman asks the guy who tried to steal a nuclear bomb why he did it. "I wanted to sell it to by potatoes". "Why didn't you steal potatoes in the first place?". "Potatoes are better guarded" was the answer.
He doesn't need to make a video, I already know how he would say in the video that the Russian offensive on Kharkov failed and Russians have huge losses . . . :)
Anders, you are really getting good at this. Your points are straight up whip lash delivered. Very potent, very powerful. I hope some Russians are reading along..
Excerpt from the Nuclear Doctrine of the Russian Federation: 19. The conditions determining the possibility of the Russian Federation using nuclear weapons are: a) receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territories of the Russian Federation and (or) its allies; b) the use by the enemy of nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction on the territories of the Russian Federation and (or) its allies; c) the enemy's impact on critically important state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the disabling of which will lead to the disruption of the response of nuclear forces; d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the USE of CONVENTIONAL weapons, when the very existence of the State is threatened
With France and the U.K. both threatening to escalate things, it makes sense that Putin would make note of Russia's nuclear capability. I think Putin arguing at some point that the war has now become one of the West against Russia and that he has decided to use "small" tactical weapons on the battlefield to preserve Russian lives and forestall another draft, would not be as "crazy" as Anders is insisting. I still don't think it is likely, but I find Ander's talks to show a lack of insight into Russia's point of view.
russian threatened everyone in case of any kind of intervention (you noted that apparently everyone don't give a shit of russian threats, for good reasons we now see why ...)until day one so I fear what u said is totally irrelevant .
@@sirrodneyffing1 If you care about understanding a situation and making productive choices, then you should care about understanding your adversary. The problem with Anders is that he is pandering to Putin-haters not deepening the understanding of what is going on.
@@erichert1001 When you are finished calling people names, you are welcome to join a reasoned conversation about such a critical situation. Until then, you can keep watching Anders' videos.
@@stuarthall3874 "Deepening the understanding" Mate, you really are a lost cause. All the Russians have done is lie, lie lie and lie again. All they do is lie, kill, deceive, lie and kill again. Everythinbg thy say is confected to deceive, and absolutly nothing else." Undersanding"? what a sick joke. Th only understanding of Russi needed is to work out how to waste them at faster rate. Thats all. Sounds a bit like you're one of those Putin mouthpieces that try to sound "reasonable" and constructive. Moscow pay well does it? in USD I bet.🤑
Nobody else had them at the time so there was no risk of retaliation. And yes, they kinda did. The US didn't want to accept Japans terms for surrender, didn't want to fight a prolonged war in Japan and wanted to end the Soviet advance into Asia
We didn’t want to do the land invasion bc that was going to be 100 times bloodier than the nukes. That was a special case, it wasn’t because we couldn’t do it because we didn’t want to. This is a little different. Russia wouldn’t be nuking for the same purpose the US did, Russia would be nuking solely out of not wanting to face a humiliating defeat. That is not nearly as justifiable of a reason and Russia knows that.
On his channel, Jake Broe has a video listing some of the (non-nuclear) retaliatory measures that the West might take in response to a Russian nuclear strike - any one of which would cripple Russia's ability to continue with the invasion of Ukraine.
LOL! And why would Russia use nukes when they won the war? Maybe its b/c west wants to get involved? If west invades Russia will defend. West take note.
@@-Highlander-42 He is winning 18% of Ukraine along with its resources and ensuring that Ukraine is less useful for NATO if inducted in its current state.
@@nathanhazlehurst484He has lost $300 bn. He is under a warrant arrest. He has lost most of soviet stocks. Finland abd Sweden are in NATO and 1000 km+ of NATO borders are added, the Baltic Sea is a NATO lake, the Black Sea is closed and half of his fleet there is destroyed, Crimea and the bridge of shame is about to be attacked, Belgorod is under contant attack, Gazprom is almost bankrupt, N. Korean missiles that explode on air are desoerately needed. I stop here. Do you see putin winning? Really? If you think russia can easily hold these territories it has stolen and annexed, you must be either an ignorant or a russian troll 👿. This war is the last chapter of Russia's deatruction. The first one was putin's installation into the throne.
I think I heard or read that the US more or less told Russia, that if they would use nuclear weapons US / NATO would fight every Russian troop on Ukrainian territory.
I haven't heard that specifically, but I strongly suspect that this is the case, or something like it. Russian use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine will probably activate a series of pre-planned responses whereby NATO uses conventional strikes to eliminate all Russian forces in and around Ukraine, and, as you said, this has probably been communicated to Russia through diplomatic channels. (I'm a recently retired senior U.S. military officer; I've spoken with folks involved in NATO and U.S. planning in Europe, but my assessment is not derived from any direct statements and certainly not on any information other than open source.)
"I told my KGB counterpart that if nuclear or biological weapons are used in Ukraine it will be the immediate end of the Kremlin regime. The US response will be Swift and absolute. He understood.". -- The Venerable Burns, CIA Director 💪💪♥️♥️♥️🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸💲💲💲💲🚀🚀🚀🚀💥💥💥⚰️🇷🇺⚰️🇷🇺⚰️🇷🇺⚰️🇷🇺⚰️
Anders, I really wonder why you are framing this in such a peculiar way: Russia using nuclear weapons to WIN IN Ukraine ≠ Russia using nuclear weapon IN UKRAINIAN TERRITORY to Win the Ukrainian conflict. The most overwhelmingly likely scenario for nuclear escalation by Russia involves "test detonations" by Russia on Russian soil. This covers Russian interests on several levels: 1. Russian sabre rattling rhetoric is increasingly seen as just empty talk. But withdrawing from the nuclear test ban treaty with a surprise under-ground detonation would be a real way to up the ante int he nuclear intimidation game without REALLY crossing the diplomatic line that would force every nuclear power to do whatever it took to make sure Russia lost in Ukraine just to suppress future proliferation. As North Korea has demonstrated quite conclusively, the nuclear testing taboo is no where near as significant as the nuclear-use-in-anger taboo. 2. Russia, like the West, unquestionably has real doubts about the reliability of the Russian aging nuclear and thermonuclear arsenal. And, unlike the West, those Russian munitions have not been maintained, upgraded, and generally tested exhaustively in every way imaginable short of test-detonations. This solves that problem for Russia, and does it in a way that is a double win for them: First, they don't need to make the sudden announcement of their withdrawal from the Nuclear test ban treaty until AFTER one of their bombs has worked. Conversely, the West won't know how many bombs they tried to test before one worked! So, the actual diagnostic test increases their certainty, but not the West's. 3. Rather than make Russia a pariah, they can then turn this into a form of terror-diplomacy... start inviting ambassadors and foreign business men, but also and especially internal and regional leaders to test detonations, complete with caviar, vodka and women. And that starts to be the basis for how they sell it to the Russian people too. Putin can say, by both deed and word, 'See how strong we are! See how outsiders are cowed, and insiders are bolstered by a=our strength!' The part of the Russian people who support Putin WANT strength... they want a resurgence of Empire, a renaissance, of power, a return of glory. 4. The Russian test detonation scenario also provides a slow escalation ramp-up both diplomatically and to eventually normalize nuclear use on the battlefield. That ramp-up looks something like this: His first detonations are performed in secret and as international surprises. Then he ups the ante by turning them into political-press-events, then he starts increasing the yield of the test devices, then he starts doing above ground testing (caught from land and space in 4k, color corrected and broadcast all over the internet... you'll practically be able to taste the fallout), then testing near Ukraine or other hostile territory, then testing inside territory that he has annexed as "Russian" but the international community still recognizes as "Ukrainian". And every single time he escalates his "test detonations" you'll see the West's resolve falter a little more, and Russia's internal unity strengthen a little more because hey... they got away with it! And at no point do they actually have to use one in anger against actual war-targets to do any of this... which means the West, desperate for an excuse not to act, won't at least not in a meaningful way. I'm sure NATO will stage drills, the US will announce sanctions, and the UN will pass a non-binding resolution denouncing Russia in the harshest diplomatic terms... the usual blah blah blah. And that impotence of response alone, regardless of what happens on the ground in Ukraine, would be victory for Putin. To be clear, I don't WANT this to happen. I'm just pointing out that the conventional, Putin goes straight to battlefield use scenario is stupid. It's stupid for all the reasons you point out. This does not however equate to Russia not doing it... it just equates to Russia not doing it that way.
