Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Dr. James Holmes: The Naval Diplomat - 19FortyFive

Is Russia Close to Using Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine?

Nuclear Weapons
Russian Mobile ICBMs. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. That being the case, it’s hard to say with confidence whether Ukrainian drone strikes deep within Russian territory might induce Vladimir Putin to order a nuclear riposte.

Putin is given to muttering darkly about nuclear war, presumably to deter the West from involving itself more directly in Ukraine’s defense.

Even so, that he would use doomsday weaponry seems doubtful on strategic and operational grounds.

First, strategy. Bombarding airfields in Ukraine’s beleaguered eastward provinces—airfields from which the drone strikes probably emanated—would defy strategic logic. The ancient Chinese general Sun Tzu put it best: “Generally in war the best policy is to take a state intact; to ruin it is inferior to this.” The wise sovereign and field commander do their utmost to avoid ruining lands they want to make their own. They preserve the land, its people, and its resources for the sovereign’s use.

It’s unclear whether Putin still entertains “unlimited” strategic aims vis-à-vis Ukraine, meaning it’s unclear whether he intends to unseat the Kiev government and forcibly “denazify” the country. Judging from this year’s lackluster performance, Russian arms appear incapable of accomplishing goals of such sweep. But he certainly wants the eastern sections Moscow has purported to annex. Nuking sites on or near those territories is no way to preserve them for incorporation into metropolitan Russia.

Nuclear use would amount to self-defeating behavior.

But Putin would have to fret about more than the impact on Ukraine. Check the weather. At present a southerly wind is blowing in from the Black Sea and Sea of Azov. If that pattern persisted, the wind would sweep debris from a nuclear blast into Russia and perhaps its ally Belarus, both of which lie to Ukraine’s north.

Few residents of those parts would take kindly to finding themselves in the radioactive hazard zone downwind from an atomic battleground. They would blame Putin.

What happens in Ukraine doesn’t stay in Ukraine if you’re talking nuclear warfare.

Next, operations. From an operational standpoint, would tactical nukes make a useful implement for Russia’s counterair campaign? It’s hard to see how. The Ukrainian armed forces have fared better than anyone thought possible because they have dispersed on the battlefield.

They refuse to congregate in massed formations that can be easily targeted, and they remain on the move to elude the Russian foe. So if Russian commanders opted to use nuclear weapons, they would probably have to use them in bulk to have much impact on scattered Ukrainian forces.

In the bargain they would compound the problems detailed above.

Fortunately for Europe and the world, Putin is probably sincere when he says he wants to avoid reaching for the ultimate weapon. Not because he’s a bighearted humanitarian, but because deploying nukes against an outmatched opponent that he has denied is even a real country would be tacitly confessing to Russia’s political frailty and martial degeneracy.

Such a confession would be anathema to Putin, who goes out of his way to project an image of manly vigor.

Russia may be an enigma, but I’m betting its leadership yields to harsh realities—and keeps the nuclear arsenal in reserve.

Dr. James Holmes is J. C. Wylie Chair of Maritime Strategy at the U.S. Naval War College and a Nonresident Fellow at the Brute Krulak Center for Innovation & Future Warfare, Marine Corps University. The views voiced here are his alone.

Written By

James Holmes holds the J. C. Wylie Chair of Maritime Strategy at the Naval War College and served on the faculty of the University of Georgia School of Public and International Affairs. A former U.S. Navy surface-warfare officer, he was the last gunnery officer in history to fire a battleship’s big guns in anger, during the first Gulf War in 1991. He earned the Naval War College Foundation Award in 1994, signifying the top graduate in his class. His books include Red Star over the Pacific, an Atlantic Monthly Best Book of 2010 and a fixture on the Navy Professional Reading List. General James Mattis deems him “troublesome.”

29 Comments

29 Comments

  1. 403Forbidden

    December 11, 2022 at 5:54 pm

    Many psychics or clairvoyants have predicted a tumultuous time for 2023 in which mankind could well witness some sort of cataclysmic event.

