Major Attack on Russia’s Bridge to Crimea Shuts the Bridge Down

Image of Crimea bridge from You-Tube video below.

The Kerch bridge from Russian to Crimea has reportedly been hit by a massive explosion on the span that carries railway traffic. Social media videos show a fiercely burning fire engulfing at least two railway carriages from a train on the bridge. The explosion, which witnesses said could be heard kilometres away, took place around 6 am on October 8. It’s said that a train was crossing the bridge at the time of the incident, as per reports.

Collapsed Road

Fuel Storage Tank on Fire

Above images from the video below.

Boom Here Comes the Boom 

Ukraine neither claims nor denies responsibility. But here is a Ukraine Government Defense Ministry Tweet.

Just the Beginning 

Михайло Подоляк @Podolyak_M is Adviser to the Head of the Office of President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

Who Did It?

https://twitter.com/baronitaigas/status/1578723827936550912

There are three possibilities. Russia, Ukraine, US.

Q: Russia? 
A: Yes, to justify use of nuclear weapons

Assessing the Damages 

The Wall Street Journal reports Crimea Bridge Explosion Disrupts Supply Route for Russian Forces

Russia’s investigations committee said three people died after the early-morning explosion on Saturday of a truck on the bridge’s roadway next to a supply train that was carrying fuel. Some demolition experts who analyzed footage of the blast questioned the Russian version and said that the explosion must have come from under the bridge, caused either by an explosives-laden boat, manned or unmanned, or by shaped charges placed by divers.

Tony Spamer, a former British Army expert on bridge demolitions, said that a truck bomb would have created a hole in the middle of bridge, but wouldn’t have been sufficient to cut the reinforcing bar and cause the structure to collapse. “You’ve got to attack the whole width of the bridge. Looking at it, it looks like it was attacked from underneath. It’s a monster job,” he said.

David MacKenzie, a senior technical director at COWI Holding A/S, a Denmark-based company that designs and builds some of the world’s largest and longest bridges, said it would take several months for Russia to be able to fully restore the destroyed spans of the bridge, and that the ban on truck traffic reflects concerns that the bridge’s substructure has also been damaged. Weight restrictions are also likely to be imposed on the railway bridge should it reopen, he said.

Assessing the Odds Putin Uses Nuclear Weapons

How Will Putin Respond? That is the key question.

I am sure this increases the odds Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons. But from what percent to what percent?

Is Putin bluffing? How would anyone know?

And although it’s logical to presume the odds just rose, no one has any real idea what those odds are.

For discussion, please see What Are the Odds Putin is Bluffing About Using Nuclear Weapons?

This post originated at MishTalk.Com

Please Subscribe!

Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish 

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

152 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Latest news is that the truck was driven by an innocent Azerbaijani family man that the Ukrainians duped.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
I doubt your story is true but I guess this is what you are sharing in Russia.
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Apparently the Ukrainians have issued a postage stamp to commemorate their terrorist attack on the bridge which killed three civilians. Some pretty sick people in Ukraine.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
Great idea! Hopefully, they will do the same when Putin i assassinated.
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
In an interesting development, Ukrainians are now saying that Russia’s Security Services suicide-bombed their own bridge. How long until Western media takes up this narrative?
About as believable as Russia blowing up their own gas pipelines.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
Interesting, if true, maybe saboteurs in the ranks, not unfeasible where Kazakhstan alone is now home to 200K Russian defectors since “mobilization”.
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Apparently the rail bridge is operational again, as is one lane of the road bridge. They just need to re-hoist the fallen concrete span of the other lane of the road bridge and it will be OK again.
I guess Russia will be more careful to check for suicide bombers from now on.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
“Crimea, the bridge, the beginning. Everything illegal must be destroyed,
everything stolen must be returned to Ukraine, everything occupied by
Russia must be expelled,” said Mykhailo Podolyak, adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in a Twitter post.”
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Just waiting for a Russian troll farm employee to object to Twitter not censoring this.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Well, that was easy, it’s especially funny when you guys try to say you’re American, using sentence structures that are jumbled, or words from a thesaurus that you think fit.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
You are a waste of oxygen, you stupid Biden bootlicker! Welcome to my Ignore list. Adios, idiot!
jhrodd
jhrodd
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Right, Markrad is a typical American name……
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
What about all the Russian people living in Crimea (basically all of the people there), who have lived there for centuries? Must they be destroyed also?
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
I hope Zelenski deports the lot of them and confiscates their physical possessions. They are clearly a security risk going forward. There is a price to be paid for cooperating with the enemy. In the old days, the men and their first born would be murdered and their wives raped but we live in modern times now.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
So you support ETHNIC CLEANSING????
I think it is odd that the WEST supposedly rejects “ETHNIC CLEANSING”, NATO went to war against Serbia for it..
Yet many media personalities, politicians and some on MISH site is calling for “ETHNIC CLEANSING” in Ukraine…
So that means Ethnic Russians who have ancestorial claims to Ukraine have a right to go into Ukraine and “ETHNIC CLEANSE” Ukrainians from parts of Ukraine!!!
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
So what you warmongers want is the land, and to hell with the people who live there, huh?
SAKMAN
SAKMAN
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
No – what they want is peace. Those who want war kill, those who want peace must kill those who want war or risk death themselves.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Great idea Jojo. Deport them to Poland and hold them in camps until new furnaces can be built. Then confiscate their shoes, eyeglasses, hair, etc. A notable idea Jojo.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
[Shrug] Call me old fashioned!
Billy
Billy
3 years ago
I don’t remember the media orchestrating the exact same message that Putin is bad when Russia did this to Crimea. Everyone just seemed to accept it. What’s the big difference?
How about instead of attacking Putin, we attack Russia’s government that tells its people what to do instead of a free government?
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Billy
When Putin took Crimea, no one had ever heard of the place. And wimp President Obama was in charge, so the only expectation was a verbal warning.
When Putin tried again, figuring that he had gotten away with the first grab, he was surprised to find the West, led by the USA, saying Never Again!
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
…..it was you , wasn t it ? I mean, not your sister nor your mother, but YOU that got raped by a Russian, right? …Just admit it, we won t tell anyone, honestly… Talking about a trauma relieves….give it a try….
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  Billy
The big difference is that Crimea did not have the son of the US president holding a seat on the board of a very large natural gas company. As opposed to Ukraine where these things are important.
wmjack50
wmjack50
3 years ago
They left one span intact so evacuations from Crimea could commence for those who wish to avoid war
dadbod
dadbod
3 years ago
Think I’ll come across sounding a bit ‘russbot’ here….
Does the west need to win?
Yup
Its supremacy in the world order is in doubt.
US didn’t win in syria after 10 years (largely due to russia deciding to support the Assad government)
US accomplished what? in afghanistan in 20 years before ducking and running
Oh and so reliable:
1993? – US says they wont move NATO east of Germany
and before that US when extricating themselves from Vietnam says to China – Yes, we agree Taiwan is yours – we’ll call it the ‘One China’ policy.
“We cannot be trusted” more like.
Some of it’s recent foreign policy highlights:
Biden branding Putin “he’s a killer” (maybe a year ago? before the war)
Assassination of Putins right hand man (oops – daughter by mistake)
Blowing up Nordstream
Blowing up Kerch bridge
Needle, needle, needle.
What is it – ‘your momma jokes’ next?
Yet Putin has been not drawn by the bait.
US appears desperate to find any mechanism to break up russia so it can balkanise it, and install its own puppets to leech it.
Probably to stave off a default on the US 32trillion?
And with an economy much bigger, who’s to say they won’t manage it. Including with Ukraine making miraculous progress recently – US, NATO entirely the reason for this.
A bit of history – Perhaps Britain will declare war on the US (as they did Germany in WW2) to stop the US getting to an unassailable position and taking over all of Europe?
ROFL
Or should Putin have waited 10 years, and let Ukraine get NATO membership, and all his negotiations with the west would be down the barrel of their much bigger gun, to comply with the rules that they set. Including deciding on the legitimacy of his own elections.
Perhaps they could sanction him for not following any of their new woke agendas.
And the MSM can in finite detail report every approved biased item!
Doh!
Yes the war is horrible. Yes it should never have started. Yes a peace should be found asap.
Maybe after mid-terms old Joe can go look after the grandkids, and they can get someone in who can do the job – Maybe Jake Sullivan, no wait – someone who can blink!
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  dadbod
Correct, you kinda sound a bit “Russbot”.
I view it in far simpler terms, do we allow Putin to invade, murder and rape citizens of a Democratic country that avails him greater leverage over the global economy?
Yes, America has engaged in gravely misguided military endeavors, but that doesn’t mean we should by allow it by others, nor allow it against us.
If it comes down to which form of governance is better, I prefer one that doesn’t murder journalists foe being truthful and political adversaries who disagree.