Thanks for adding that to the discussion. Great insight. However does this not also create pressure on non proliferation? And also have the risk of popular dissent? I mean it might play out the way you say. But it's a gamble. Nontheless a gamble we should prepare to handle.
@@pierman4858 You are right that it creates pressure on on-proliferation, but only in ways that are useful to Russia in the short to intermediate term. Russia, in this scenario, might actually encourage some non-nuclear states to go nuclear as a sort of the diplomatic carrot to the diplomatic stick that is the test detonations. Putin, who unashamedly sees what he is doing as a resurgence of the USSR, would sell this to the Russian public by doubling down on his Anti-Nazi Ukraine justification. He would start suggesting that the West has been infiltrated by Nazi imperialists who are using puppet international entities like the UN and NATO to advance the insidious agenda! He'd frame his proliferation as judiciously providing nuclear technology to nations he, in his wisdom, knows to be free of such infiltration so as to protect them from the insidious clutches of this Western Nazi Conspiracy!!!!! Of course the real-politik of this would be a bit more sinister: Russia has always used puppet states both inside and outside its borders to maintain power. This would be a way for them to start to establish a new network of such puppets globally in much the same way that the Soviets sought to spread the communist revolution globally. Except now its membership in the nuclear club, gated and controlled by Russia of course, that he would be using to extend his influence. In the long run, such capabilities might be turned against Russia, but that can be guarded against by simply only giving these weapons to countries physically far from Russia... Nicuragua isn't going to be developing an ICBM any time soon. It is much more likely that the weapons RUssia provides will be used by local puppets in local wars. That too is a way for Putin to up the ante without, himself, using them in war. Further, it would erode the taboo of use of nukes which transfers Russia's hypothetical nuclear arsenal to an actual one.... making Russia still stronger as it is willing to cross the line, but the West wouldn't be. Sure it's a gamble... but the Russia we have is VERY willing to gamble geopolitically... we wouldn't be in this situation in Ukraine if it weren't.
Anders, I am a very big fan of yours and watch all of your videos as soon as they are released. But I have a sharp disagreement with one thing you said in this video (at 6:32), you said Russia is "liberating more and more territory." Russia does not liberate territory, it enslaves territory. Russia does not render freedom to those residing in the captured land, Russia subjugates them.
@@mariaf.6601 I went back and listened and you are 100% correct. I should have known (Anders' command of the English language is better than mine). Thank you for taking the time to correct me.
I think one of the key points is that the Chinese government would be absolutely furious. Being a pariah in the west is one thing, being isolated from China is quite another.
@@Tonik-13 loads. The Russian economy is increasingly dependent on China. President Xi, while being pretty supportive of the Russian government has been fairly explicit that any use of nuclear weapons would be unacceptable. The Chinese government doesn't want to see any kind of nuclear war, limited or otherwise for a variety of reasons. China is also pretty obviously the senior partner in any kind of alliance or partnership between Russia and China, having a vastly larger economy, military, population, etc. the only thing Russia really has over China now is access to natural resources and a far larger nuclear arsenal. That said China is expanding and modernising its own nuclear arsenal. The Chinese government certainly doesn't want to see a world where every country with the economic and scientific capacity pursues a nuclear weapons program. They already have to contend with dubious situations of Pakistan and India sabre rattling on their frontier and the DPRK with a nuclear arsenal threatening their neighbours every so often (though this was presumably pursued with Beijing's knowledge and blessing).
@@wh8787 Buddy, you have written so much but not a single fresh thought, try to say something that is not common knowledge for a change. But still you made a mistake, Russia and China are indeed interconnected, but you overestimate China's influence on Russia. China has no power over Russia, that is the essence of the relationship between these two countries, unlike the west they preach sovereignty, and non-interference in the internal affairs of the country. Of course Russia will take into account China's opinion, but Russia will ensure its own security as it sees fit and will act at its own discretion, in its own interests and China can't and won't do anything about it. Even if it doesn't like something.
@@Tonik-13 China doesn't rule Russia, this much is true. However, in a nuclear scenario, China, and many other states would no longer do trade with Russia, the Russian economy and perhaps russia itself would collapse. This would be unacceptable to the oligarchs, would see to it that Putin would be strung up. Russia can pretend it doesn't need China, but it does need China, now more than ever, and in that way, China has considerable influence of Russia.
@@pnwdrifter5680 What kind of trade are you talking about? In the nuclear scenario, there will be no trade at all, there will be no one to trade. The West very often talks about the possible use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. It seems that the West dreams about this and wants to provoke Russia to take this step. But I will tell you one secret - there are no targets for nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The Russian weapons of the apocalypse are aimed at the real enemies of Russia. And if it comes to its application, Russia will be least concerned about trade and China's opinion...
I would like to hear your take on why Macron is hinting about the possibility of french troops in Ukraine. Is he just playing Putin's own game of smoke and mirrors, or is this something else completely? He seemed incredibly naive in the months leading up to the invasion, so I find this very intriguing.
Looks to me as an attempt for consensus of NATO to send troops, seed an idea and see what the responses are. Nobody will send troops to Ukraine is too risky.
I'm curious too. My guess: When US aid was stalled in congress & RU started gaining territory again, Macron got worried nobody would stop them & started looking for ways to step up & push them back out of Europe
France has been losing its power in Africa and access to vital resources they rely on for their nuclear industry for example. Russia has been pushing them out of their former colonies successfully and it’s costing France big style. There is no chance France would send troops to Ukraine. It was a weak bluff to try give pause to Putin’s plans for Africa.
Putin may not distinguish between the existence of the Russian state and his own power, but does he distinguish between his own power and his own existence? His use of nuclear weapons would most certainly imperil the latter.
I am persuaded Putin can’t distinguish between loss of his power and existence. His nightmare is to end up like Mussolini, Hitler or Kaddafi. He would rather destroy whole world not to be seen like them. Maybe I am mistaken because he has children. But without children it would be 100% sure
Probably because i was born after the cold war, but i simply can't take nuclear threats seriously. Blackmail is the only serious use i see for them, and that's why we can't cave to blackmail.
@@BaBaYaga1999-p7u You are free to live in fear, but the calmer approach the West currently are taking are, objectively, a much better way to handle things. Would think someone having lived through the cold war would have more against caving to Russian threats?
@@BaBaYaga1999-p7u pls don't think because u are afraid everybody is . I was born during cold war and I piss on pootin's face . This is typical bully blackmail , so we call the bluff and let's see if they really like the taste of our deterrence . It's your kind of reaction that leads us all in the present situation, because it's exactly what made the russians so cocky and it's eactly what Anders tried to explain to you in this video . I guess he will have to do many more vids, for certain to understand the term "blackmail" and it's consequences . Sad .
