Why Trump does not broadcast nuclear threats to Russians?

[Spathi]

The success of Putin’s war in Ukraine is caused by the fact that Russia dictates Ukraine and the West how they can fight, and how they can’t. I hope that Trump will finally provide Ukraine the long-range missiles and allow the Ukrainians to hit the Russian military bases with them. Possibly Putin will start escalating his nuclear threats; and to avoid a nuclear war, it is important to let the Russians know what will happen if Putin pushes the button. The Russians should know how many nukes does US have, that they are able to retaliate, and in this case, if Putin declares that he intends to use the nukes, this will decrease his approval rating in Russia. If the rating of Putin becomes small, very quickly some general will overthrow him.

A good strategy would be an official switch to a defensive nuclear doctrine. 10 years ago Putin boasted that Russian had defensive nuclear doctrine, while the USA had offensive one.

One more good strategy would be adopting some resolution at UN assembly, that if a person starts a nuclear war and more than 30 million people dies in this war, this person will be electrocuted (if he survives), his children will be sterilized, and the officers who had carried out the order of this person, will be electrocuted too. This can sound terrible but I believe this would be a proper decision.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

You seem to be under the impression Trump isn't allied with Putin.

 

[gleem]

One more good strategy would be adopting some resolution at UN assembly, that if a person starts a nuclear war and more than 30 million people dies in this war, this person will be electrocuted (if he survives), his children will be sterilized, and the officers who had carried out the order of this person, will be electrocuted too. This can sound terrible but I believe this would be a proper decision

What makes you think the world will be in any shape to carry this out? The preemptor has a significant advantage. Previously, ICBM launches could be detected up to thirty minutes before they hit their targets. Today, with the threat of hypersonic missiles, which travel in unpredictable paths at low altitudes, the attacked nation may not be able to respond before its capability is seriously neutralized. Additionally, the perpetrator will be more prepared to deal with the retaliation.

 

[Spathi]

You seem to be under the impression Trump isn't allied with Putin.

Yes, I think it is really so.
When Trump "betrayed" Ukraine 8 months ago, firstly i was depressed, but now I see that Trimp was able to make EU spend more money on military and help Ukraine more.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Yes, I think it is really so.
When Trump "betrayed" Ukraine 8 months ago, firstly i was depressed, but now I see that Trimp was able to make EU spend more money on military and help Ukraine more.

So they are and how is the situation looking?

 

[Spathi]

What makes you think the world will be in any shape to carry this out? The preemptor has a significant advantage. Previously, ICBM launches could be detected up to thirty minutes before they hit their targets. Today, with the threat of hypersonic missiles, which travel in unpredictable paths at low altitudes, the attacked nation may not be able to respond before its capability is seriously neutralized. Additionally, the perpetrator will be more prepared to deal with the retaliation.

As far as I know, the number of hypersonic missiles is not big. USSR was able to build a huge amount of missiles, Russia can't.
It is interesting, how many nuclear submarines do US have, and how close they can be to Russian cities?

 

[Spathi]

So they are and how is the situation looking?

The situation is not good because Putin is still dictating how Ukraine can fight, and how it can't. I hope this will end.

 

[gleem]

As far as I know, the number of hypersonic missiles is not big. USSR was able to build a huge amount of missiles, Russia can't.
It is interesting, how many nuclear submarines do US have, and how close they can be to Russian cities?

Based on info on the internet, the US has 14 Ohio-class subs, each capable of launching 20 nuclear warhead missiles with a range of 7,500 mi. It has 400 land-based ICBMs. It has about 500 nuc nuclear-capable air-launched AGM 86s with 1500 mi range. It also has abot 4000 tomahawk ship/sub based missle but onely have a range of 1000 mi. making it not as useful against Russia. While nuc capable they are not armed as such due to a treaty.

All that said who knows, the US seem to be cnstantly cancelling and reinstating weapon programs.

 

[sbrothy]

The success of Putin’s war in Ukraine is caused by the fact that Russia dictates Ukraine and the West how they can fight, and how they can’t. I hope that Trump will finally provide Ukraine the long-range missiles and allow the Ukrainians to hit the Russian military bases with them. Possibly Putin will start escalating his nuclear threats; and to avoid a nuclear war, it is important to let the Russians know what will happen if Putin pushes the button. The Russians should know how many nukes does US have, that they are able to retaliate, and in this case, if Putin declares that he intends to use the nukes, this will decrease his approval rating in Russia. If the rating of Putin becomes small, very quickly some general will overthrow him.

A good strategy would be an official switch to a defensive nuclear doctrine. 10 years ago Putin boasted that Russian had defensive nuclear doctrine, while the USA had offensive one.

One more good strategy would be adopting some resolution at UN assembly, that if a person starts a nuclear war and more than 30 million people dies in this war, this person will be electrocuted (if he survives), his children will be sterilized, and the officers who had carried out the order of this person, will be electrocuted too. This can sound terrible but I believe this would be a proper decision.

You idea hinges upon a likelihood of mutual exchange of a bunch of megaton city-busters? It sounds to me like a really really bad idea.

 

[sbrothy]

Based on info on the internet, the US has 14 Ohio-class subs, each capable of launching 20 nuclear warhead missiles with a range of 7,500 mi. It has 400 land-based ICBMs. It has about 500 nuc nuclear-capable air-launched AGM 86s with 1500 mi range. It also has abot 4000 tomahawk ship/sub based missle but onely have a range of 1000 mi. making it not as useful against Russia. While nuc capable they are not armed as such due to a treaty.

