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.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If he uses any, the entire west needs to get involved directly. People cannot just throw nukes around because they are failing to win a war of conquest.

    • ArtemZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      And what the entire west is going to do about it? Express deep concerns? Deliver 10 more outdated tanks to Ukraine?

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Deliver 10 more outdated tanks to Ukraine?

        Russia is fielding T-55 tanks onto battlefields in Ukraine. If that sets the baseline, then nothing the west has sent can be considered “outdated”.

        • ArtemZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Totally irrelevant because:

          • Russians use them mostly as tactical utility vehicles for moving personel around.
          • Tank battles almost never happens in modern warfare
          • Russians still have more T90s than Ukraine has Leopards and T90 is a more advanced and better protected machine
            • ArtemZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are they really losing? Looking at the map it seems like they control 2x territory compared to pre-2022. And they just recently took Bakhmut.

              • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Much of the territory Russia occupied in Feb 2022 has been liberated by Ukraine, including major cities like Kherson and Kharkiv. Check out the map. Those large blue swaths in the North, East, and South are all places Russia used to occupy and no longer do.

          • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Russians use them mostly as tactical utility vehicles for moving personel around.

            Tanks aren’t made to transport people and they are abysmally bad at it. They use a ton of fuel and don’t hold anybody but the crew. A passenger could sit on top, but if you are going the 100% unprotected route, there are piles of vehicles out there that are less maintenance and fuel intensive for troop transport. If that is honestly how Russia is using their T-55s, I encourage them to continue.

            • ArtemZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you are using a tank purely for moving people around then the only crew member is tank commander. Speaking of fuel, it is not like Russia has any shortage of it.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        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.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          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.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            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
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              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?