Thank you for another great video. I'm a little skeptical about Putin feeling like he has to explain nuclear first use to Russian population. We do not have a democratically elected leader of a free nation here, we have a dictator-for-life of a dictatorship that has increasingly fascist characteristics. After more than twenty years in power Putin probably feels more like the Russian people owe something to him for all the "good" he has done for great Russian empire, not the other way around. If he takes the decision to use nuclear weapons the propagandists have already laid the groundwork for this by claiming the West is preparing for such things, it might be claimed it was the only possibility to stop Ukraine using nuclear/biological/chemical weapons on Russia etc.. What i'm saying is there is a likelihood your take is based on assumptions for a more Western style government that will not hold true for Russia though I agree the risk is still not great. Russia is not stopped from using nukes to "win" or destroy Ukraine, or whole of Europe by being responsible to their population, it is the "then what" as you say. The fear of consequences, the fear of the attack failing and the fear of the attack not being decisive. The last one is especially important in my opinion since it would take massive tactical weapons use on the battlefield to turn the conflict decisively in Russia's favor, there would be huge risks that Russian forces are not equipped to deal with radiation exposure and the more nukes are used the more likely Western counter-attack is. Strategic use would also hold massive risk of counterattack if it's not a one-off, and then it depends on what target. Russia might not be held to many constraints but at some point West must realize if you need nukes not to get nuked, or nuclear blackmail works then everyone needs nukes. If USA is not the one to do it France or UK might conduct a nuclear counterstrike to reinstate deterrence. Also as one last edit to say about nuclear proliferation. The fear of it does not hold equal sway in my view when it comes to nuclear weapons states. Russia might be more keen than we like to admit to allow or even encourage other states to get nukes. North-Korea, the most recent nuclear weapons state showed their gratitude to Russia with lots of ammunition. Iran is close to a bomb and a Russian ally that generously provided for Russia's war and we do not know what the true cost of it was to Russia. We really should not think Russia's logic in terms of our own, they are very deep in the fascist blackhole that has a gravity of it's own. We also cannot overestimate China's influence upon Russia to stop them. Heck China might not want to stop Russia. 2nd edit: We also cannot rely on Putin and his inner circle to be reasonable when it comes to not using nuclear weapons because of the stated doctrine or some other such consideration. Russian culture has it that rules and regulations are for the lower class only and Putin will not feel bound by them. We have seen Russia try to strategically bomb and starve Ukrainian civilians for revenge and out of spite just like Hitler did to United Kingdom after failing to invade. Dictators such as these can be incredibly childish and entitled and when denied something they want after years of decades of being taught they can get away with everything there is a chance they will do something totally drastic out of pure hate. We should be ready for it, ready to respond with the harshest measures and signal such, that will already reduce the risk of it happening. Only thing Putin understands is strength and weakness, we do not want to look weak. If Russia uses nuclear weapons the counterstrike must be devastating, it must be very near immediate. If the result is something like "increase support for Ukraine", more sanctions no matter how devastating it might as well be strongly worded letters and will be seen by many dictators in this world as West's failure to act. Russian nuclear use might not have to be matched but the result must be a devastating conventional attack that will turn the tide of war, it needs to overmatch what can be commonly viewed as Russia's gains from using nukes. Otherwise our deterrence is gone, the world will have changed and everyone and their mom will need nukes to either blackmail others or defend themselves.
But what is the thing that Putin can't destroy with an Iskander but if he destroyed it with a nuke would restore Russia's superpower status? I can't think of anything.
First remove dementia Biden and drug addict Zelensky, you cried that Russia non democratic, but when the last US presidential elections took place, for some reason everyone very quickly shut up about the tossing of ballots and vote counting without the presence of observers
Russia won't use nukes inside Ukraine as they are currently trying to annex it. The term "don't shit where you eat" is applicable as using nukes would irradiate the areas they are used making them less than desirable. If they go with nukes it would be to attack other parties that are supporting Ukraine or by handing less efficient (and for their own sake untraceable) devices to third parties for terror attacks against Nato members.
Another point to mention is that nukes require constant and expensive maintenance to keep them in good working order. Considering what we have seen so far about the state of preparedness of russian military equipment and how little spending Russia made in its armed forces in the previous decades, if we take into account the size or their nuclear stock, I would doubt them being really capable of launching a nuclear war
I have thought the same thing about Russian nuclear weapons. The rest of the military was left without maintenance and resources while the money was siphoned away by greedy Putin cronies. But, even one nuclear weapon would be devastating.
It’s entirely possible that an attempted ruSSian nuclear launch would result in a nuclear explosion over their own territory. If that happens, Putin will blame NATO, of course.
If you want to support the channel, please consider subscribing to my newsletter on www.logicofwar.com.
And remember to be careful about attempts at impersonation scams in the comments section where someone uses my profile picture from a different account. I will never ask you to contact me on private platforms like Telegram or WhatsApp.
We apprciate your thoughtful and balanced commentary Anders.
you seem pretty daft:
1. 2 nukes on kiev and the war is over
2. Dear russian slaves and meat, NATO has attacked (for added effect stage a false flag operation) us and we beat them by sending nukes. they are now scared and defeated
can you be abit less dellusional. after so many years of hyping of ukraine, can you just acknowledge defeat is inevitable without NATO entering the war, in which if NATO enters the war, we will have WWIII and a nuclear exchange? you are not helping the Ukrainian by lying about their conditions, the more you hype them up, the more europe will see thing as under control and the less money and resources they will focus on Ukraine. it is way better to be honest and tell them the truth, then to lie and prolong the slatemate. NATO must consider the possibility of a nuclear war.
@@lagrangewei Why Ukraine has already liberated 50% of Ukraine. Europe is ramping up the defense industry, the US aid will keep coming. Russia has two years left in the fight, if the west start sanction India and Russia the support to Russia will be gone. Russia is alone in this against Ukraine supported by the richest and biggest military power in the world. If we in the west decide that Russia will lose, then Russia will lose, if Russia uses 1 nuke Putler and Russia is over as a nation. There is no way out of this for Russia anymore, Surrender or total downfall is whats waiting Russia.
Russia making a nuclear escalation gambit is actually highly detrimental to them as long as the West sticks to a proportional retaliation strategy.
Nuclear weapons are most useful when you don't use them.
Last week Putin threatened to nuke a McDonald's because they got his value meal order wrong😂 Russia is nothing more than a joke at this point lol
They are also useful if you have no other choice to avoid defeat.
Putin has been threatening the weather with Nukes for 20 years. Maybe the rhetoric has increased but its always been there in some regard
Are they? I mean, they were quite effective when the US used them if you want to be cynical about it.
@@TheMrCougarful Not even nuclear weapons can help the russian military, it's such a complete joke lol
Wow. Someone delivering facts and not fear mongering. I’m impressed.
A very strange channel.
Anyone old enough to remember the Cold War knows nuclear weapons are useless in reality. How long would it take for any of Russia's neighbors to normalize relationships and resume trade? China, India, all the Russian friends in Africa or Middle East would fear being branded a pariah, being cut out of global trade and turn their backs on Russia as soon as the fist bomb blew.
This guy is to facts as pig is to flying.
@@tomk3732. Yeah. Bizarre. It's like listening to interviews with Ben Hodges. He was the highest ranking American NATO member in Europe but he has absolutely no idea about Russia, Putin, Russia's military strategies, Russia's M.I.C. capabilities, Russia's military equipment, Russia's economy... NOTHING!!
It's unbelievable. I watch these experts get it wrong over and over and over again and wonder, are they really this incompetent? Or are they lying?
@@tomk3732 Then you should rather watch Russian state TV, instead of wasting your time here. The facts being presented there are probably more to your liking. But Z-patriots seem to be constantly drawn towards YT-channels like this one, like moths are drawn towards a flame. Somehow, they simply can't stay away. 😆
You explain this so calmly and clearly, I needed this. Thank you.
Tack!
You do understand Russia will Winn this war?
@@jojjeja9371 Will never happen, Ukraine and the west will never trow away a world order since 1946 that would open up for dictatorships and, pure evil like Russia, China, North Korea and Iran to do as they want to their neighbors. Thats not even a possibility. Russia is weak and the sanctions bites like never before, we are slowly boiling the frog. Russia has all ready lost this war they just don’t understand it. Russia has a life line by China and India. A lufe line that will end the day the west says stop or we will not bye your gods anymore. These country’s are going down to if they don’t stop supporting the genocide in Ukraine. And if Ukraine would lose against all odds that means WW3 and boots on the ground for Nato. The west has has 30/1 in resources and military power and as you know the will to support Ukraine has gone up the last month. When Ukraine liberates their lands from the Russian Nazis, Russia will collapse. China will then take a big bite of Russia and all the country’s inside Russia that want to leave Russia, like the stolen parts of Georgia, Chechenia, and many other minority’s Russia will brake up in pieces. These regions hate Pution because he send them first as canon food and don’t pay their familys. And I don’t care what you heard at RT or some other Russian fake Nazi state media. You don’t invade other country’s thats a fact. 500 000 dead or wounded Russian soldiers 709-1800 dead a day compared to 100 000 dead UA-soldiers, a totally failed invasion of Ukraine, a Russian Black sea navy taken out by a country without a navy. And last Ukraine has all ready taken back 50%. Yes Russia will take some small grounds the upcoming weeks but then the US aid will arrive, and Europe are starting up the war production at the same time as Russias war industry will be blown to peaces now when the ban on bombing Russia with western weapons are lifted. Russia is weak and have all ready sold their soul to china. Putin is wanted iver half of the world, Nato has started to expend even more. The Russian economy and export is falling like a dead bird and you think Russia is winning 😂😂😂 Ukraine don’t need to win the war, they need to hold the line, Russia will destroy itself from the inside. Let’s see what happened now when 7 Nato country’s is about to send its soldiers in to Ukraine to release them to the front, and when the mobilization is on. Russia is digging its own grave in Ukraine just like they did in Afghanistan. We all know when Russia are afraid and we are doing something right and that when Russia starts threatening the worlds with nukes.