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe. An oligarchy sponsored by the Cia. Zelenski is a billionaire.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
Under Yanukovych, yes, very corrupt, Zelenskyy was legitimately elected, his career as a comedian at least assured voters he wasn’t part of the status quo Russian oligarchy.
Interestingly, Russia is the single most corrupt developed country.
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Russia is up there I doubt the single most corrupt but Ukraine any way you look at it is in the top 20. Sure, the CIA instigated a civil war to overthrow a corrupt pro Russian leader to install a corrupt pro US leader. Awesome, meanwhile the little people suffer. At least the MIC is making money and lining the pockets of our honest politicians. At least we legalize corruption in the US via “campaign donations” . We have the best government money can buy.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
Zelenski can’t be a billionaire.
He can’t even afford a decent shirt.
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
You are referring to zelenski correct? It’s much h more acceptable to weaponize the judicial system against your political adversaries. That’s more polite.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Talking about “gravely misguided military endeavors”, add NATO’s Ukraine misadventure to the list. This winter, many west Europeans are going to be wiping their butts with freezing hands – in the dark. And that’s for starters!
As for those the country that “doesn’t murder journalists”, how about throwing journalists into prison for doing journalism? And remember it is Navalny who can write op-eds in the Washington Post. Assange is not allowed any such luxury.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
It’s 15 years max, right?
15 years in jail for speaking against the Ukraine invasion, and, you’re equivocating that to Assange?
Didn’t Putin imprison a female punk rock band for singing bad things about him?
Putin woulda hated the Sex Pistols.
Here’s the contrast, I can openly say Bush or Cheney’s a war criminal without worrying the Feds will arrive at my door to arrest me, can you say anything bad at all about Putin?
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
You can say Bush or Cheney’s a war criminal because TPTB have made sure that you are impotent. That is how inverted totalitarianism works.
SAKMAN
SAKMAN
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
TPTB in China and Russia and Iran have made their populations 100% impotent. Watch the revolution in Iran completely fail due to near complete informational control. You support that, killer.
At least in the West they still have the right to a voice.
Carl_R
Carl_R
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
That reminds me of a Reagan joke. He said that a Russian was talking to an American, and the American said “I can march into Reagan’s office, pound the desk, and say ‘I don’t like the way you are running the country!’ and nothing bad will happen to me. The Russian replied “I can do the same thing”, and the American said “You can?” The Russian replied “Absolutely. I can march into Gorbachev’s office, pound the desk, and say ‘I don’t like the way Reagan is running his country!’ and nothing bad will happen to me.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Yep she was fined and released!!!
Funny thing in Russia if a female commits murder she allowed to remain free until all her children are 18!!!
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
…..’ a democratic country ‘ LOL ! When did you land from mars ? US should get its fat a$$ out of Europe , you messed up the Middle east, now its Europe’s turn, your fckn criminal gang must ve thought , let s fight Russia with Ukrainian cannon fodder and ruin the EU’s economy in the process THAT was your ‘democratic’ plan all along ! Gangsters and warcriminals thats what you are !
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Zelensky has turned into a two bit dictator!!!
He has banned all opposition parties, even ones who have zero ties to Russia!!!
Free Press is not allowed!!! All news networks including BBC have to have the permission of the Ukrainian military before reporting what is happening in Ukraine!!
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Assuming this is Ukraine strategically disabling Russian routes to Crimea, imagine what’s going through the mind of Russian troops in Crimea, feeling trapped there after witnessing the slaughter elsewhere in Ukraine.
I highly doubt this was Putin, this was a pretty brilliant move on Ukraine’s part, I’ve even been speculating Ukraine was going after Crimea with the huge surge of momentum in recent weeks.
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
This was a PR stunt only. The bridge was not structurally damaged and most of it is open again already. I must admit that Ukraine/US is extremely good at propaganda. But make no mistake, it is just propaganda.
Incidentally, Crimea is not an island. Even if the bridge is one day destroyed, Russia can supply Crimea by land.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
Thanks Putin. How’s the weather in Moscow today?
Tip for you: stay away from open windows or stairs on high floors.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
And Russia is running some of the world’s largest ferry’s across the straight!!!!
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
“This was a PR stunt only. The bridge was not structurally damaged and most of it is open again already.”
So far Ukraine hasn’t taken credit, they have every reason to boast if it was them, which means it might have been a Russian inside job, and, if Putin uses this to justify nukes, we’re boots on the ground, American & NATO troops will make Ukraine’s look like child’s play.
Kazakhstan is now up to 200,000 defectors, nevermind Finland, Georgia, and the rest , your country is toast, either way.
Your best hope is for the Kremlin to oust him.
Robbyrob
Robbyrob
3 years ago
ahhh its war lives societies structures are destoryed
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Apparently there is a talented group of marine demolition experts in Eastern Europe.
Third time is the charm?
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
A problem faced by anyone who occupies contested area, is that they, by definition, have lots and lots of enemies behind their lines.
If the entire world suddenly decided to get behind the Basque separatists: Handing them weapons, calling them heroes and playing up their chance to “win” and bask in glory; that region would turn into a mess real quickly as well.
Main difference being, the rest of the world sides with the current occupier in the Basque case. But are against the current occupier in the Crimean case. Making the road to eventual victory seem much more plausible for those opposed to the current occupier in the latter. Hence motivating them to take risks which many fewer Basques would.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
At least Spain and France allow the Basques to speak their native language.
Eastern Ukraine not so much.
Misc
Misc
3 years ago
You see…it is against the rules of war to intentionally target infrastructure.
Ukraine just violated this rule. Hence, Russia is now free to destroy Ukraine’s infrastructure. Now we get to see if Russia turns off the lights in Kiev.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Misc
Apartment buildings aren’t infrastructure? Nothing in Mariupol was infrastructure?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
I think Misc meant that Russia is now free to continue to destroy Ukraine’s infrastructure.
Perhaps Russia will destroy more now if they become really pissed.
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
There were Ukrainian soldiers hiding in apartments, hospitals and schools, making them legitimate targets. Read the Amnesty International report on this:
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
The US targets Iraq’s power grid!!! Using a new weapon system, US even admitted this was the first time the US had attempted to use it!!!
