The nuclear nightmare penetrates the European and American Chancellery. With news of Ukraine advancing from the front, and signals from Russia of Putin’s growing weakness even within his own circle of powerful and warlords, the danger of a rat or caged rat reaction increases. Let Samson die with all the Philistines. A picture hovering in the secret rooms of NATO these days. That is why President Joe Biden decided to deliver a catastrophic and almost threatening message. Armageddon Bible.
Invoke nuclear escalation if Putin resorts to tactical weapons. The words betray, on the one hand, concern about the seriousness of Putin’s nuclear threats, which is not a hoax but a concrete political-military option in the Ukrainian venture, on the other hand is an attempt to rally the support of the Europeans. Allies in Kyiv, even in the worst case scenario. To defuse in advance the effect of Putin’s possible use of small atoms, all he fears is that the psychological effect of a bombshell will force the Ukrainians to surrender, with the EU unwilling to get off the ground. Nuclear confrontation with special frontiers. Nothing new on the Eastern Front. White House spokeswoman Karen-Jean-Pierre notes that there is no intelligence that prompted Biden to raise the level of verbal confrontation. Science expert and New York Times columnist William J. However, this does not prevent the Kaiser from actually pressing the nuclear button. “Putin is unpredictable, such an invasion of Ukraine that everyone said wouldn’t happen, and then it happened.” Even the news that Iranian drones make no difference to the Russians, while Western weapons are in the hands of the Ukrainians (see Al Hemar) is much more effective, raising concern about Moscow’s response. Anyone can go online and with a few clicks check the effects of a nuclear attack on nuclearsecrecy.com, write the target and the power of the warhead. Brod explains: “A tactical nuclear weapon could be the size of a watermelon or it could fit inside the palm of a hand, and it would be more powerful than any conventional weapon. The Russians have 2,000, and we in Europe have a hundred. Because? We wanted to reduce the number lest they end up being small. As they are, in the hands of some terrorists.”
At NATO headquarters in Brussels, analysts have already put forward all possible variants of a nuclear attack and Western response. Because a tactical weapon can be calibrated to destroy a bridge, a block, a city or an entire area, but in any case the desired effect is above all political and psychological. Tactical weapon does not produce Hiroshima mushroom, the goal is to “escalate for calm”. Turn on to turn off. Raise the level to lower it and reset everything. It is Moscow’s doctrine since the times of the Soviet Union, to win a losing war. And at least in words, the US is doing it (in advance) this time. Putin spared no warning, failing to scare the Ukrainians, not even the incredibly Europeans. But if he pulled out 2,000 small nuclear weapons, “the day he had to take them out would be terrifying for everyone,” Brod says. As usual, the British were the first to point out the danger, for whom nuclear power was a real possibility from the start. Matthew Kronig, vice president of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, made clear in an interview with the Daily Telegraph that Putin would not agree to lose the war until he tried a nuclear weapon. A small atomic bomb on a limited target is enough for him: a Ukrainian ship in the Black Sea, a fighter from Kyiv, a small village … “Everyone will say: Oh my God, Putin launched the atomic bomb! NATO, for the time being, is ready to respond with conventional weapons. Which can be just as destructive as an atomic watermelon if not more destructive.
“Infuriatingly humble analyst. Bacon maven. Proud food specialist. Certified reader. Avid writer. Zombie advocate. Incurable problem solver.”