@@jojjeja9371 Nope - Slava Ukraini
@@Rottweilerdsq You are delusional, or you are part of the not exiting European brainwashed military. Germany maybe?
@@Rottweilerdsq England have a militært counting 70.000 soldiers. The only credible "European" military is Turkey, and they will leave Nato for sure.
For those of us who remember the Cold War, this kind of threat is familiar and not something we tend to worry about. For the younger ones who have never known constant nuclear threats, this kind of threat is scary. If we are heading into another cold war, everyone is going to have to get used to these threats because they will be far more constant, even without a war going on.
Coldwar times are over ...! Remember Russia is not big threat to us its china wait n watch on coming October brics + expansion n their plan to kill dollar dominance with centralised currency bwn southeast asian african and middle eastern countries... west hegemony nearing its end !
Oh, we are already in a cold war with Russia. Hints: continuous cyber attacks, misinformation, assassination in Germany, exploding ammo storage in Bulgaria, extensive drone usage on oil platforms in the north sea, buying up real estate in Finland close to military installation, etc etc
I lived through the Cold War and all this nuclear bomb talk is so ho hum, rofl.
I believe that knowledge about nuclear weapons and how (and why) they can be used is the key to cope with a new cold war - at the end of the day, war is still business and ned to give an outcome ;)
Served in the DK Army 4 years 63-67 as engineer large part of the training was decontamination as the Russians was expected to hit our radars towards the Baltic Sea as later told by the Polish after 91 the plan was to use a 2megaton bomb first if did not succeed then a 5megaton half the main island would be destroyed as soldiers were told if they came life expectancy would be approximately 4 hours glad they were broke and stayed home,never imagined these times would come the Russians have never been rational and trustworthy now in Canada since 70 and glad for 👍it 🇩🇰🇨🇦👨🏼🦳
Appreciate the (relatively) short format of these analysis videos. There are quite a few other excellent channels like Perun and Wlliam Spaniel who do explainers but they all produce one hour long materials that not everybody has the time to listen to. You fill a much needed gap for people interested in the conflict.
You are one of the best sources on YT. Always balanced, clear and informed
True!
He is spokesman of NATO. He's a Danish NATO officer, he can't say one word that contradicts anything that NATO, or the Danish govenrment, says. But he might be more well-spoken than the childish "reporters" you know from your own country,
Edited for typos
You guys are clueless. Weak minds
@@MeBallerman Finally somebody using the brains. NATO is pushing planet towards nuclear abyss.
@@MeBallerman Oh that's such a good argument, I had better watch RT for half an hour to balance out my opinion, there's no reason at all that Russia might want to twist the facts and bend the narrative when they are obviously doing so well
Anders. Thank you. A very interesting and thought provoking insight. I love your videos. Muvh appreciated. John from UK
This channel always delivers a calm analysis without the hysterical fear mongering of many media outlets. Really like the content! 👍
THIS IS MY FAVORITE CHANNEL about war in Ukraine. Greetings from Romania
How can you consider this guy credible after he accused russia for destroying nord stream 2? When i saw that video i knew he is not objective at all.
salutari
Fantastic explanation. Its the best nonnuclear picture I have ever seen. Thanks a lot.
When your bluff has been called a dozen times already, how effective is it any longer?
"Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!"
Foolish Western talking point. Our leaders don't seem to understand the difference between a 'warning' and a 'threat'.!!
As long as they have nuclear arsenal u can never call a bluff.
That is now called "strategic ambiguity". You never when the other side has set the thresholds of its red lines. Happened with Ukraine in 2008, 2014 and 2022. In all those occasions, the West ignored Russia's previous warnings, later followed by disbelief. The current Israeli-Iranian crisis is another example. Israel never expected such a reaction from Iran.
@@santoriniblue8413 I think Israel did tbh. I mean the net result of that was Iran looking very stupid and embarrassed.
TY Anders for your great videos. 🎉🎉❤
This channel is great! Your analytics and knowledge is on top, thank you for contribution in these crazy times.
Always good food for thought! Thank you for sharing, @Anders.
I look to this channel for the most consistently cogent analysis of the war in Ukraine.
I agree.
Telegraph Ukraine daily is recommended too
Comedy - same as Denys.
@@tomk3732If this comedy, you are the circus clown.
@@sot11cat No, video author is the performing clown - I am in the audience and I am in on the joke. You seem to not get it.
Love your logical analysis of the situation as always! It really does help process the noise and see clearly! Please continue with your excellent work!
In order to preserve non proliferation countries must not only make it clear that they would respond strongly if one were used, but also clearly and transparently ignore nuclear blackmail. If we want to keep a lid on the number of nuclear powers, it must be clear to all countries that there are no real advantages to possessing them.
Nato is amassing and stacking massive forces all over the western border of Russia. Of course Russia is going to be talking about deterrents.
Yeah, but it is clear from North Korea that is advantageous to possess them if you are going to be isolated regardless. At least with the current dynamics, nuclear proliferation is going to occur. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are probably the current lineup. If Taiwan falls, you've got South Korea, Japan, and Indonesia.
Anders didn't mention it but the US and president Biden already made it clear if Russia uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, then the US will respond 'very strongly' to it (making sure Russia will regret having done it) and China too already signalled to Putin what will happen if he dares to use nuclear weapons
@@richdobbs6595 Taiwan will be one of the first if Russia gets away with the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine - and China told Putin they won't like it one bit
@@embreis2257 That was my thinking. Taiwan, South Korea and, Japan probably have everything you need to start a nuclear program and detailed plans on how to get that program started ASAP. Both China and North Korea really don't want that to happen
Great video thank you
Great presentation Anders, thank you.
Bluffing. All day long. Dont give the bastards an inch. They will never stop.
I think they stripped the parts out of most of their nuclear in the 1990s and sold them on ebay to get food money😂😂😂
absolutely agree. call their bluff
@@dpelpal As I understand it, they took whatever little funding they had and used it to maintain and even grow their nuclear deterrent as best they could during that time to the detriment of their conventional forces. I do not think Russias nuclear forces are are anything to scoff at... But im also certain they will not use them in this stage of the. conflict. Putin may be the lowest form of life on earth but hes not going to commit suicide.
@@dpelpal As i understand it, they took whatever little funding they had and used it to maintain and even enhance a core of their nuclear deterrent. We should not underestimate their nuclear arsenal. Theyre still bluffing, but their nuclear forces are no joke.
@@Thewestcoastshooter They spent all the money on their military and it's still a complete joke? 😂
Clear as ever Anders, thanks and keep it up
Thank you Anders, fantastic summary
Very interesting & informative video Mr Nielsen. Thank you for your analysis!
Thank you for this thoughtful perpective
Amazing video again. Your viewpoint on topics like these are very refreshing. Thank you for these very informative videos. 👍🏻
Yeah, his viewpoint is refreshing and very wrongheaded. He has no idea what he's talking about. He's just a goofball with an opinion that happens to be wrong. Remember what they told you Ukraine was going to win Ukraine is going to be completely destroyed. They already have 500,000 dead people.
Thanks! Important subject especially the closing sentences
Great analysis ! Thank you for sharing !
Great video Anders . Can you do a video on hybrid warfare? . Why isn't the west responding to russian cyber attacks ?
Hybrid or Cyber?
How do you know they aren't responding or planning a response?
@@falten2 obviously something is being done about it , but i would like to know more about how the west could/would handle that kind of attacks
@@krede77 You did say that nothing was happening, hence my question. But your second post makes alot more sense. Guess we will just have to wait and see.. Im sure there is alot of cloak and dagger in this game.
here in Bulgaria, nothing is being done, Russian bots have taken over almost all internet resources, hundreds of fake publications, fake news, disinformation - every day, everyone knows where the bot factories are, who the trolls are, and none of our services react??? Desperate!!