    Thus, with a little pushy push from Biden and stoltenberg, Russia could begin to think of employing nukes as a realistic means to end the US-sponsored proxy war in Ukraine.

    Sponsoring a proxy war against a nuclear rival in Syria or Libya or some other hellhole in the third world is one thing, but doing it right at its doorstep is something else.

    Biden has foolishly opened the Pandora box by fomenting a war against Russia and this alone is justification for use of nukes.

    The US would make the same decision or walk the same route if Russia were to foment a war on America’s border with massive supplies of top flight weaponry feeding hostile forces fighting uncle sam.

    Biden is worse than both LBJ who once promised no boots in nam and Obama who made the same promise for Syria.

    Biden is right now knocking on the forbidden door of megiddo that promises nuclear armageddon for whoever dares to knock it open.

  2. Big Crow

    December 11, 2022 at 6:42 pm

    I’d opt for neutron bombs myself. Knock off those pesky Ukrainian Nazis and leave the infrastructure in place.

  3. D

    December 11, 2022 at 7:28 pm

    Only idiot will think that putin is sincere in anything at all. The guy is pathological liar.

  4. TheDon

    December 11, 2022 at 8:09 pm

    Maybe, but it means end of Russia, and orthodoxy.

  5. Jack

    December 11, 2022 at 8:29 pm

    Russia is not Nuking anybody.

    They know that their tech will not match up to the US tech and in any nuclear exchange they’re going to come out on a short end of the stick

  6. Infantry Grunt

    December 11, 2022 at 8:53 pm

    As it is, what was once called the “world’s 2nd army” has its hands more than full with little Ukraine using “modern” Russian (aka Soviet era) & NATO weaponry. KGB Putler may be a genocidal butcher with delusions of grandeur, but like Little “Rocket Man” Kim, he isn’t suicidal. Besides, even if Putler ever got that far in the thought process, he would be removed by force in a coup d’état.

    Speaking of seeing into the future, the Bible states that the Russian Federation & its leader are Gog/Magog — we know what that portends for the neo-Soviet Empire…

  7. GhostTomahawk

    December 11, 2022 at 9:36 pm

    Nuking Ukraine would be foolish because the fallout would fall directly on them.

    Like if Nevada nuked California. The prevailing weather systems would bring that death to Nevada.

    Please stop writing this birdcage liner

  8. Dan Jason

    December 11, 2022 at 11:02 pm

    Please stop with the nuclear weapons nonsense. And please report the truth. That this war is a result of nato expansion. Don’t believe me! Then what would we do if Russia had treaties with Mexico and Canada and missions that could shoot down our nukes in Canada?

  9. Serhio

    December 12, 2022 at 2:21 am

    The author writes about the nuclear bombing of the eastern parts of Ukraine. It really doesn’t make sense. If Russia has to use nuclear weapons, then it should be done on the border of Ukraine and Nato. It is necessary to wait for the wind to blow towards Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania or Bulgaria. Then the territories of Russia and Belarus will receive minimal pollution and the main blow will go to the enemies of Russia. The supply of weapons by Nato countries through the nuclear desert will stop. And after a while, what remains of Ukraine will completely go to Russia. And there will be a strip of radioactive glass between NATO and Russia.

  10. Jim

    December 12, 2022 at 12:16 pm

    The U. S. recently stated a strategic ambiguity on nuclear first strike use.

    The Russians are mirroring the U. S. position.

    The Russians consider this as a ‘confrontation’ … as an ongoing situation.

    The U. S. leadership needs to consider, and I would recommend, treating Russia as an equal interlocutor.

    Things start to ease up… what was unthinkable… becomes more reasonable.

    The American People want negotiations to end the war.

  11. Dr. Scooter Van Neuter

    December 12, 2022 at 1:48 pm

    Putin may be a brutal thug, but I don’t think he’s a stupid one. Hopefully, more intelligent powers within Russia will depose Putin before he embroils the world in a catastrophic conflagration.