I think it is strange how the majority of the people in the west have forgotten about the US invasion of Iraq…
We even blew up bridges in Iraq..
Go back and look for videos of the US and its Coalition of the willing bombing a bridge with civilian vehicles on it and the US General is shown laughing and mocking how the driver was “LUCKY”!!!!!
My standard as a US citizen is if the US GOV’T does something in “WAR” than other countries have a “RIGHT” to do the same thing..
The United States of America can no longer stand on the claim “MORALLY RIGHT”!!!!
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Misc
In war infrastructure is always targeted extensively. There is no rule against it. A bridge has both military and civilian uses so it is fair game.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Misc
Ukraine was told to stay away from Crimea because it was considered part of Russia. The fact that his has blown points to that exclusion being removed. It should never have been in place originally but the West didn’t want to give Putin excuses to escalate.
Now we know Putin is weak, Ukraine is being turned loose. Hopefully, they start attacking inside Russia proper.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Crimea was a gift from Russia to Ukraine made in 1954. The oblasts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson together account for nearly 90% of Ukraine’s industrial output as well as a large part of its agri output. The rest of Ukraine is backward, poor and very corrupt, and is headed to getting even more backward, poorer and extremely corrupt in the years to come.
Carl_R
Carl_R
3 years ago
Reply to  Misc
Russia has already been blowing up power plants and dams in Ukraine, so that is nothing new. As for bridges, they have long been military targets. Many bridges have already been blown up by both sides, and many more will be blown up by both sides before this war is over. Considering the vast amounts of military equipment that have come across the Karch bridge, it is impossible to argue that it is strictly a civilian target.
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
As with many of these incidents lately, it doesn’t much matter who is to blame. Its a war, and things get blown up.
I still do not expect Putin to use nukes. And if I am wrong and he tries to use nukes, I hope someone will take him out first to prevent it.
Either way, the sanctions will continue on Russia for a long time to come. The west does not want Russia to easily rebuild its shattered military.
Which means Russian oil and gas production will continue to decline.
And since OPEC is tapped out, and most other producers are unwilling to spend big on capex, the world faces an energy supply crunch over the next few years.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
After the coming disastrous winter, western Europe will have a means to get Russian oil through a circuitous route via Asia. Of course, it will be much more expensive for them. As will natural gas.
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Oil is going to get more expensive for everyone. After all, it is a worldwide commodity. With Russian oil production in decline, supply is going to be constrained worldwide. I suspect Asia will end up “using” what little Russian oil they can get. There won’t be any left over to sell to Europe. They will have to find other sources.
The same goes for natgas.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Yep keep believing the propaganda being fed to you by the US INTEL agencies with help from the US/WEST MSM!!!!
Just last month the third highest ranking official was in Moscow and during a press conference outright stated the China will continue to support Russia, economically, politically and militarily!!!
That proves the West Intel agencies are involved in covering up for the Chinese!!!
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Reply to  JRM
You have said the same thing to me many times:
“keep believing the propaganda being fed to you by the US INTEL agencies with help from the US/WEST MSM!!!!”
That’s all pretty funny. Because I keep telling you that the oil production sources I use are OPEC and Russia itself. Clearly you get your info out of your behind (or is that what your Russian masters tell you to say?)
Russia was meeting its 11 Mbpd OPEC quota earlier this year. Their quota was just dropped to 10.5 Mbpd. But that doesn’t matter because their production has already fallen to 10 Mbpd. And its about to fall a lot further. For two reasons:
1. New European sanctions are “supposed” to come into effect in December. We will see if that actually happens. But it is probably a moot point anyway because:
2. Russia is focusing so many resources on their failing war effort that they are taking resources away from their oil production. Combine that with the loss of resources of western companies who left Russsia, and the current sanctions on the sale of oil equipment and parts to Russia and you have a recipe for decline of production for years to come.
I suggest you go to Russia (unless you are already there) and offer your help with oil production. And bring some much needed equipment with you. Russia needs all the help they can scrounge.
The decline in Russian production has already happened, and its about to get worse. And it doesn’t matter how you try to spin the facts.
Your lack of understanding of many things is rather breathtaking.
Just like when you thought that US oil companies stored their oil in the SPR. Lol! Perhaps you have never seen the thousands of oil storage tanks scattered all over the US because you don’t live in the US?
Which means you are likely a Russian troll.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Joke is on you I was born in Oregon and still living here in OREGON!!!!
I have an open “MIND” and look at both sides of the issue!!!
You mean the west translated evidence??
Media like to say Putin is saying one thing but when use Russian translating software online and they don’t match up..
Meaning they blatantly lie about what is coming out of Putin’s mouth…
US/West MSM media did the same thing with Saddam, he would do an interview in English and voice over would be in Arabic and then they would change the Arabic translation to English, and it never matched what Saddam was saying in English!!!
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Reply to  JRM
Lol! You probably think you have an open mind. But it sure doesn’t come across that way. Just look at what you just wrote. Rant after rant after rant. Its crazy stuff. You definitely appear to be a Russian troll. And if you are not, you are a very dumb American.
OPEC has their own website where you can get the news straight from the source. Are you telling me its a fake site run by western media? If so, you are definitely a Russian troll.
Just like when you told me that oil companies store their oil in the SPR. An American would never say something that stupid.
Who won the world series last year? Lol! Take your pick. Russian troll or incredibly dumb American?
BDR45
BDR45
3 years ago
I think we all need to pressure the US government into a more humanitarian and sensible approach to the Ukraine/Russian war. I can hardly believe the elites really want WWIII, as it would be probably a nearly disastrous outcome for Western powers. And to say “Russia will be destroyed too” is pure insanity. Our frontal cortex evolved so we would THINK, not act impulsively. We don’t want the history books to say,
…..”and in the 21st Century, a nuclear holocaust was created by politically motivated and impulsive leaders, resulting in the loss of 1/2 billion lives.”
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Reply to  BDR45
EXACTLY. I am going to be calling all my senator and congressmen to encourage that the demented corrupt president forget about all the money the Ukrainians paid him and his family and end this conflict instead of destroying Ukraine. I have no doubt Joe is planning on provoking the Russians until they launch a nuke. You would think someone would be stopping him.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  BDR45