Thank you for your insight throughout this conflict. It's reassuring to find that there are sane people in the world.
I appreciate your analysis so much. Thank you for your insights.
Recently a man was investigated by the russian police during a putin rally. The man said, "Putin gave me the happiest childhood you could ever have!" The policeman looked at him and said "You're 60, putin wasn't president when you were a child!" The man looked at him and said "yes! He wasn't there, this is why I had a happy childhood!"😂
@user873kak I'm still laughing about him screaming "Kyiv in 3 days"😂😂😂
@@dpelpal Putin never said Kyiv in 3 days. You can actually search the whole catalog of RUclips videos right now and you won't find it. That statement was said by western media over and over again.
@@boxingsense3459 Oh yes comrade and the MOSKVA still sails as well!!!😂
It is fortunate that there are no such fools, like you, in Russia.
@@dpelpal 😂😂😂 Yeah, and 20% of Ukraine is now under NATO control after more than $200 billion dollars.
Love your analysis and how you look at things. Your oversight and insights are so high level.
I really appreciate your insight and analysis of these important issues. You deliver the material well and are a true professional. Keep up the good work!
What a wonderfully argued explanation, I'm quite blown away by the way you simplify and explain such an overwhelming and worrying topic. I've long held the view that Putin will not (can not) use nuclear weapons, but never been able to argue clearly why, so it was a great relief to hear you break the question down with such clear and concise logic. Thank you.
He will not if he does he will be faced with nuclae weapons from the west
except the expert is full of contradictions...russia use nuke means russia weak..america NUKED 2 civillian japanese cities..so strong..PROPOGANDA
Yep. I have watched him from day 1 of this war and he is spot on each time. The US president should hire him.
After the US backed coup the whole issue for the Russians is security. if NATO enters Ukraine and install missiles...Russia has about 5 minutes to react. Whether you believe it or not Russia sees this as an existential threat and they most likely would use nuclear weapons if pressured. But contrary to what Anders says, Russia is winning and was always going to win. Obama warned against any conflict in Ukraine as the Russians ability to escalate was greater than NATO's. He was right.
Nah
Thanks as always for such wonderful and structured analysis. I am visiting Denmark in July I hope to bump into you in Kopenhagen.
Stalker
Great points. Thanks for doing this.
Good one
Insight and logic
🎉🎉🎉🎉
Thanks 🙏
Thank you 😊
Excellent and down to earth analysis, probably the best on Russian nukes I have heard so far.
Only time nuclear weapons were used, were against country losing the war already, having no allies, and with no way to retaliate.
All the opposite is true of Ukraine.
Its seems to be a stalemate like in WW1 and nobody is winning at the moment.
...And we know the effects now...
So, it's useless crying about it unless you are going to use them hint hint russia
Yes, Japan was losing the war when the nuclear weapons were used. But, the situation in 1945 was different than 2024, for many reasons.
It's not fair to make comparisons.
@@danm9006 Yes, now situation is worse due to total capacity of the nuclear weapons
@danm9006 lol the comparisons is not fair just because the US was the one Using it lol😂?
as always: clear thoughts evolved
Thank you. What a mess 1 person has caused. I really appreciate your knowledgeable point of view which should be an to The Art Of War.
I fail to see how using nuclear weapons in Ukraine is a win. For one I thought the point was to retake Ukraine. You can't occupy irradiated land. Also, the political fallout would be worse than from the bombs. Total embargo, kicked out of the UN, etc. It's hard to run a country when nobody will trade with you.
You can occupy irradiated land. In fact, it may be easier to occupy irradiated land. Besides Russia doesn't want Ukraine but to control access to Russia, and that is in Western Ukraine and Poland. Remember people never stopped working at Chernobyl, and human activity has continued in the surrounding area to this very day. I think the threat of NATO responding if Putin does such a thing will prevent tactical nukes. I believe Sullivan or Kirby have already alluded to this last time he threatened
hundred thousands dead and you can ask question if its holocoust.
Russians so afraid of shadows
they attac eweryone, they surely live in the past. As a result they repeat it themselves, and make shadows threathening.
With their foggy logic they will newe feel safe. They are a victim of their own halusination.
Nuclear weapons dont have as much radiation as people think and they would be detonated in the air so the radiation would not be absorbed as much into the ground, Japan was hit twice and safe to live in a very short time after
The UN is defunct and no longer matters in any way, shape or form. Case in point: Hamas was just recognized as a country by the UN.
Playing the nuke card would be inherently risky, the US has at least eight SSBN constantly at sea, the UK one, the French one any one of which could make a mess of Russia no one is winning if all that's left is a smoking cinder.
Bullshit, Russia has none, right? Nitwit.
Nato is amassing and stacking massive forces all over the western border of Russia. Of course Russia is going to be talking about deterrents.
And how many Russian nuke subs?
@@noahway13I think you miss the point. Nobody wins in a nuclear exchange, it's MAD to think differently.
@@noahway13 Allegedly 4 or 5 at sea, given their maintenance prob 1/2 that.
Has this changed with the recent use of FOAB-type thermobarics by Russia in Ukraine? Those explosions (Vuhledar) are purportedly similar to what a Russian tactical nuke might achieve -- I can't tell if this is cooling off the Russian talk of (especially tactical) nukes by showing that they've always have conventional alternatives... or is it heating up ???
Thank you for providing sanity and clarity.
I too feel this time around of nuclear blackmail it is a sign of weakness.
Strong nations send warning first.
@@tomk3732 which they have done.. agree.
Thank you for this rational and articulate explanation.
Thats was very informative ,and about time someone talked about this. Thanks Anders !!
It is getting tiresome 😣 the nuclear ☢️ blackmail !!!!
And laughable lol. Last week putin threatened to nuke a McDonald's for getting his value meal order wrong
Its not blackmail its a reaction ,warning to Nato trups if they put boots on ukraine and I BET they are serious
Rather things being tiresome than things lightiing up in the dark.
@@dpelpal Yes and the McDonald's is only 1 mile from his bunker.😄
this expert is full of contradicing propoganda..russia cant use weapons without looking weak..yet america nuked 2 cities war crimes diud they also not look weak????????????????????????
I am seriously impressed with your logic and reasoning. To the extent that I will even forgive you for wearing a tie. (lol)
Seriously though, keep up the good work!
Cheers
Nothing wrong with a shirt and tie. Nice to see someone dress smart for a change
@@46FreddieMercury91 My hatred of ties comes solely from having been forced to wear the things from primary school onwards. But it is just a personal thing. Hence the lol in my comment. But there is a tradition that professional liars wear ties, e. g. politicians. Still, I'd rather have politicians than a military coup...
Cheers
Non-proliferation part is obvious, but when it comes to selling use of nuclear weapons to domestic audience cant Putin simply say something like it is to save lives of Russian soldiers that would otherwise die trying to "denazify" Ukraine using conventional means? He can point out that it worked for USA in WW2 and blame west for escalation as usual.
Non proliferation wasn't the issue back then it is today. It was assumed the Russians would get the bomb no matter what.
Russia's own policy on the use of nuclear weapons would not consider that a valid situation for there use
@@nic.h Putin has already been a president many times longer than Russian laws would've allowed when he started. Turns out he can just change the laws when he feels like it.
That said, even he can't do that without some preparation, which is where he could potentially be overthrown if the change is too unpopular.
@@pRahvi0 yes fair point dictators don't tend to care about rules
Thank you for your explenation. Since the start of the full scale war against Ukraine I thought briefly about this nuclear threat and then decided that it is a bluff. Glad my own thoughts about that are about the same as your.
I wish your explenation would be broadcasted by the mass media as far too many people still fall for it.
People seem to be mistaking a warning for a threat. Contrary to what the video states, Putin nor anyone else has spoken about using nukes in Ukraine, why would they? They are doing fine on the battlefield, it is Ukraine which is getting devastated.
Putin's warning was about the use of NATO weapons to attack Russian territory, the warning is that it risks Russia considering the country which supplied the weapons as a party to the war, then there will be no problem to hit them on home soil, using whatever weapons they deem fit.
