Comments by "Sean Cidy" (@seancidy6008) on "Mobilization, annexation and nuclear weapons" video.

Do something America would surely would feel impelled to, yet it is not a combatant in the war, suddenly taking actual military action directly against Russia would be a bigger escalation than Putin using a theatre thermonuclear weapon In a war Russia is has been losing for many month and has already had by his own admission several thousands KIA in. In a situation where America is retaliating for a strike on Ukraine, Russia has already crossed the Rubicon, so it is barely plausible that after detonating one theatre thermonuclear weapon Russians are going to accept that their nuclear deterrent to conventional attack is an empty bluff and in fact worthless in relation to America. In a thermonuclear sense, China is as weak as a kitten compared to Russia, whose ICBM arsenal is essentially comparable to America's. You cannot successfully use fisticuffs on a man who is holding a loaded gun, especially if he is puny. He won't just take the pain. He will not.
1
Unless the Russians are dim, the mobilised reservists are for replacing the remaining contract professional soldiers currently stationed at cushy bases inside the current borders of the RusFed. The freed up young tough professional soldiers will be sent to Ukraine. Not clear what Putin is going to do with them, but I think he understands Ukraine aided by America is holding almost all the cards in a long war, and further Ukrainian advances are likely. Invading the Russian Motherland is something that Ukraine must not and won't willingly do, because it would give Putin a theoretical justification (under long standing Russian rationales for first use) to detonate a theatre thermonuclear weapon on the Ukrainian army. What Putin is up to with the proposed rapid incorporation of the occupied territories is getting Ukraine on the horns of a dilemma whereby trying to liberate their own territory they will be moving into what is in Kremlin eyes as Russian as Siberia. Please note: I do not think Russia will demand Ukraine withdraw from what they have liberated in Donbass ECT just because of some law that Russia has passed saying all Donbass is Russian, but I do think that once Russia passes such a law the Ukrainians will be put on notice that if they advance any further their force will be treated as if they are a conventionally unstoppable aggressor at the gates of Moscow.. The meaning of Putin's "this is not a bluff" remark is clear. It is much cleverer than a demand to 'surrender or we drop the Bomb'. because it puts the ball in the Ukrainian American court. My feeling is the US behind the scenes will tell Ukraine to advance as quickly a possible before the occupied Ukrainian territories can be incorporated into Russia proper under Russian law. Once that happens America will choke down the supply of HIMARs ammunition, and the war will effectively end. America is not going to get into a nuclear war with Russia, and a US force (including air force) conventionally fighting with Russia would have much too easy a path to nuclear war, because there are tactical anti aircraft missiles that Russia commander would in 15 minutes ask for permission to use when they were being clobbered as they would be.
1
@krpi7685 Holding the referendums and doing the annexations now does not fool anyone outside Russia, but it must be for a purpose and I think he is preparing the ground for the contingency of having to issue a credible theatre thermonuclear strike when and if 'Paddington' puts his paw across whatever front line exists at the time. Putin is readying a backstop in case the Russian army gets routed again, wants the West to understand that the personnel of the state including the military commanders in Russia are going to be given a order consistent with the long established decision protocols for an apparent proper rationale for the use of a theatre thermonuclear weapon on the rear area of an Ukrainian army driving into what by that time in Russian law ' 'is' as Russian as Vladivostok. In a situation where America is retaliating for a Russian battlefield thermonuclear strike on Ukraine's advancing army with a direct military attack of some kind on Russian forces in and around Russia, Russia would have has already crossed the Rubicon of first use, although not against any member of Nato. None of such complicating factors have been well worked out in all their implications in the way a Warsaw Pact NATO conflict had been over decades, so there can be little certainty. Nonetheless, I venture to say it is barely plausible that after detonating one theatre thermonuclear weapon on a Ukrainian army, the Russians are going to accept that their nuclear deterrent to conventional attack is so risible to America that it can for example, brazenly send swarms of F35s to sink the Black Sea Fleet with impunity, while Russia is paralyzed with fear. Two things are thing is for certain Russia would be pathetically vulnerable to any conventional raid America launched on it, and another is that in the thermonuclear weapons' realm Russia can look the USA in the eye; so what would the Kremlin do in retaliation? 'Nothing' seems an unlikely response from Putin in view of his track record.
1