You can’t get sensible from a nuclear armed Soviet goblin.

StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Not ONE single warhead went astray during the Soviet breakup. Not one nuke have even remotely considered being used by the Russians during any of the numerous conflicts they have been involved in since then. Or even before then, despite them getting their rears summarily handed to them, American style, in Afghanistan. By all evidence those guys are Very Sensible wrt nukes. Thank goodness.
The difference this time, compared to all of those other conflicts being: There was no other “superpower” doing its darnedest to keep fanning the flames of war as high as they could in any of those. Not in Chechnya, not South Ossetia, not in Syria…… If Russia ends up sufficiently cornered to consider using nukes this time, it’s only because the “enemy” is no longer just one of its neighbours. But rather because another nuke power, or five, keep falling all over themselves trying to get involved in the fight. That’s what’s not sensible: Risking a massive nuclear confrontation over what, from a legitimate US POV, is little more than a barfight in a vodka bar in Donbas.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
Use nukes, get nuked. Them’s the rules.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
NOT REALLY. the only time they were used, and dropped on civilian targets, there was no repurcussions. hat tip harry truman, the hat salesman from midwest.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
That’s because nobody else had any to nuke us with.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
If “Them’s the rules”, then it becomes even more pertinent for everyone not right in the middle of any specific conflict, to do everything they can to MINIMIZE, not increase, the risks that nukes will be used.
Exactly whether nominal “Separatists”, “Russians” or “Ukrainians” arbitrarily “have the right to” tax and harass people in some arbitrary land strip in Donbas; where even those who live there can’t seem to agree on the matter; has got to be about the stupidest reason to risk nuclear annihilation of the US Eastern Seaboard one cold possibly think of.
Nuclear war between Russia and the US is a real problem. For pretty much everyone on earth. Something no local skirmish in Donbas would never become, were it not for idiotic tit-for-tat meddling by outsiders.
Of course, that “rule” also begs the question of “who’s going to nuke Israel,” when demographics, along with democratisation of nuclear technology, inevitably forces them into a corner with no other obvious way out? Should the US Eastern Seaboard be sacrificed in response to a strike on a suspected underground facility in some Iranian mountain as well? Instead of simply leaving the hotheads of the world to settle their own differences without insisting on policies maximising the risk of global armageddon.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
So, just bend over and spread ‘em whenever some tinpot dictator waves a nuke around?
I’d rather die in nuclear fire than live on my knees.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
“So, just bend over and spread ‘em whenever some tinpot dictator waves a nuke around?”
Nope. Do what the Ukrainians are doing. Fight back. Come what may. The Afghans would have kicked the Russians out even if the Russkies had resorted to nukes. While Americans are queasy enough that even a hint of radioactivity in the air, would have resulted in them kicking themselves out.
Secondly: While there is nothing wrong with you volunteering to get nuked over some silly symbolic “stand your ground” posturing; Why the heck should everyone else, in the US and surrounding countries, as well as Eurasia, be nuked just so you can demonstrate how tough and resolved you are?
Thirdly: At some point, a nuke will be dropped. Somewhere. The cats are out the bag. Spreading. And breeding. They’re not somehow going to just crawl back in. Like all militarily useful technology, what goes into nukemaking also has civilian uses. It’s pretty short sighted to commit oneself to a policy of even a single nuke going off in some remote backwater somewhere not only justifying, but indeed necessitating, a response resulting in the offloading of another 10-odd thousand warheads on pretty much everywhere.
prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Hmmm… the US used nukes twice on civilians in WW2. Then Eisenhower threatened the North Koreans with tactical nuke strikes in 1955 if they didn’t sign a peace deal. Then Johnson considered using tactical nukes in the Vietnam War during the siege of Khe Sanh.
The Soviet Union and Russia have never used nukes on anyone, nor have they threatened to.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  prumbly
The fact is since the US got nukes, every president has threatened to use them, against whomever we were at odds with during their tenors…
BUSH SR threatened to NUKE Panama and then Granada.. I remember watching him live on TV saying it!!!!
Bush JR threatened to nuke Iraq!!!!
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  BDR45
Exactly! We should be pressuring Putin to withdraw all his forces, give up Crimea and make restitution to Ukraine and its citizens. Anything less is not acceptable.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Nope. “We” should not. If YOU want to, go the merry heck ahead. Along with any other fellow traveller who simply cannot help themselves minding everybody’s business but their own.
The only thing “we” should do, is: Trade freely with all; and be entanglingly allied with none. Without any exception. Just as the last of the literate US leaders admonished; back in that quaint era when America still aspired to be a somewhat free and civilised country.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
[Shrug]. You’re free to hold what opinions you choose, no matter how wrong they may be.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
you speak the truth and with wisdom. i’m sure you are mocked with those sane positions. hat tip to you.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  BDR45
“I think we all need to pressure the US government into a more humanitarian and sensible approach to the Ukraine/Russian war.”
This approach failed with Georgia, Crimea and the current situation, Putin only understands force.
To be honest, I both surprised and impressed that Biden understands this.
I don’t want WWIII either, but I even less want a world living in fear of Putin, Kim or China if they see us back down now and look the other way.
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Who has caused more death and destruction than Putin, Kim or China? One guess… the US. Out last incursion into Afghanistan and Iraq cost 1 million lives and 8 trillion USD. That doesn’t include the unnecessary dropping of the A bombs on Japan. Read the history on that. I was brainwashed by the usual textbook explanations that it was to save US lives sparing an invasion into Japan. The true facts on that is that they were about to surrender, something I recently read about unfortunately.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
I suggest saving your breath, in Russia your knowledge of the U.S. and world events is restricted to what you’re allowed to know.
The fact that Putin has threatened you with up to 15 years in jail for speaking against this war says it all.
Yes, my government has done bad things, and most Americans acknowledge that (We’re allowed to), but there is no possible chance you’re going to sway Americans with that spiel.
“America has done bad things before, so it’s ok for Putin.”
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
So, as an American, there is absolutely nothing you can do about the bad things your own government has done, but you delude yourself that you can do something about the leader of another country on the other side of the planet??!! Ummmm… ok! LOL
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Your country’s leader is a tyrant, a thief, a murderer and I’m pleased to see that, unlike Georgia and Crimea, we are doing something this time.
The critical difference between us, I had the right to speak out against Bush, you have no such right to speak out against Putin without risk of potential jail.
dadbod
dadbod
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
You say:
“Yes, my government has done bad things, and most Americans acknowledge that (We’re allowed to), but there is no possible chance you’re going to sway Americans with that spiel.
“America has done bad things before, so it’s ok for Putin.””
paraphrasing – you say
US has done it, but Putin cant
LOL
hypocracy much?
Freedom of press is a separate issue for Russia. On the flip side – so is Guantanomo bay for US.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
My country’s leader Biden is a tyrant, thief, murderer etc.? Yeah, but in his defense I would argue that he has no effing idea who he is or where he is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-111Yns6fU

MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Putin, chum, you’re no American, everything you post is pro-Russia, literally everything.
BDR45
BDR45
3 years ago
The president of Ukraine is not only corrupt, but crazy. Negotiations should begin immediately to reduce further casualties on both sides.
Someone is hoping for and encouraging the Russians to lob a few tactical nukes into Ukraine. Cui bono? To me it seems like President Putin has been more than cautious and careful in his tactics, so I would immediately rule out Russia as an agent of either Nordstream or this bridge bombing.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  BDR45
Good luck with that, American’s don’t agree, I’m seeing both political sides here agreeing on this.
It’s actually the first time since 9/11 I’ve seen this type of cohesion in U.S. politics.
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Never underestimate the ignorance and stupidity of the general electorate. They only lap up the garbage propaganda they are feed by the MSM and their dear leaders. Never underestimate the evil corruption of our politicians by their money masters.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
Which country do you refer to?
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
Especially when they don’t agree with YOUR personal POV.
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
The Kerch bridge from Russian to Crimea has reportedly been hit by a massive explosion on the span that carries railway traffic
The train fire was co-incidental, the span was not hit: just tanker cars that caught fire and burned/exploded.
Ukraine has as good as bragged about it (like Blinken and Nord Stream).
The only theory I am hearing is shaped charges underlying a blast shield in the truck that detonates on video at the exact spot.
Any notion that Russia itself did this seems too fanciful absent extraordinary evidence.
Limits on truck weight are probably precautions pending structural inspections.
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
People who think that only the Russians have agency should think about:
  • Why didn’t the Russians destroy a Norwegian gas pipeline if they wanted to make life difficult for Europe?
  • Why haven’t the Russians destroyed any bridges over the Dnieper River instead of their own … those could just as easily be blamed on Ukraine, which has blown a lot more bridges than have the Russians.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
Those Dnieper bridges, along with much else of Ukrainian infrastructure, will likely become targets if this keeps escalating. I doubt Russia needs nukes to do so, as the sheer amount of conventional ordnance they have can do one heck of a lot of targeted damage on its own, should the goal become simply to render Ukrainian infrastructure maximally dysfunctional, period.
All meaningful infrastructure serves both a military and civilian role. Deliberately targeting infrastructure that far from the front lines, is something Russia have abstained from thus far. Even when they’ve been retreating, they haven’t blown up everything as they leave. Nothing good will come of that restraint being abandoned. And Ukraine; despite the great fighting force that they seem to be gelling into; will never, ever, beat gigantic Russia at that sort of scorched earth warfare.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
It’s worth noting that the very first Ukrainian targets hit were infrastructure, before they had any troops move in.
That failed miserably, they wound up hitting apartment buildings, churches, schools and had minimal effect on actual infrastructure.
Unless you’re claiming Russia’s military has completely reinvented itself, there’s no reason to assume Russia will suddenly “get good”.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
They won’t “get good.” Look at Syria. Ukraine turning; from the current status of somewhere where Russia have some idea that they’ll be ruling occupied/annexed/liberated people; and into the wasteland that is “Russian-controlled” “Syria”, is exactly the fear.
Unfortunately for Syrians, both Russians and Westerners quite obviously consider them distinctly second class humans, versus Ukranians. In Syria, the Russians have no intention of “occupying” areas, nor providing “Russian school materials, TV channels and food aid” to people there. Instead, they just systematically dismantle all infrastructure supporting even semi-modern life with anyone who happens to be there considered no more consequential than stray dogs.
Then, if the locals are lucky, the Russians open up “humanitarian corridors” for civilians to leave. Then, once those thus self selecting as “civilians” by leaving are gone, anyone remaining is deemed a “militant.” Whereby completely indiscriminate bombing of all which was once there is considered a-ok. In reality to ensure noone who left has anything to come back to. After all, it’s a lot easier to spot and eliminate a rocket crew close enough to threaten their paymaster in Damascus, if there is nothing but barren dessert for a hundred miles in every direction…….
There’s enough of a military industry in Russia (even more so now, when all potentially competing bidders for “good-job” labor and raw materials have been sanctioned into layoffs…), to manufacture ordinance on a massive scale. They can keep delivering explosives at a high rate, to Ukraine as well as Syria, indefinitely; without depleting stockpiles the way everyone else would. So while there’s no way they can meaningfully “occupy” determined-not-to-be Ukrainians the way things are looking (Ukraine supposedly have 2 million motivated men/women chomping at the bit to be allowed to serve, Russia struggles to “capture” 300,000 poor, unmotivated souls to force into the theatre….) ; just indiscriminately feeding explosives in there to ensure the region remains “unlikely to pose a threat,” is a completely different matter.
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
Delusional. It is the US with its ISIS cohorts that ruined Syria; they’re still occupying swathes of its territory and sanctioning the population.
Raqqa and Mosul were completed wiped out, tens of thousands of people died, civilians and all.
The US threw special munitions on Aleppo to short/disable the electric infrastructure, 4 million people without water, sewage, or electricity.
Just like they did to Baghdad (8 million).
The Russians in the end had enough secret contacts to get most of the militants left to leave Aleppo by bus for Idlib.
Historically speaking, it is the USAF that is the king of indiscriminate bombing.
Syria makes no chance till the US gets out and the sanctions are dropped.
But for Russia, it would be like Libya, with open air slave markets and continuing internecine warfare.
All ethnic and religious minorities would have be exterminated.
Carl_R
Carl_R
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
I expect that if Russia is about to lose Kherson, they will blow up the dam and flood Kherson. I also expect that if they appear likely to lose the nuclear plant, they will mine it, and schedule it to detonate after they leave. Yes, blowing up a dam to flood civilians is considered a war crime, but that didn’t stop them from blowing up the dams on the Inhulets river. That just seems to be how things roll these days.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
The Russians have tried to be different than the US (which destroyed every bridge, every power station, every communication center, every water treatment plan, in the case of Serbia and Iraq and Afghanistan). But so far, most of their focus has been on the economic war and the energy war against NATO – which they have been winning, as seen in the latest OPEC+ decision.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
The language by Ukraine officials implies Russia did not do this. What is surprising is the train bridge was not detonated as well, or selected as the primarily target. Repairing one bridge leaves the other operational, but repairing two bridges eliminates all traffic. Nonetheless, there are now disruptions in logistics.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
It’s hard as heck to plant enough explosives to bring down a bridge built solid enough to carry heavy train traffic. Probably even more so in Russia, where everything has to be sufficiently over-engineered to accomodate less-than-German-grade reliability of engineering materials.
As an aside: This also demonstrates the ultimate futility of “long range guided precision cruise missiles” in wars like this: Such missiles, no matter how “cool” and “superior” The Man on TeeVee makes them look on CNN, are simply way too inefficient a means of depositing destructive energy on targets. They work great at sea, and in the air. And can be useful for taking out very concentrated high value targets like radar installations, and if the targeting is precise enough movable artillery. But if combatants are determined, they won’t roll over just because they lost a radar. And more thorough-going destruction of people’s ability to fight, require lots and lots and lots more destruction than what even the wealthiest of militaries can deliver with such multimillion dollar taxpayer funded toys.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
There a “THREE” bridges, one rail, one “FOUR” lane bridge towards Crimea, one “FOUR” lane bridge to Russia…
Watch them convert surviving bridge into 2 lanes each direction…
Friendly reminder Russia built that bridge in Record time and way ahead of schedule.. Confounding “WEST” experts!!!!!
And Russia has land route to Crimea and are also running some of the worlds largest ferry’s to and from Crimea!!!!
Russia also operates some of the worlds largest Hover Crafts!!!!
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
The truck with the explosives was registered in Southern Russia. Possibly this is the work of internal actors dissatisfied with Putin’s Folly.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Yep Ukrainians infiltrators can’t get into Russia????
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
The Russians have never mentioned a ‘tactical’ nuke, and have certainly never threatened Ukraine with one.
They have merely warned the West about all their loose talk and the idea that they have nuclear ‘primacy’.
Russian nuclear doctrine is clear and much more restrictive than American, where they have invented terms such as: surviving a nuclear exchange; anti-ballistic shields; pre-emptive first strike; nuclear primacy; escalate-to-deescalate; tactical adjustable yield nukes (which they are building); and refuse to exclude first use nuclear weapons (‘strategic ambiguity’). Only in the case that Russia’s very existence is threatened does Russian doctrine allow nukes, and it requires 4 parties to agree (unless there has already been a nuclear exchange, in which case there is a deadman’s switch).
If it ever comes to nuclear exchanges, it will be aimed at Washington and London, not Kiev or a farmer’s field in the Pontian Steppe.
This whole discussion is aimed at priming the public for an inevitable pre-emptive strike against a Russian nuke mirage.
Shades of Iraq WMDs.
The chemical/biological weapons are completely gratuitous, no evidence that Russia has them, but plenty that America does.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
The Russians have never mentioned a ‘tactical’ nuke, and have certainly never threatened Ukraine with one.”
I’m guessing you’re in Russia, the media there has been restricted, atop Putin threatening to imprison anyone who speaks against his war.
In America, we’ve seen his threats. We’ve also seen footage of his missile attacks on hospitals, schools, and churches.
We’ve also seen the bodies of women, children and senior citizens the Russian army has killed.
Unlike Russia’s media, our private, Constitutionally protected media is allowed to go there and report in real time.
blackswan
blackswan
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Right… like they reported in Irak, Syria, Libya etc… amazing delusional perspective.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
You mean all the “WRONGLY TRANSLATED TRANSCRIPTS”???
Stop buying what the western MSM/INTEL agencies are selling you and do your own investigation..
And run your own translation software on what Russians are saying!!!
You will be stunned on how much “WE” are being lied to about, what they are saying!!!!
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
No, not in Russia.
You are not very good at parsing the American propaganda media; in Russia there are millions speaking their minds, even in government.
All the civilian objects hit were either b/c UAF was using them as barracks (particularly old folks homes, schools, hospitals) , depots, and to hide weapons, all of which are war crimes.
Many of the apartment building “mishaps” were in fact stray air defense missiles.
In fact, Ukraine’s command & control, as well as the whole defensive industry, was crippled immediately.
Our private media are completely controlled by the complex (e.g., Hunter Biden laptop story, 100% suppression and lies) and always unanimous on important issues: People seem unaware, which makes it work even better. The whole complex keeps broadcasting stories unanimously which fall apart soon after.
This SMO has had an extremely low civilian:military casualty ratio, about 20:1
Traditional American and NATO campaigns in recent decades are 1:1
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago

“How Will Putin Respond? That is the key question.

I am sure this increases the odds Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons. But from what percent to what percent?”

Responding with a tactical nuke would really be a sign of weakness and blowing up what is left of Russia’s reputation and losing whatever support they have left from their “friends” would not be worth it. That is the logical point of view but from a logical point of view Russia invading Ukraine was madness too so Putin could command it but not sure if the order would be followed.
Dutoit
Dutoit
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
I would rather think 50 Ukrainian bridges destroyed (and some other infrastructure: power plants, dams, etc..). It is also possible that some bridges explode in western Europe, for unknown reasons.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Dutoit
You assume Russia has the means when if they had had them they would have already used them. If bridges explode in Western Europe you can be sure that pipes that heat Russian cities in winter will explode also. You still think that Europe will be cowed by Russia’s intimidation tactics. You should know by now that that is not the case.
Dutoit
Dutoit
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
The only question is : which one can create the biggest pain to the other ?
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Dutoit
I would say the Ukrainians are giving a world of pain to the Russians.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Dutoit
As any war progresses, it increasingly becomes more a question of who can take, not who can create, the most pain.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
The fact that Russia’s missiles have been so crudely targeted, while at the same time Ukraine was able to pinpoint and kill 44 Russian generals speaks volumes.
I’m bewildered at how inadequate and outdated Putin’s military and satellite targeting has been.
JRM
JRM
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Stop believing the PROPAGANDA!!!!
Every time Russia targets a “APARTMENT” building the first thing you should ask is what did the Ukrainian military have deployed on site!!!!
I remember BBC running a story when the Russians struck a Civilian Apartment in Northern Ukraine, even BBC video showed a tank parked under the cover in front of the building!!! The crater was where the tank was and the building was “COLLATERAL” damage!!!!
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Stop with tactical nukes!
Blow one up and it puts radiation in the air which blows wherever the wind goes. Regardless of the amount of radiation put out, just the fact that it is there in some amount and blowing over other countries (or Russia itself) is enough to cause immediate retaliation.
Putin won’t do it.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
I’m no Meteorologist, but it looks tike the jet stream blows west to north-west in East Ukraine.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
WInds blow west to east in general.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Petraeus: US would destroy Russia’s troops if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine
Former CIA director and retired army general says Moscow’s leader is ‘desperate’ and ‘battlefield reality he faces is irreversible’
Sun 2 Oct 2022
The US and its allies would destroy Russia’s troops and equipment in Ukraine – as well as sink its Black Sea fleet – if the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, uses nuclear weapons in the country, former CIA director and retired four-star army general David Petraeus warned on Sunday.
Petraeus said that he had not spoken to national security adviser Jake Sullivan on the likely US response to nuclear escalation from Russia, which administration officials have said has been repeatedly communicated to Moscow.
He told ABC News: “Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a Nato – a collective – effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black Sea.”
The warning comes days after Putin expressed views that many have interpreted as a threat of a larger war between Russia and the west.
Asked if the use of nuclear weapons by Russia in Ukraine would bring America and Nato into the war, Petraeus said that it would not be a situation triggering the alliance’s Article 5, which calls for a collective defense. That is because Ukraine is not part of Nato – nonetheless, a “US and Nato response” would be in order, Petraeus said.
Petraeus acknowledged that the likelihood that radiation would extend to Nato countries under the Article 5 umbrella could perhaps be construed as an attack on a Nato member.
….
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Petraeus is a lost who lost in Afghanistan.
How exactly would the US do all of this?
With their bluff & PR?
The Black Sea is covered by all types of Russian missiles, and the air space has the best air defense in the world.
The US should be a little more concerned about Russia hitting their aircraft carriers with invisible kinzhals in any confrontation.
Putin has not threatened the use of tactical nuclear missiles (Russian nuclear doctrine assumes any nuclear weapons means the end of the world), and certainly not against Ukraine. Only against Washington if NATO were foolish enough to follow through all the nuclear threats they have made.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
What are tactical nuclear weapons? An international security expert explains and assesses what they mean for the war in Ukraine
Published: September 28, 2022
Author – Nina Srinivasan Rathbun – Professor of International Relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
Tactical nuclear weapons have burst onto the international stage as Russian President Vladimir Putin, facing battlefield losses in eastern Ukraine, has threatened that Russia will “make use of all weapon systems available to us” if Russia’s territorial integrity is threatened. Putin has characterized the war in Ukraine as an existential battle against the West, which he said wants to weaken, divide and destroy Russia.
U.S. President Joe Biden criticized Putin’s overt nuclear threats against Europe. Meanwhile, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg downplayed the threat, saying Putin “knows very well that a nuclear war should never be fought and cannot be won.” This is not the first time Putin has invoked nuclear weapons in an attempt to deter NATO.
I am an international security scholar who has worked on and researched nuclear restraint, nonproliferation and costly signaling theory applied to international relations for two decades. Russia’s large arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, which are not governed by international treaties, and Putin’s doctrine of threatening their use have raised tensions, but tactical nuclear weapons are not simply another type of battlefield weapon.
Tactical by the numbers
Tactical nuclear weapons, sometimes called battlefield or nonstrategic nuclear weapons, were designed to be used on the battlefield – for example, to counter overwhelming conventional forces like large formations of infantry and armor. They are smaller than strategic nuclear weapons like the warheads carried on intercontinental ballistic missiles.
While experts disagree about precise definitions of tactical nuclear weapons, lower explosive yields, measured in kilotons, and shorter-range delivery vehicles are commonly identified characteristics. Tactical nuclear weapons vary in yields from fractions of 1 kiloton to about 50 kilotons, compared with strategic nuclear weapons, which have yields that range from about 100 kilotons to over a megaton, though much more powerful warheads were developed during the Cold War.
For reference, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 15 kilotons, so some tactical nuclear weapons are capable of causing widespread destruction. The largest conventional bomb, the Mother of All Bombs or MOAB, that the U.S. has dropped has a 0.011-kiloton yield.
….
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
The expert fails to tell us that Putin is simply quoting from §24 and §27 of the Russian nuclear doctrine.
Nothing new, it has not been revised since 2014.
There’s nothing about tactical nukes in there, not part of Russian but of American doctrine.
Putin is not threatening Ukraine, he is warning London & Washington.
RonJ
RonJ
3 years ago
October 3, Martin Armstrong said that WW3 had begun.
Zero Hedge: US Buying $290M Worth Of Anti-Radiation Drugs for Use In “Nuclear Emergency”
Jackula
Jackula
3 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
link is broken?
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
I generally ignore ZeroHedge for anything but contrarian investment advice, the U.S. government has cited them as a possible Russian influencing operation.
I came to that conclusion almost ten years ago when I was lambasted in their comment section for speaking out against the Georgia invasion.
That said, this report is true, and it should show Putin U.S. resolve is real.
Fish1
Fish1
3 years ago

Let the nukes fly. If you love something set it free. What would be the best investment opportunity should Putin fire off a modest tactical nuke?

Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  Fish1
A private aircraft capable of reaching Central America?
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
I’m sure gringos would be welcomed with open arms, and eventually find their way into a hearty soup for the locals.
White people generally have no idea what it’s like to be on the receiving end of racism.
Jackula
Jackula
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
I’ve been in Mexico many a time and unless I took the time to befriend the locals I was on the receiving end of a lot of predatory stares
Dennis C
Dennis C
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
We encounter it all the time when we apply for college or a government job.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis C
Exactly the kind of obliviousness I’m describing. Contrast these fairly infrequent, awful experiences with what happened to Briona Taylor , George Floyd and literally millions of other people that did poorly in the vagina lottery. Think about the Jews, the Armenians, the Tutsi.
Poor baby has to study harder to get into the particular college they want to… yeah, it’s unfair, but is it as unfair as having your entire extended family slaughtered because somebody dislikes a collection of genetic traits you share?
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis C
And how does that compare to having your extended family slaughtered because somebody decides a collection of genetic traits you possess makes you subhuman? Tell an Armenian, a Jew, or a Tutsi about the terrible things we American WASPS endure at the hands of our racially different oppressors.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis C
Don’t forget applying for a small business loan or subsidized apartment rental.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
White people problems….
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
This worked well for McAfee, great idea.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Fish1
New Zealand cave. Just ask Peter Thiel.
SAKMAN
SAKMAN
3 years ago
Now all that is left is to see if Putin is such a sore loser that he flips over the whole game board before he gets thrown out of a window.
Webej
Webej
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Ellipsis does not work well in URLs.
Dead link by dead beat.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Webej
Well it looks like you will have to do without then. I know you had great anticipation when you clicked on the link and I feel your grief when you saw the link was dead. I apologize for ruining your evening and I sincerely hope you will get over the disappointment after a week or two.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
An audacious move. The bridge was protected from the air, the ground and under the sea and they still got it.
hhabana
hhabana
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Sort of like 9/11
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  hhabana
No. The towers weren’t protected at all. Here the bridge was protected by layers of defenses because it is a prime target that Russia needs to protect and in the end they couldn’t protect it. It’s a miscalculation that Russian leadership is prone to; Incompetence at all levels.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  hhabana
“Sort of like 9/11”
Main difference being: For every Jihadist inside the US in 2001, there are likely a thousand “Ukrainists” in Crimea. That’s a problem any occupier of contested space will have to live with.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Will we have a Nuclear Christmas? Only PootyPoot knows for sure.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Wanna bet Poopy Pants has a role in it, too?
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
I’m counting on old Malarky to mash that button the instant that Soviet manlet manages to get one of his rickety nukes to detonate.
If the Bible bangers are right, I’ll get to meet Jesus and watch him battle The Dark Lord Soros to the death. I’ll bet a case of iodine pills on the savior.

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.