To be worried about Russia's retaliations on the West?

[fedupfufu]

There was an LBC listener who called in and said that Russia will nuke the UK first as retaliation for giving Ukraine fighter jets. It wasn't too long ago that fighter jets were considered off the table by the US and the UK. There were also two people on an episode of Joe Rogan's podcast discussing this. The powers that be just seem intent on bringing us closer to nuclear Armageddon. Sometimes it seems like nobody will do anything until it's too late.

This

As was pointed out earlier, the MAD concept makes this very unlikely.

Except that this is total nonsense. It completely ignores the fact that Article 5 exists and as such acts as the very reason the “huddle” ( so much wrong with this I’m not sure where to start) won’t attack us or any other NATO member.

ISW may not be wholly funded by the defence industry, but it has extremely close ties to the pro war "Neocon" movement. Extremely powerful lobbyists who help shape policy on Defence spending.

It was founded by Kimberly Kagan, who is married to Frederick Kagan. His sister in law is Victoria Nuland, currently Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs of the United States for Biden, who also served in Obama's administration during Maidan in 2014.

Her husband is Robert Kagan, famously of the defunct think tank Project for a New American Century,
credited by many for the Hawkish direction and devastation unleashed by Bush Junior in the middle east.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=128491&page=1

And specifically about Ukraine and how the ISW helps shape propaganda by using selective analysis:

responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/06/12/a-case-study-in-american-propaganda/

@BelleHathor That's an interesting article.

It is pretty clear the ISW is not wholly neutral if you follow it for a few weeks, and it's also clear that it seems to get a lot of its information from Russian milbloggers and drawing its conclusions from observing them, events and the Kremlin's policies, which leads to the question, is there an over-emphasis on the milbloggers?

Not sure I agree that America is less propaganda-savvy when you see the effects that Trump's very palpable lies have had, and perhaps still have. A lot of it depends on education and on critical thinking and I think that is an issue in Russia in many places, and in the US too when you consider the rise of Creationism and denial of science (heh, you might not believe in science, but science sure as hell affects you).

Having said all that, it's probably wise to have a good read of that Responsible Statecraft site to see if/how far it's neutral and detached ...

I do think Lawrence Freedman is one of the best to follow, but he does not do daily analysis.

@ReleaseTheDucksOfWar The author of the responsible statecraft article is Robert Wright a Democrat I believe.

I just wanted to point out the bigger picture as to why the ISW assessments might not give the full picture.

I don't believe that anyone is immune to propaganda. I know people who are still angry that we were lied to regarding the Iraq War.

This is very good (if you can call it that) if you like long talks. It has a foreign volunteer who is fighting in Ukraine giving his take whilst he is back for a while and the excellent Peter Zeihan who I have been following for a while who has just turned doomsterish on the nuclear possibility.

I have also heard him say many times that a victory over Ukraine would bring Russia into direct conflict with NATO. I have heard him say previously that in a direct conflict with NATO he viewed the use of nuclear weapons by Russia to be unlikely because it would bring the full military force of NATO against the Russian regime that would all but guarantee the end of life for most or all of the power circle around Putin on a very personal level. (Basically, Putin knows he is dead if he ever used a nuke)

But here Peter said quite starkly: “there will be a nuclear exchange”. That to me is sounds like a shift in his assessment of the risk, a change in his view of Putin’s propensity to use nukes to bring the war to NATO or even a change in his view of the likelihood of NATO to retaliate with nukes after a Russian first strike.

They say globalisation is cold stone dead and it is the democratic free world against the authoritarian bloc of China/Russia/Iran/NK and everybody has to pick a side and WW3 has effectively begun.

All my life, political people have been telling us all that there is certain to be a nuclear exchange, for one reason or another.

It hasn't happened yet, and I have regretfully realised I am going to have to put up with the dreary, painful and demeaning business of growing old, because I can't realistically expect to have all my troubles wiped out abruptly by a nuclear blast. Dammit.

Putin's seriously overdone the nuclear threats, him and his aides. By now people are shrugging.

If you want to make an impact, don't keep threatening the same thing over and over. People eventually stop reacting.

Quite.

Obviously a lot of people are old enough to remember and understand the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction, or they know their history, but the Russian state did actually have an opportunity to influence some who don't fall into either category. And they fucked it. We're long into boy who cried wolf territory now.

I think they've done well in Africa and getting India on side. That's an area where the West fell down (Trump, sigh, but also before).

But yeah, it's hard to get worked up about the nuclear stuff now unless the POTUS or Jens Stoltenberg start commenting.

The thing with India and much of Africa and the global south is that they were pushing at an open door. The trauma of colonisation runs deep and that’s something that the Russian’s have exploited.

When we lived in Germany in the 1980s we were on a 10 minute evacuation order in case of nuclear attack.

It didn't happen then and it feels even less likely now.

Which is ironic given that "colonisation" is exactly what Russia intended to do in Feb 22. Albeit it wasn't Africa or India being colonised.

Indeed.

India is very mendacious here - Modi is basically a Hindu fascist and an implacable foe of China hence he gets to get a free ride diplomatically on buying Russian weapons and oil and helping to bust sanctions whilst framing the Ukraine war as a European issue - i.e those guys who colonized and looted us for centuries. He has had recent border skirmishes with combat fatalities with China. Also, the US no doubt sees India as a potential manufacturing pivot along with Mexico as China disinvestment continues apace.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932021_China%E2%80%93India_skirmishes

www.riazhaq.com/2023/02/india-emerges-biggest-winner-of-ukraine.html

Its not India that is the immediate worry, its IF China supplies munitions to Russia.
Hopefully bluff....

You people? Oh dear.

@eddyf Posted on wrong thread?

Because if memory serves me correctly, Russia invaded Ukraine and no russian cities have been reduced to dust.... & no Russian children kidnapped and sent 1000s of miles away, paraded on Ukrainian TV....

www.wsj.com/articles/natos-biggest-european-members-float-defense-pact-with-ukraine-38966950

President Emmanuel Macron of France and Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that he needed to start considering peace talks with Moscow when the three leaders met in Paris earlier this month, people familiar with the conversation said.

Over dinner at the Élysée Palace, the sumptuous seat of the French presidency, Mr. Macron delivered a more sober message, the people said, telling Mr. Zelensky that even mortal enemies like France and Germany had to make peace after World War II.

Mr. Macron told Mr. Zelensky that he had been a great war leader, but that he would eventually have to shift into political statesmanship and make difficult decisions, these people said.

Speaking after a security conference in Munich last weekend, Mr. Macron became one of the first Western leaders to publicly question whether either Ukraine or Russia could achieve their battlefield aims, saying neither side could prevail militarily.

He told French media: “What we need now is for Ukraine to launch a military offensive which pushes back the Russian front in order to open the way for a return to negotiations.

Well that goes directly against the German statement that Scholz is not pushing Zelensky for peace ...

It's very difficult to know what to believe because contradictory announcements come all the time. Sometimes the only real way to know what's actually been said is by observing the unfolding of events.

Lockheed Martin plant is preparing to increase production of the HIMARS system after it proved itself well on the battlefield in Ukraine, — Reuters
In particular, it is planned to increase the production of HIMARS launchers from 48 to 96 per year.

Also, some announcements just can't be taken seriously. The announcement that the West will pressure Ukraine to the negotiating table was made by Bild, it seems, who are apparently the German equivalent of the Sun. Not to be taken seriously.

Meanwhile a single individual saying something unrealistic during a phone-in is apparently enough to make someone so worried they have to start a thread here asking about whether the UK is about to be nuked.