  12. Tamerlane

    December 12, 2022 at 1:57 pm

    If the ChiComs were bringing Mexico into a military alliance unto our border, we’d depose the gov’t in Mexico City and intervene. Period. All this “moral” postulating is empty hot air. It doesn’t give a fig about moral principles—ours is the same gov’t that sent 2.5 million anti-communist Russian emigres to Stalin to their certain deaths in Operation Keelhaul, and the same that knowingly sent 500,000 natives Stone Age peoples to their deaths by forcing our NATO ally out of New Guinea and handing it over to the Sunni Javanese… it covers interventions and policies in moral postulating, but that is nothing but a convenient fig leaf.

    Russia will escalate as far as needed to prevent Ukraine from ever joining and expansionist and aggressive military alliance like NATO, just as we would were the shoe on the other foot. Whether that involves nukes is going to depend to what degree American policy makers push the envelope and lie to the American people about Russia’s motivations and COAs.

  13. Tamerlane

    December 12, 2022 at 2:04 pm

    Doc, if Putin fails to secure Russia’s near sphere through his limited conventional action, his replacement will almost certainly escalate. To do anything less would consign Russia to defenselessness, something no Russian leader of any ideological perspective could tolerate. This is why the American intel has known and conveyed to the political class for the past 25 years the truth that Russia’s elite of all political persuasions look upon Ukraine within NATO as the reddest of all possible red lines for Russia.

    The most fundamental duty of any leader of any nation is to secure its defense and defensibility. In this context that means that Russia cannot and will not back down here. As I predicted 10 months ago, they will attrit Ukraine and maintain their mission for as many years as necessary. They cannot do any less, nor could we were our positions reversed and we faced an expansionary military alliance which had within the past 20 years twice attacked non-belligerents while expanding up to our borders.

  14. Tamerlane

    December 12, 2022 at 2:20 pm

    Jack,

    You write that “[the Russians]…know that their tech will not match up to the US tech and in any nuclear exchange they’re going to come out on a short end of the stick”.

    Perhaps, but Ukraine is not the ally of the United States, it is a mere proxy or client state. The U.S. will not go to WWIII over Ukraine, but if Russia is willing to, they will win in Ukraine. That’s pretty much it as far as game theory is concerned. I don’t see any reason to doubt that Russia’s stated position of the past 25 years that it does in fact view Ukraine within NATO as an existential threat to Russia. We, like Russia, allow for use of nukes in the face of existential threats… Russia views NATO as an aggressive expansionist alliance (having attacked non-belligerents like Libya and Yugoslavia and carved them up involuntarily by force in the past 25 years alone)….

  15. David Chang

    December 12, 2022 at 4:10 pm

    God bless people in the world.

    This strategic dilemma is from the cooperation between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party in World War II.

    And the Battle Is Going Again.

    In the end of 20th century, Dr. Kissinger oppose the foreign policy of Democratic Party and PNAC, and think that the United States shall not make Eastern Europe to be battlefield.

    Because of Democratic Party’s Cold War policy, called long telegram, is wrong, Democratic Party allow Communist Party to propagate socialism in United States, so we shall assume that Russia, North Korea, CCP, and Iran have refused to obey Ten Commandments forever, and decide to eliminate people who obey Ten Commandments.

    Because tactical nuclear weapon is a major provocation, and few people will want to be attacked by tactical nuclear weapon without retaliation. Therefore, Soviet Russia President Putin requires us to stop helping Ukraine, and requires Zelenskyy to stop preventive strikes.

    If Mr. Putin wants to occupy Ukraine and Europe, and to complete socialism international, the socialism warfare is just begun, we won’t worry the end of socialism war in Ukraine.

    Because Russia and Ukraine do not determine strategy or policy by Ten Commandments, they only believe value, we should oppose any plan by Russia and Ukraine for weapons of mass destruction, and shall explain the procedure of tactical nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction to people.