In that situation everyone seems to jump direct to nukes, but Russia has a lot of none nuke missiles, able to avoid NATO air defences and strike anywhere in Europe.
Another brilliant analysis, Anders. Thank you from 🇦🇺
Thank you Sir!
Who wants to deploy nukes on their doorstep? That's nuts.
The nukes would actually not target Ukraine.
Putano cares not one iota for anybody, including his own people. "Nuts" or not, that's the reality we have.
@@johannesvalterdivizzini1523, for Putin this is a game of who can be the craziest...
Great content!
I want to know how well maintained the Russian nuclear weapons are?
This is irrelevant. Badly maintained nukes can also cause a lot of damage.
@@no_more_spamplease5121If the don't explode during launch, or crash, than you get a fizzle eventmor nothing. basically a radiologic spill.
and no, they haven't maintained them at all. mabye a handful. many silos have even been closed permanently because the fuel, which is poisonous, has been leaking......
Perun made a video on that and the conclusion is that the probability of their nukes working is very high by the fact that they have literal heaps of fissile material , i advice people to go and watch his channel
This is difficult for the public to judge due to a lack of transparency. However, we do know that Russia has fewer financial resources at its disposal than the USA.
Back than in my childhood there was a joke: Policeman asks the guy who tried to steal a nuclear bomb why he did it. "I wanted to sell it to by potatoes". "Why didn't you steal potatoes in the first place?". "Potatoes are better guarded" was the answer.
You should make a video about the new Kharkiv offensive
Oh yes, take popcorn and watch the comedian.
He doesn't need to make a video, I already know how he would say in the video that the Russian offensive on Kharkov failed and Russians have huge losses . . . :)
Would you watch this? This guy is a moron!
Anders, you are really getting good at this. Your points are
straight up whip lash delivered. Very potent, very powerful. I hope some Russians are reading along..
Excerpt from the Nuclear Doctrine of the Russian Federation:
19. The conditions determining the possibility of the Russian Federation using nuclear weapons are:
a) receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territories of the Russian Federation and (or) its allies;
b) the use by the enemy of nuclear weapons or other types of weapons of mass destruction on the territories of the Russian Federation and (or) its allies;
c) the enemy's impact on critically important state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the disabling of which will lead to the disruption of the response of nuclear forces;
d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the USE of CONVENTIONAL weapons, when the very existence of the State is threatened
With France and the U.K. both threatening to escalate things, it makes sense that Putin would make note of Russia's nuclear capability. I think Putin arguing at some point that the war has now become one of the West against Russia and that he has decided to use "small" tactical weapons on the battlefield to preserve Russian lives and forestall another draft, would not be as "crazy" as Anders is insisting. I still don't think it is likely, but I find Ander's talks to show a lack of insight into Russia's point of view.
russian threatened everyone in case of any kind of intervention (you noted that apparently everyone don't give a shit of russian threats, for good reasons we now see why ...)until day one so I fear what u said is totally irrelevant .
You can't escalate defending yourself against a murderer.
@@sirrodneyffing1 If you care about understanding a situation and making productive choices, then you should care about understanding your adversary. The problem with Anders is that he is pandering to Putin-haters not deepening the understanding of what is going on.
@@erichert1001 When you are finished calling people names, you are welcome to join a reasoned conversation about such a critical situation. Until then, you can keep watching Anders' videos.
@@stuarthall3874 "Deepening the understanding" Mate, you really are a lost cause. All the Russians have done is lie, lie lie and lie again. All they do is lie, kill, deceive, lie and kill again. Everythinbg thy say is confected to deceive, and absolutly nothing else." Undersanding"? what a sick joke. Th only understanding of Russi needed is to work out how to waste them at faster rate. Thats all. Sounds a bit like you're one of those Putin mouthpieces that try to sound "reasonable" and constructive. Moscow pay well does it? in USD I bet.🤑
As usual greatly instructive
I watched a video yesterday where Russia was making nuclear threats, from 2016.
Threats go back to the USSR.
Did the USA use nuclear weapons against Japan from a position of weakness?
Nobody else had them at the time so there was no risk of retaliation. And yes, they kinda did. The US didn't want to accept Japans terms for surrender, didn't want to fight a prolonged war in Japan and wanted to end the Soviet advance into Asia
We didn’t want to do the land invasion bc that was going to be 100 times bloodier than the nukes. That was a special case, it wasn’t because we couldn’t do it because we didn’t want to. This is a little different. Russia wouldn’t be nuking for the same purpose the US did, Russia would be nuking solely out of not wanting to face a humiliating defeat. That is not nearly as justifiable of a reason and Russia knows that.
Very well laid out! Thanks!
👍👊
On his channel, Jake Broe has a video listing some of the (non-nuclear) retaliatory measures that the West might take in response to a Russian nuclear strike - any one of which would cripple Russia's ability to continue with the invasion of Ukraine.
LOL! And why would Russia use nukes when they won the war? Maybe its b/c west wants to get involved? If west invades Russia will defend. West take note.
Jake Broe lol. He’ll be the first one crying in a corner.
Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with, it's always helpful! 💙💛
Mange tak 😊
Putin's like a schoolyard kid saying he'll get his big brother just because he's losing
Have you looked into what independent journalists are reporting? Maybe it's a good idea.
Losing? Ok you guy's have lost all credibility. See ya!
He’s not losing
@@-Highlander-42 He is winning 18% of Ukraine along with its resources and ensuring that Ukraine is less useful for NATO if inducted in its current state.
@@nathanhazlehurst484He has lost $300 bn. He is under a warrant arrest. He has lost most of soviet stocks. Finland abd Sweden are in NATO and 1000 km+ of NATO borders are added, the Baltic Sea is a NATO lake, the Black Sea is closed and half of his fleet there is destroyed, Crimea and the bridge of shame is about to be attacked, Belgorod is under contant attack, Gazprom is almost bankrupt, N. Korean missiles that explode on air are desoerately needed. I stop here. Do you see putin winning? Really?
If you think russia can easily hold these territories it has stolen and annexed, you must be either an ignorant or a russian troll 👿. This war is the last chapter of Russia's deatruction. The first one was putin's installation into the throne.
Anders, the clarity in how you see the world is astounding and expressed wholesomely by yourself. Hej Hej.
I think I heard or read that the US more or less told Russia, that if they would use nuclear weapons US / NATO would fight every Russian troop on Ukrainian territory.
Fight how? By being radioactive clowns? 😂😂😂
I haven't heard that specifically, but I strongly suspect that this is the case, or something like it. Russian use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine will probably activate a series of pre-planned responses whereby NATO uses conventional strikes to eliminate all Russian forces in and around Ukraine, and, as you said, this has probably been communicated to Russia through diplomatic channels. (I'm a recently retired senior U.S. military officer; I've spoken with folks involved in NATO and U.S. planning in Europe, but my assessment is not derived from any direct statements and certainly not on any information other than open source.)
BS
"I told my KGB counterpart that if nuclear or biological weapons are used in Ukraine it will be the immediate end of the Kremlin regime. The US response will be Swift and absolute. He understood.". -- The Venerable Burns, CIA Director 💪💪♥️♥️♥️🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸💲💲💲💲🚀🚀🚀🚀💥💥💥⚰️🇷🇺⚰️🇷🇺⚰️🇷🇺⚰️🇷🇺⚰️
Du er bare så god til det dér, Anders! Tak for dine informative videoer!
Anders, I really wonder why you are framing this in such a peculiar way:
Russia using nuclear weapons to WIN IN Ukraine ≠ Russia using nuclear weapon IN UKRAINIAN TERRITORY to Win the Ukrainian conflict.
The most overwhelmingly likely scenario for nuclear escalation by Russia involves "test detonations" by Russia on Russian soil. This covers Russian interests on several levels:
1. Russian sabre rattling rhetoric is increasingly seen as just empty talk. But withdrawing from the nuclear test ban treaty with a surprise under-ground detonation would be a real way to up the ante int he nuclear intimidation game without REALLY crossing the diplomatic line that would force every nuclear power to do whatever it took to make sure Russia lost in Ukraine just to suppress future proliferation. As North Korea has demonstrated quite conclusively, the nuclear testing taboo is no where near as significant as the nuclear-use-in-anger taboo.
