President Joe Biden said on Monday the threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is "real", days after denouncing Russia's deployment of such weapons in Belarus. On Saturday, Biden called Putin's announcement that Russia had deployed its first tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus "absolutely irresponsible".

President Joe Biden said on Monday the threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is “real”, days after denouncing Russia’s deployment of such weapons in Belarus. On Saturday, Biden called Putin’s announcement that Russia had deployed its first tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus “absolutely irresponsible”.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
    02·
    1 year ago

    And what the entire west is going to do about it? Express deep concerns?

    What is the west going to do about a foreign power blowing up people with nukes? Exactly what we said we would do: direct and overwhelming conventional force against the country nuking others.

    • Tetsuo666@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      Out of curiosity, you say an overwhelming conventional force. Does that mean the NATO plan explicitly says it should be conventional?

      I always imagined that if a country nukes another they would immediately be nuked themselves. Because if a country is using their nuclear arsenal, it’s probably a bit late to moves armies around.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
        05·
        1 year ago

        The idea-here is two-fold:

        • One cannot allow any country to gain an advantage by detonating nukes, if that is allowed, more nukes will be used in the future. Using a nuke in any capacity has to be so detrimental that actually using one is never worth it.
        • If the exchange is currently limited to tactical nukes against military targets, there is still an escalation path to MAD, and that is best to be avoided.

        With those ideas in mind, the West does have a response available that doesn’t bring us to MAD, but does make another using a tactical nuke in any capacity an awful idea: overwhelming conventional force.

        If Russia gains a local tactical advantage by nuking 5,000 Ukrainian troops, then a response that involves the entire Russian Black Sea fleet exploding, logistical depots all over the front exploding, troops all over the front exploding, and the Kerch Bridge exploding has made what was a tactical victory for Russia into a massive strategic defeat for Russia. Using this method, we have not escalated to MAD, and have made it a very, very poor idea to use nukes for any purpose.

        Does that mean the NATO plan explicitly says it should be conventional?

        I am not aware of an explicit plan that says only a conventional response is authorized. However, notable US commanders have said a direct and overwhelming conventional response from the West is what will likely occur if Russia uses tactical nukes against Ukrainian troops.

        • TheDeadGuy@kbin.social
          01·
          1 year ago

          The US military undoubtedly has secret abilities they do not advertise. My guess is that in the event of real nuclear threat they will reveal and use something we’ve never seen before. Large scale EMP attacks perhaps?