    But United States government have to ask Europe Union to stop socialism, and obey fiscal discipline, increase military of E.U., and prepare for next war.

    God bless America.

  16. Dr. Scooter Van Neuter

    December 12, 2022 at 4:58 pm

    Tamerlane
    To infer that Putin was forced to invade Ukraine for the safety and well-being of Russia is ludicrous, period.

  17. Jim

    December 12, 2022 at 8:11 pm

    Doc, in international relations, if you push too hard, there’s a chance the other guy will push back.

    If you don’t account for that you’re being stupid.

    Kinda like stepping out in front of a speeding car.

    Expanding Nato to Russia’s border & turning it into an offensive organization…

    No, study the history and it’s our leaders forcing the issue for a long time… the 2014 coup we promoted wasn’t even the start of it… more like the middle.

  18. Stefan Stackhouse

    December 12, 2022 at 8:46 pm

    Unfortunately, I cannot see a scenario where Russia is pushed all the way back to their border, and they refrain from using any nukes. They aren’t going to use them NOW, but if things turn out for the worst (for them), then I would rate it a near certainty that they will use them.

  19. TMark

    December 12, 2022 at 9:44 pm

    The “It’s NATO’s fault” speech never achieved legitimacy. NATO is a defensive alliance, not an invader. Each new member was not invaded or annexed; they willingly joined. In sum, NATO never expanded east – instead, Eastern Europe reached west.

    Russia is not threatened by any potential NATO invasion. Nobody wants that contaminated wasteland. Rather, the Kremlin’s domestic hold on power is directly tied to brutal demonstrations of power beyond Russia’s borders. Moscow must maintain the illusion of Russian EXCEPTIONALISM by proving Russia somehow still matters as much as it used to in decades past. Big landmass, big history, big oil, big nukes, big deal.

    Allowing Ukraine to join other former Warsaw Pact nations and ex-Soviet republics in enjoying self-determination and a higher standard of living in the EU and NATO is mortally embarrassing to Moscow. A total loss of Kremlin face and influence, thus a loss respect and cohesion from the Russian public leading to regional crackup and internal collapse. So Putin brutalizes and pays the price: 100,000 Russian troops dead by Christmas.

  20. Tamerlane

    December 13, 2022 at 1:04 am

    Doc,

    That’s illogical and ludicrous. You Ukrainian trolls really need to at least tip your hat to basic deductive reasoning!

    TMark,

    False. NATO is not a defensive alliance. It has engaged twice in the past generation in unprovoked offensive wars against non-belligerent countries which did not attack it nor pose a threat to it. NATO has twice in the past generation invaded countries offensively, and has severed entire provinces from these countries by force and held plebiscites within them, and then recognized the breakaway provinces as sovereign nations.

    False. NATO did expand east. No one has the right to join NATO, and the United States has openly pursued a policy of pressuring Russia and disregarding the past 30 years of Russian explanations that their near sphere is critical to their defense.

    False, your Ukrainian propaganda might work on uneducated and inexperienced European trash, but it doesn’t work on those of us who have served in combat as American military officers. The Ukrainians have taken well over 100,000 casualties, and we all know it. They are a proxy client state of ours, unable to act without our assistance, guidance, and logistical direction. Supporting the most corrupt government in Europe against the second most is a poor use of our tax dollars, particularly when it has the effect of strategically weakening the United States, and your leftist Democrat talking points are just that, empty emotive platitudes not based on reality or American interests.

  21. Bertram

    December 13, 2022 at 11:20 am

    A better example of stepping in front of a speeding car, would be Putin escalating to using nukes.

    That is the primary example of Putin stepping in front of a speeding car, because there is only one outcome from that. Immediately after soiling his pants (again), Putin dies.

    Ukraine would never have been a member of NATO, just as Sweden and Finland would never have been, but for Putin’s foolish actions. He brought it about. Now they are all inevitable.

    Putin gambled. He lost. Now the only question will be the magnitude of his loss before someone takes him out of the game.