2. Russia, like the West, unquestionably has real doubts about the reliability of the Russian aging nuclear and thermonuclear arsenal. And, unlike the West, those Russian munitions have not been maintained, upgraded, and generally tested exhaustively in every way imaginable short of test-detonations. This solves that problem for Russia, and does it in a way that is a double win for them: First, they don't need to make the sudden announcement of their withdrawal from the Nuclear test ban treaty until AFTER one of their bombs has worked. Conversely, the West won't know how many bombs they tried to test before one worked! So, the actual diagnostic test increases their certainty, but not the West's.
3. Rather than make Russia a pariah, they can then turn this into a form of terror-diplomacy... start inviting ambassadors and foreign business men, but also and especially internal and regional leaders to test detonations, complete with caviar, vodka and women. And that starts to be the basis for how they sell it to the Russian people too. Putin can say, by both deed and word, 'See how strong we are! See how outsiders are cowed, and insiders are bolstered by a=our strength!' The part of the Russian people who support Putin WANT strength... they want a resurgence of Empire, a renaissance, of power, a return of glory.
4. The Russian test detonation scenario also provides a slow escalation ramp-up both diplomatically and to eventually normalize nuclear use on the battlefield. That ramp-up looks something like this: His first detonations are performed in secret and as international surprises. Then he ups the ante by turning them into political-press-events, then he starts increasing the yield of the test devices, then he starts doing above ground testing (caught from land and space in 4k, color corrected and broadcast all over the internet... you'll practically be able to taste the fallout), then testing near Ukraine or other hostile territory, then testing inside territory that he has annexed as "Russian" but the international community still recognizes as "Ukrainian". And every single time he escalates his "test detonations" you'll see the West's resolve falter a little more, and Russia's internal unity strengthen a little more because hey... they got away with it! And at no point do they actually have to use one in anger against actual war-targets to do any of this... which means the West, desperate for an excuse not to act, won't at least not in a meaningful way. I'm sure NATO will stage drills, the US will announce sanctions, and the UN will pass a non-binding resolution denouncing Russia in the harshest diplomatic terms... the usual blah blah blah. And that impotence of response alone, regardless of what happens on the ground in Ukraine, would be victory for Putin.
To be clear, I don't WANT this to happen. I'm just pointing out that the conventional, Putin goes straight to battlefield use scenario is stupid. It's stupid for all the reasons you point out. This does not however equate to Russia not doing it... it just equates to Russia not doing it that way.
Thanks for adding that to the discussion. Great insight. However does this not also create pressure on non proliferation? And also have the risk of popular dissent? I mean it might play out the way you say. But it's a gamble. Nontheless a gamble we should prepare to handle.
@@pierman4858 You are right that it creates pressure on on-proliferation, but only in ways that are useful to Russia in the short to intermediate term. Russia, in this scenario, might actually encourage some non-nuclear states to go nuclear as a sort of the diplomatic carrot to the diplomatic stick that is the test detonations. Putin, who unashamedly sees what he is doing as a resurgence of the USSR, would sell this to the Russian public by doubling down on his Anti-Nazi Ukraine justification. He would start suggesting that the West has been infiltrated by Nazi imperialists who are using puppet international entities like the UN and NATO to advance the insidious agenda! He'd frame his proliferation as judiciously providing nuclear technology to nations he, in his wisdom, knows to be free of such infiltration so as to protect them from the insidious clutches of this Western Nazi Conspiracy!!!!!
Of course the real-politik of this would be a bit more sinister: Russia has always used puppet states both inside and outside its borders to maintain power. This would be a way for them to start to establish a new network of such puppets globally in much the same way that the Soviets sought to spread the communist revolution globally. Except now its membership in the nuclear club, gated and controlled by Russia of course, that he would be using to extend his influence. In the long run, such capabilities might be turned against Russia, but that can be guarded against by simply only giving these weapons to countries physically far from Russia... Nicuragua isn't going to be developing an ICBM any time soon. It is much more likely that the weapons RUssia provides will be used by local puppets in local wars. That too is a way for Putin to up the ante without, himself, using them in war. Further, it would erode the taboo of use of nukes which transfers Russia's hypothetical nuclear arsenal to an actual one.... making Russia still stronger as it is willing to cross the line, but the West wouldn't be.
Sure it's a gamble... but the Russia we have is VERY willing to gamble geopolitically... we wouldn't be in this situation in Ukraine if it weren't.
This man is a feckin genius! 👍
Yes, his comedy is great!
Anders, I am a very big fan of yours and watch all of your videos as soon as they are released. But I have a sharp disagreement with one thing you said in this video (at 6:32), you said Russia is "liberating more and more territory." Russia does not liberate territory, it enslaves territory. Russia does not render freedom to those residing in the captured land, Russia subjugates them.
20 seconds before that, he says "If you switch on Russia's news, you hear ... ... ..."
@@mariaf.6601 I went back and listened and you are 100% correct. I should have known (Anders' command of the English language is better than mine). Thank you for taking the time to correct me.
@@gavelbanger You are welcome 😊
Slava Ukraïni 🇺🇦✌
I think one of the key points is that the Chinese government would be absolutely furious. Being a pariah in the west is one thing, being isolated from China is quite another.
What does China have to do with it?
@@Tonik-13 loads. The Russian economy is increasingly dependent on China. President Xi, while being pretty supportive of the Russian government has been fairly explicit that any use of nuclear weapons would be unacceptable. The Chinese government doesn't want to see any kind of nuclear war, limited or otherwise for a variety of reasons. China is also pretty obviously the senior partner in any kind of alliance or partnership between Russia and China, having a vastly larger economy, military, population, etc. the only thing Russia really has over China now is access to natural resources and a far larger nuclear arsenal. That said China is expanding and modernising its own nuclear arsenal. The Chinese government certainly doesn't want to see a world where every country with the economic and scientific capacity pursues a nuclear weapons program. They already have to contend with dubious situations of Pakistan and India sabre rattling on their frontier and the DPRK with a nuclear arsenal threatening their neighbours every so often (though this was presumably pursued with Beijing's knowledge and blessing).
@@wh8787 Buddy, you have written so much but not a single fresh thought, try to say something that is not common knowledge for a change.
But still you made a mistake, Russia and China are indeed interconnected, but you overestimate China's influence on Russia. China has no power over Russia, that is the essence of the relationship between these two countries, unlike the west they preach sovereignty, and non-interference in the internal affairs of the country. Of course Russia will take into account China's opinion, but Russia will ensure its own security as it sees fit and will act at its own discretion, in its own interests and China can't and won't do anything about it. Even if it doesn't like something.
@@Tonik-13 China doesn't rule Russia, this much is true. However, in a nuclear scenario, China, and many other states would no longer do trade with Russia, the Russian economy and perhaps russia itself would collapse. This would be unacceptable to the oligarchs, would see to it that Putin would be strung up. Russia can pretend it doesn't need China, but it does need China, now more than ever, and in that way, China has considerable influence of Russia.
@@pnwdrifter5680 What kind of trade are you talking about? In the nuclear scenario, there will be no trade at all, there will be no one to trade. The West very often talks about the possible use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. It seems that the West dreams about this and wants to provoke Russia to take this step. But I will tell you one secret - there are no targets for nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The Russian weapons of the apocalypse are aimed at the real enemies of Russia. And if it comes to its application, Russia will be least concerned about trade and China's opinion...
I would like to hear your take on why Macron is hinting about the possibility of french troops in Ukraine. Is he just playing Putin's own game of smoke and mirrors, or is this something else completely? He seemed incredibly naive in the months leading up to the invasion, so I find this very intriguing.
because Europe plans to send troops.Not only France.
Looks to me as an attempt for consensus of NATO to send troops, seed an idea and see what the responses are. Nobody will send troops to Ukraine is too risky.
I'm curious too. My guess: When US aid was stalled in congress & RU started gaining territory again, Macron got worried nobody would stop them & started looking for ways to step up & push them back out of Europe
Because Russia is threatening France’s uranium supply in west Africa
France has been losing its power in Africa and access to vital resources they rely on for their nuclear industry for example. Russia has been pushing them out of their former colonies successfully and it’s costing France big style. There is no chance France would send troops to Ukraine. It was a weak bluff to try give pause to Putin’s plans for Africa.
