“If Europe suddenly wants to start a war with us and starts it,” Putin said, then it would end so swiftly for Europe that there would be no one to negotiate with in Europe. Putin used the Russian word for “war”. He also suggested that the war in Ukraine was not a full-blown war and that Russia was acting in a “surgical” manner which would not be repeated in a direct confrontation with European powers. “If Europe suddenly wants to fight with us and starts, we are ready right now,” Putin said.
NOTE: imo there is a lot of saber-rattling going on lately. Its all part of the political game. Pls let’s keep our heads cool with clickbait titles and speculations. I can sympathise with the worries and that these are trying times for us.
Nuclear weapons
It’d make more sense to nuke Ukraine as they have no way to retaliate.
You mean the same France, Uk and USA had ?
Putin is not stupid enough to not understand that if he ever try to use a nuke he will be the first target of the retaliation.
He is, however, an old and dying man full of hate.
France or the UK would not start a nuclear war with Russia over the Baltic states, Poland, or Finland, as that would spell their own demise. Nor would they do so for Germany, Italy, or Sweden. And the US cannot be relied upon.
You’re under the impression that France, the UK and the US would stand idly by as nukes start to drop around the globe?
Not idly. But they would not use their nuclear bombs.
I’m convinced that if one nuke drops, then they will all start dropping at a rapid rate.
This is why no one ever actually uses them, because as soon as you do, it’s game over
That would lead to the complete destruction of France/UK. Why would they do that?
Russia dropping nukes on other countries would lead to the complete destruction of Russia. Why would they do that?
Why would it lead to the complete destruction of Russia?
@Aequitas - that was what we all thought throughout the cold war.
Songs were written about this.
Yet here we are - again.
France and the UK did not use nuclear weapons during the Cold War. And the US explicitly and unambiguously extended nuclear deterrence to the entire NATO territory. But that is no longer the case. France and the UK would have more interest in dishonoring the alliance for existential reasons alone, as long as they themselves are not bombed. But from the US perspective, the Europeans were vassal states. An attack on them had to be seen in the US as an attack on its own territory. The same does not apply from a French or British perspective. Anyone who thinks that they would risk their existence for an act of revenge against Russia is living in La-La Land.
I agree, they would not start. But if Russia start, they surely will retaliate: a nuke in the baltic states or even nearer will cause harm also to them. And France has a strange nuclear doctrine.
Preemptive strikes ftw
Technically is called “warning shot”…
Same thing…
Why would they? That would mean the end of France/UK or even of humanity.
True. Problem is: how do you respond to someone that use a nuke ? If Russia use a nuke, it is the end either way: if other retaliate the situation escalates, if they do not retaliate Russia think they have free hand.
During the cold war the only thing that prevented a nuclear escalation is the certainty of mutual destruction, nothing else.