  22. Bertram

    December 13, 2022 at 11:23 am

    Tamerlane.
    It is painfully obvious you have never served in any western military, let alone as an officer. You need a new persona, this one has cracked old boy.

  23. Jeepwonder

    December 13, 2022 at 11:25 am

    Putin is a bully, and loves to bluff. He has been so isolated that nothing he has chosen to do has worked out the way he was sure it would work out. He is out of touch, that is why he is dangerous. He needs to be dragged back into reality and the reality is that any nuclear strike would end with Moscow being smoldering glass. A ‘Neville Chamberlain” approach will end badly, we need to be brave like Zelensky, not a coward like any diplomat! This will be settled at the end of a bayonet, not with intellegencia explaining the dangers to us plebes.

  24. Dr. Scooter Van Neuter

    December 13, 2022 at 12:40 pm

    BTW, recent Russian troop cellular intercepts describe training being presently done in nuclear hazmat suits. Maybe Putin IS that stupid…

  25. Clifra Jones

    December 13, 2022 at 3:37 pm

    Well, we know the US “says” they destroyed them. But no one knows if Russia Still has functional Neutron warheads. Which if deployed would “leave their real estate just how we want it.” Th fallout issue is lessened by a large degree.

    The other question is, does Putin believe that Biden, the UK and France have the stones to respond? That is the $64,000 question. Biden did not have the stones to guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty per the agreement that had with us. What makes any think he has the stones to respond to a neutron warhead attack on Ukraine?

    We will see what happens now that the ground is frozen. Do the Russian advance or to the consolidate their positions.

  26. Tamerlane

    December 14, 2022 at 12:14 pm

    Bertram,

    Stay over there in England. You guys couldn’t even handle the Suez Crisis on your own without being spanked by Big Daddy Eisenhower, and you’ve lost ground since. You clearly don’t comprehend game theory, nor understand what Russians believe to be their own strategic interest. We have had to pull your “jr partner” chestnuts out of the fire innumerable times, and yet you behave like you can commit to any independent course of action without our approval. It’s humorous and pathetic.

    Escalation will occur until the United States simply agrees to not admit Ukraine into NATO. We have that capacity within our power, ability, and prerogative. No other country has the “right” to the use of our blood and treasure to secure its own defense. We are free to choose who to assist and who not to. This isn’t about morality, save insomuch as our government is one of limited, constitutionally enumerated powers only and may only lawfully and morally act within that granted sphere. Nowhere within our American constitution, Bertram, is the federal government granted the power to redistribute taxpayer property and monies to a foreign regime, particularly one as corrupt as Ukraine; nor does it grant the federal executive the power to unilaterally put the United States into war regardless of the emotive merit of any particular case.

    Putin dying will not end Russian intervention in Ukraine, just as our President’s death would do nothing to end our intervention in Mexico were that nation attempting to join a Chinese Communist run military alliance on our borders. If anything, Purim’s death would usher in a new generation of leadership even more hawkish and aggressive.

    As for Finland and Sweden joining NATO,
    —neither are anywhere close to being the strategic threat to Russia as Ukraine, a feat which would render Russia defenseless. As for
    “Putin [having] lost”, that has yet to be determined, as anyone who has swerved on G-staff or higher is well aware. To add to the paraphrase Napoleon’s commentary on formation size…The longer the war lasts, the more the conflict favors Russia. The greater the pressure placed upon Russia threatens their existential interests, the greater the likelihood of escalation. This is called “deductive reasoning”, “Bertram”. Refusing to perceive and recognize what an adversary views as their own existential interests doesn’t change what those interests are, it simply blinds us.

    We’d be wise not to escalate a war with a nuclear superpower blindly, and I believe any prudent and wise person who wishes to preserve innocent life would agree.

  27. Tamerlane

    December 14, 2022 at 12:40 pm

    Jeepwonder,

    It is our American “intelligentsia” which is pushing for war, escalation, and resolution of this conflict via “the end of the bayonet”, not the plebeians—who largely oppose military intervention by the United States or escalation of the conflict.