Nice, objective, clear analysis. Thank you
Putin may not distinguish between the existence of the Russian state and his own power, but does he distinguish between his own power and his own existence? His use of nuclear weapons would most certainly imperil the latter.
I think most people are just laughing at russia at this point. Last week Putin threatened to nuke his dog for peeing on the floor😂
I am persuaded Putin can’t distinguish between loss of his power and existence. His nightmare is to end up like Mussolini, Hitler or Kaddafi. He would rather destroy whole world not to be seen like them. Maybe I am mistaken because he has children. But without children it would be 100% sure
More pointedly there is a chain of decision makers even in Russia.
Crazy tzars cant nuke everyone by themselves.
If NATO attacks Russia warns it would use nukes to defend. As simple as that. West was warned.
Russian Vatniks talk about nukes the way ‘billionare tech-bros talk about pods
Probably because i was born after the cold war, but i simply can't take nuclear threats seriously.
Blackmail is the only serious use i see for them, and that's why we can't cave to blackmail.
For those of us born DURING the Cold WAR, we absolutely DO take the threat VERY seriously.
And you should too.
@@BaBaYaga1999-p7u You are free to live in fear, but the calmer approach the West currently are taking are, objectively, a much better way to handle things.
Would think someone having lived through the cold war would have more against caving to Russian threats?
@@BaBaYaga1999-p7uSo, if russia says «give me Alaska» or «give me Estonia or i will nuke you» your idea is to give in?
@@BaBaYaga1999-p7u pls don't think because u are afraid everybody is . I was born during cold war and I piss on pootin's face .
This is typical bully blackmail , so we call the bluff and let's see if they really like the taste of our deterrence . It's your kind of reaction that leads us all in the present situation, because it's exactly what made the russians so cocky and it's eactly what Anders tried to explain to you in this video .
I guess he will have to do many more vids, for certain to understand the term "blackmail" and it's consequences .
Sad .
@@laurentsalbert9630 You live in an illusion, and in reality you piss on the keyboard . . .🙂
Its difficult to say as whatever they say has been lies, so how can we ever know what they actually say?
Tak for info endnu en gang. Du er altid oplysende... Hilsen fra en dansker i Manila.
Let’s hope it never happens. call the bluff now . F16s now. Blackmail.
F-16s already happened dummy. The process is well underway.
Its like a bee threaten with his sting, knowing its his strongest-weakst weapon.
Once a bee releases its sting, it dies. For sting, read missile.
Thank you for another great video. I'm a little skeptical about Putin feeling like he has to explain nuclear first use to Russian population. We do not have a democratically elected leader of a free nation here, we have a dictator-for-life of a dictatorship that has increasingly fascist characteristics. After more than twenty years in power Putin probably feels more like the Russian people owe something to him for all the "good" he has done for great Russian empire, not the other way around. If he takes the decision to use nuclear weapons the propagandists have already laid the groundwork for this by claiming the West is preparing for such things, it might be claimed it was the only possibility to stop Ukraine using nuclear/biological/chemical weapons on Russia etc.. What i'm saying is there is a likelihood your take is based on assumptions for a more Western style government that will not hold true for Russia though I agree the risk is still not great.
Russia is not stopped from using nukes to "win" or destroy Ukraine, or whole of Europe by being responsible to their population, it is the "then what" as you say. The fear of consequences, the fear of the attack failing and the fear of the attack not being decisive. The last one is especially important in my opinion since it would take massive tactical weapons use on the battlefield to turn the conflict decisively in Russia's favor, there would be huge risks that Russian forces are not equipped to deal with radiation exposure and the more nukes are used the more likely Western counter-attack is. Strategic use would also hold massive risk of counterattack if it's not a one-off, and then it depends on what target. Russia might not be held to many constraints but at some point West must realize if you need nukes not to get nuked, or nuclear blackmail works then everyone needs nukes. If USA is not the one to do it France or UK might conduct a nuclear counterstrike to reinstate deterrence.
Also as one last edit to say about nuclear proliferation. The fear of it does not hold equal sway in my view when it comes to nuclear weapons states. Russia might be more keen than we like to admit to allow or even encourage other states to get nukes. North-Korea, the most recent nuclear weapons state showed their gratitude to Russia with lots of ammunition. Iran is close to a bomb and a Russian ally that generously provided for Russia's war and we do not know what the true cost of it was to Russia. We really should not think Russia's logic in terms of our own, they are very deep in the fascist blackhole that has a gravity of it's own. We also cannot overestimate China's influence upon Russia to stop them. Heck China might not want to stop Russia.
2nd edit: We also cannot rely on Putin and his inner circle to be reasonable when it comes to not using nuclear weapons because of the stated doctrine or some other such consideration. Russian culture has it that rules and regulations are for the lower class only and Putin will not feel bound by them. We have seen Russia try to strategically bomb and starve Ukrainian civilians for revenge and out of spite just like Hitler did to United Kingdom after failing to invade. Dictators such as these can be incredibly childish and entitled and when denied something they want after years of decades of being taught they can get away with everything there is a chance they will do something totally drastic out of pure hate. We should be ready for it, ready to respond with the harshest measures and signal such, that will already reduce the risk of it happening. Only thing Putin understands is strength and weakness, we do not want to look weak.
If Russia uses nuclear weapons the counterstrike must be devastating, it must be very near immediate. If the result is something like "increase support for Ukraine", more sanctions no matter how devastating it might as well be strongly worded letters and will be seen by many dictators in this world as West's failure to act. Russian nuclear use might not have to be matched but the result must be a devastating conventional attack that will turn the tide of war, it needs to overmatch what can be commonly viewed as Russia's gains from using nukes. Otherwise our deterrence is gone, the world will have changed and everyone and their mom will need nukes to either blackmail others or defend themselves.
It's all very logic, unfortunately Putin isn't.
But what is the thing that Putin can't destroy with an Iskander but if he destroyed it with a nuke would restore Russia's superpower status?
I can't think of anything.
When it comes to his own survival as dictator of Russia he is logical. Of course from the perspective of the people of Russia not.
Putin is VERY VERY logical. The first thing he want is the survival of its regime. And that's all !!
Pootin is mad and needs to be removed.
He's just ruzzian
I think he's just as big a joke as a russian army. _KYIV IN THREE DAYS!_ 😂
aawwww go kiss your boyfreind
First remove dementia Biden and drug addict Zelensky, you cried that Russia non democratic, but when the last US presidential elections took place, for some reason everyone very quickly shut up about the tossing of ballots and vote counting without the presence of observers
Please lead the way.
Wow that was an insightful argument
The dogs are barking Sancho, is a sign that we are moving on !!!
Let the dogs bark 😂😂😂
Whatabout "in 3 Days, we take Kyiv", on Day 805? And what about 487.000 dead Orcs? Fighting with Stoneage T54? Vlad?
whatabout summer counteroffence ? already in Crimea or still moving westward lol ? 🤣
@@alexpoetov3213 Whatabout 489.000 dead orcs? For 16% OF uKRAINE !
Russia won't use nukes inside Ukraine as they are currently trying to annex it.
The term "don't shit where you eat" is applicable as using nukes would irradiate the areas they are used making them less than desirable.
If they go with nukes it would be to attack other parties that are supporting Ukraine or by handing less efficient (and for their own sake untraceable) devices to third parties for terror attacks against Nato members.
They must be losing (again).
Another point to mention is that nukes require constant and expensive maintenance to keep them in good working order. Considering what we have seen so far about the state of preparedness of russian military equipment and how little spending Russia made in its armed forces in the previous decades, if we take into account the size or their nuclear stock, I would doubt them being really capable of launching a nuclear war
I have thought the same thing about Russian nuclear weapons. The rest of the military was left without maintenance and resources while the money was siphoned away by greedy Putin cronies.
But, even one nuclear weapon would be devastating.
It’s entirely possible that an attempted ruSSian nuclear launch would result in a nuclear explosion over their own territory. If that happens, Putin will blame NATO, of course.
Solid logical reasoning. 😊 now just to memorize your analysis to share with my associates. ❤❤❤