All that said who knows, the US seem to be cnstantly cancelling and reinstating weapon programs.

Well who says the treaties are being respected?

 

[Spathi]

You idea hinges upon a likelihood of mutual exchange of a bunch of megaton city-busters? It sounds to me like a really really bad idea.

Please study more information about Ukraine. It seems for me that approximately 20% of Russians ("vatniks") get a sadistic pleasure of torturing the Ukrainians... And also I have already written that I believe that the Ukrainian political model can save the Western world. The risk is justified.

 

[sbrothy]

Well I don’t have many years left. I like to go out with a bang.

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

---- Dylan Thomas.

I have COPD so pretty soon I’d welcome an alien invasion or quick nuke. Guns are harder to aquire here but if you dont care what it was used for before its probably doable.

EDITED to include the real poem and it's author. It's one of my favorites along with Still Falls the Rain.

 

[sbrothy]

But in principle I agree that Russians need to feel the war. Preventing Ukraine from shooting into Russia is just unfair. Although they succeded with a couple of deep penetration missions. That big bridge comes to mind. An honest military target.

 

[sbrothy]

[…] if Putin declares that he intends to use the nukes, this will decrease his approval rating in Russia. If the rating of Putin becomes small, very quickly some general will overthrow him.

[…[

Btw, why are you so sure it will hurt his approval rating? Using a couple of tactical nukes would be very much in-character for him. I mean what’s more masculine than a couple of hot thermonuclear “bangs”?! Also, it would send a very loud (albeit perhaps not exactly very clear) message to the world at large and the US and China in particular.

EDIT: Rewrote it so I'm not tempted to sprinkle random commas all over the place.
EDIT2: Or, god forbid, semicolons!
EDIT3: Am I overthinking this? Nah.....

 

[Spathi]

Btw, why are you so sure it will hurt his approval rating?

Putin thinks he "needs" a nuclear war, more exactly the possilibity of it (threat), to save his power. But not the Russians, including Putinists.

 

[sbrothy]

Putin thinks he "needs" a nuclear war, more exactly the possilibity of it (threat), to save his power. But not the Russians, including Putinists.

But you do realize that using nuclear weapons no longer (EDIT: necessarily) triggers MAD? The nukes have been miniaturized - made tactical - so can be used instead of, say, an FAE device just to send a message, if nothing else.

EDIT: A message of his willingness to use nukes and, if necessary, escalate the conflict.

 

[OmCheeto]

Why are Putin and Trump still in power?
Or is my question supposed to be a new thread?
This strikes me as a Michael Jackson eating popcorn moment.....

I'm starting to understand the Revelations......

 

[sbrothy]

Immanentizing the eschaton? Yeah, it's all pretty much idle speculation really.

 

[dlu]

But you do realize that using nuclear weapons no longer (EDIT: necessarily) triggers MAD? The nukes have been miniaturized - made tactical - so can be used instead of, say, an FAE device just to send a message, if nothing else.

EDIT: A message of his willingness to use nukes and, if necessary, escalate the conflict.

I don't subscribe to tacticals, even if they aren't MAD per se.
I think it is dangerous for any leader to flippantly flap lips about nukes.

Using tactical nukes always has the chance that something more powerful could or would be utilized.
Tactical would be what - anything less than 1000 miles, 10 kton yield or so.
If your loosing the battle and use a tactical, or two, or three, and then still are loosing, perhaps something else will jar the opponent into retreat. The opponent can consider reciprocating in turn.
What is the land contamination with tacticals? For how many years, more or less, is the area considered scorched earth?

 

[sbrothy]

I don't subscribe to tacticals, even if they aren't MAD per se.
I think it is dangerous for any leader to flippantly flap lips about nukes.

Using tactical nukes always has the chance that something more powerful could or would be utilized.
Tactical would be what - anything less than 1000 miles, 10 kton yield or so.
If your loosing the battle and use a tactical, or two, or three, and then still are loosing, perhaps something else will jar the opponent into retreat. The opponent can consider reciprocating in turn.
What is the land contamination with tacticals? For how many years, more or less, is the area considered scorched earth?

Indeed! Also, it's not that I'm a fan, but what is this miniaturization for if not an excuse for using them?

 

[dlu]

Indeed! Also, it's not that I'm a fan, but what is this miniaturization for if not an excuse for using them?

Personnally, just my opinion.
They were conceived in the 60's when nuclear was the way to go.
They ( nukes ) were envisioned for even digging out canals in one shot does it all in one day.
Until someone did say "Hey, wait a minute ... "
No one has had the courage to try to eliminate the tactical nukes, probably because they can be disguised so easily as a regular missile or other munition.

Just a thought - maybe they don't even exist, but just used a decoy threat for the enemy to fear leavening them wondering. The deceptive art of war mongering.

 

[sbrothy]

Nah, I'm pretty sure they're real. Nothin to back it up with though.... Anyway, it's a moot point as the FAE bombs are just as powerful and virtually equivalent to tactical nukes. It's just that the inherent fear of nuclear bombs are so much more internalized in the masses.

 

[gleem]

t
The first US tactical nuke system was called the Davy Crockett Weapon System, which used a 120 mm or 155 mm recoilless rifle and had a yield of 10 to 20 tonnes and a range of 1.25 to 2.5 miles. the system was retired in 1971.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

 

[sbrothy]

Speaking of nuclear bomb miniaturization it already started with the Project Orion's nuclear shaped charges in the 60s.

EDIT: So I guess I had something to back it up with after all. However vague.