    Are aware that our intervention on behalf of a non-ally has involved the commission of numerous casus belli against Russia? These include the act of war of seizing a non-belligerent’s sovereign wealth, as well as an economic blockade? The most impactful result of this is not that Russia has responded by striking the West—they haven’t —though they have under international law a basis for responding with military force to these above-mentioned acts of war, but rather is that the developing world has taken notice of the high handed unlawful unilateral actions of the United States against a nuclear superpower and will seek to defend their own parochial interests against any such interventions against themselves in the future. THIS is the greatest legacy of this Ukrainian war. What happens between Russia and Ukraine is of limited consequence to the United States in comparison to the challenge our own responsive actions have triggered.

    Consider the BRICS—Hindu Nationalist-run India’s Modi—Indonesia, South Africa, Brazil etc, they now are fully receptive to China’s siren song that America cannot be trusted and that it will leverage its power to interfere (as it did via NATO by force in Yugoslavia and Libya) economically by seizing assets held in USD abroad if a government domestically acts in a manner which runs contra to D.C.’s will. This is the great challenge to the post war order… not Russian military adventurism, which our “intelligencia” in this administration has precipitated so recklessly.

    It is not Chamberlain-esque to “not be all things to all people”. We are not the policeman of the world, Jeepwonder, and cannot afford it even if you hubristically actually believed the United States holds some moral mandate to compel everyone else by force to live as we wish them to live. It is not Munich in ‘38 to avoid existential challenges to our American global hegemony by not fighting non-existential (for America) fights. What happens with Ukraine is of little strategic interest to us in America, but the USD being challenged on a foundational level IS an absolutely existential threat to us—and we have blindly brought this upon ourselves, just at Athens did when it attacked Syracuse in the Peloponnesian War when it signaled to the rest of the Greek world that it was an existential threat to not merely the democratic city of Syracuse, but to all states which wished to maintain their own independent domestic and foreign policy. We have turned the developing world against us here, and you are missing the forest for the trees.

    Lastly, as for your comment about this conflict being resolved by force—you are naive in extremis. Russia will lose a conventional conflict with the West—and they are well aware of it. They are also well aware that any such defeat would remove them not only as a “regional” great power, but would remove their capacity for their own self-defense and could possibly lead to their own fragmentation as a country. They cannot tolerate this, and this, as it would be to the United States, is perceived by them as an existential threat. The greater that threat—your desired endgame—looms, the higher the likelihood that they will use any means at their disposal to prevent complete annihilation.

    Thanks.

