Comments by "Sean Cidy" (@seancidy6008) on "Can Russia win in Ukraine with nuclear weapons?" video.

  1. Russia is most unlikely to use them because nukes are for those losing conventionally.
    4
  2.  AndyWoohoo666  If Ukraine had them now it would use them. 'Nuff said.
    3
  3. They (or rather the politicians in charge back then) renounced forever more Ukraine having nukes in return for money (much of it paid by Germany). Ukraine did get "assurances" but at the insistence of the US the agreement explicitly stated that there was no guarantees being given to Ukraine. This caveat was not 'small print it was made quite a thing of. The money was the sticking point the Ukrainians held out for more and signed when Germany provided it.
    1
  4.  AndyWoohoo666  Nato doctrine in the Cold War was LOL
    1
  5.  AndyWoohoo666  Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons for 'assurances' , that was LOL.
    1
  6.  AndyWoohoo666  FAB bombs
    1
  7. If what you have been saying in these videos is correct Anders , then Russia's leadership is either completely deluded about how the war is going for them , or ought to already have seriously considered using a nuclear weapons against Ukraine. The only reason to think Russia won't use nukes, is because the Russians seem to think they are slowly but surely winning conventionally; if they become convinced they are losing conventionally then using theatre thermonuclear devices would surely become a viable alternative for the Kremlin to seriously consider
    1
  8. That is why the West is not willing to give Ukraine what it needs to win. They want the Russians to be discouraged, not desperate.
    1
  9. You have to read between the lines, as with any source.
    1
  10. Which is why he tried to take Kiev.
    1
  11. Russia might think that worth it if pushed too hard.
    1
  12. I think Russia would as likely as not use nuclear weapons on Ukraine to stop Ukraine if it was about to win. There definitely would not be a nuclear war because years into the conflict the West has not got directly involved in fighting Russia even conventionally over Ukraine. Fortunately, Ukraine is further away from winning than ever. Does not mean Ukraine is going to lose, just that a meaningful win is beyond them. Or rather that the West does not dare push Russia into a corner by supplying Ukraine with everything it needs. It's called a nuclear DETERRENT, not "blackmail".
    1
  13. The calculus of nuclear stand offs as they existed in the Cold War between equal superpowers was understood. The Russian (Warsaw Pact) conventional superiority was deterred by Nato's nuclear weapons doctrine of going nuclear if a Soviet conventional attack was succeeding. Anders's assurances of nuclear weapons use against the Ukrainian army being a counter productive non starter for Putin in any conceivable circumstances is an entirely novel hypothesis. Washington does not appear to be at all confident that Putin can not use tactical nukes without being overthrown, judging by the grudging provision of the really effective weapons to Kiev.
    1