  28. Erny72

    December 20, 2022 at 11:23 am

    This is really baffling; where are the author and the vacuous sock-puppets in western ineptocracies or media getting this delusion that Russia is planning or threatening to use instant sunshine in Ukraine?
    Why on earth would Russia lay waste to eastern Ukraine when the protection of those territories and their populations from genocide is one of the primary objectives of the SMO? Why would Russia lay waste to central Ukraine when the intention for it post war is to be a neutral neighbour, indeed a neighbour in which many Russians have family? Why should Russia feel the need to reach for instant sunshine when it is patently obvious that she has escalation dominance in the conventional sense against not only the Ukrop armed forces but it’s western puppet masters?
    All this tactical nuclear talk is a strawman; since the west is losing the Ukraine project so badly, the only way to tell victory stories now is to make sh!t up, something along the lines of “see we applied pressure and Putin backed down from using nukes”. Which is kind of funny because Putin has never suggested any intention of using nuclear weapons against the Ukrops; pay attention to any of his speaches where instant sunshine is mentioned and you will find a consistent warning to western adventurers not to think about trying instant sunshine themselves when their puppets are beaten and nukes might appear to be the last face-saving roll of the dice they have, because Russia will respond. The more attentive will also have heard Putin remind people recently that Russia’s nuclear doctrine is a total response, NOT a first strike.
    As for the preamble wondering what were/are the objectives of the SMO, well again, that should be fairly clear to anyone paying attention (which doesn’t mean being drip fed bovine excrement via the fake news).
    The initial phase of the SMO was intended to apply political pressure so the coke-head of Kiev would back down from the bravado talk about joining the NATO, cleansing Donbass of ethnic Russians and obtaining a nuclear arsenal. The intial ‘invasion’ was a soft touch; during a serious invasion, tank columns don’t obey give way rules at intersections and an invasion force doesn’t restrict itself from causing damage and casualties to the civilian population, nor go so far out of its way to allow their adversaries to surrender rather than simply giving them the good news. That strategy of more or less political bluff backed with a bit of shock and awe (like taking out the bulk of the Ukrop airforce and command and control in the first night) looked to be working, right up until Bozo the clown arrived in Kiev shortly after the negotiations in Turkey and told his bromance buddy ‘don’t you dare’.
    Since then, the Russian army has consolidated it’s lines, withdrawn from territories whose defence was untenable with such a small expeditionary force and let the Ukrops come to them to be demilitarized (not that you’d realize it if your only information was coming from the fake news which claims a series of spectacular victories, without ever mentioning the cost, at least not until the pointless last stand at Artemovsk started getting too big to hide).
    One thing the Russian military appears good at is learning from mistakes and adjusting its course accordingly; unlike the dolts in DC who clearly have no idea what a reverse gear is. Obviously the leadership accepted the need for a more assertive strategy and concluded that Ukraine’s western puppet masters won’t allow it to voluntarily demilitarize itself, so for that objective to be reached the Ukrop military will have to be decisively beaten to a pulp. Hence the partial remobilization and serious attention being given to breaking the electric grid (that anyone in the west can wring their hands and feign outrage at the targetting of the electric grid is quite laughable, after all it was good enough for ‘us’ to do the same in every conflict we’ve engaged in).
    How much of Novorussia returns to the Russian Federation probably depends on how long Vika Nuland and coy. delude themselves that Ukraine can fight on or that a political collapse is imminent in the Kremlin. I expect the new border will be the Dneiper River and by now, I’d be surprised if the statue of Stepan Bandera isn’t at some point dragged out of the market square of Lvov by a tow cable round the neck strung from the back of a T-90MS.
    At this point it is also intriguing to see whether Turkey, Syria and Russia settle their differences and move to delouse the region of Obama’s favourite ‘moderate terrorists’ and escort the ‘Murican garrison off the premises before giving the PKK a stern telling off. One can hope that doesn’t happen until the dust has settled in Ukraine…
    The most worrying possible outcome of the inevitable collaspe of project Ukraine might be some desperate moron in Washington or London, high on their own supply of ‘exceptionalism’, thinking that whipping up a coalition of the idiotic can make a face saving difference by wandering into Galicia or Odessa as a ‘trip wire’. The imaginative ‘strategy’ might be to hope that their flags are like some kind of Elven invincibility cloak. The next likely outcome for a light infantry expeditionary force would be to join their mercenary comrades who are already buried in the Donbass black soil, and a score of dead GIs with stars and stripes on their bodies, along with concomitant indignant outrage on the home front, would represent the only credible risk of instant sunshine being flung about in Ukraine. But the first warheads to fly would have ‘made in the USA’ stickers on them.
    With luck the net-zero lunacy may have manifest itself in them relying on solar cells to fly in which case they won’t.
    So God help us, because it is by now obvious that we have certifiable morons pretending to lead every single country in ‘the global community’ (meaning Europe, North America and a few occupied or lapdog islands in the Pacific).

  29. Anna

    December 26, 2022 at 5:54 am

    Hitler 2 putin adolfs brother is under the illusion Russia has great thing written about it in history ? Was one of those stand out memories of stalins russian red army raping 2 million girls and women at the end of 1945 in Germany? Funny how the murdering tyrant putin always forgets this event total barbarian Russians still today scum and will be always.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement