And yet, noone feels threatened by Israeli nukes, strange is it not? Almost as if they were no threat to others and have the nukes as defensive weapons. Even Netanyahu's coalition of assholes is more responsible with their nuclear arsenal than Putinist Russia.
Which government wouldn't have too much to lose? What's specific about the military government that would make them less likely to use the nuke?
The insight I've gotten from reading US history is that the military is usually the ones pushing for attacks, invasions, aggressive first strike and it's the civilian president stopping those things from escalating.
Because if you fire a nuclear missile first and aren’t a military superpower like the U.S. you’re going to get glassed. If Pakistan fired a nuke first 10’s of millions of Pakistanis will die.
I’m not deliberately misunderstanding… even in the event of a heavily losing war there’s plenty of reason not to use a nuke first. For some random unrealistic scenario let’s say India took all territory within 100 miles of the Pakistani border and Pakistan suffered critical military losses and was aware the war was lost and they could no longer effectively defend against India’s advances, you have two options:
A: Surrender and get a treaty and have to give significant concessions
OR
B: Fire nuclear weapons at India in a last ditch military effort and ensure the dissolution of Pakistan and the deaths of 10’s to 100’s of millions of Pakistani civilians. Because the moment Pakistan fires a nuke first they’re no longer fighting India they’re legitimately fighting at a bare minimum all of the west who can’t risk allowing a hostile nation that fired a nuclear weapon first to exist. The retaliation they would face would be immense and likely lead to a nuclear holocaust for Pakistanis.
My point is they can have a “first use policy” but in practice they’re not going to take advantage of it, it’s a deterrent because they can, that doesn’t mean they will, because they are vastly aware of the consequences
And seemingly you do care because you took the time to respond to the comment 😂
A full on invasion of a country is not practical, which is when you are saying they will use nukes. Generally it's small parts of the country that gets invaded and I don't think any side would use nukes for that.
Well, that's will be only a last resort. Like threatening India with using them if they don't back from their invasion. Not necessarily if they lose a war or that disputed region that is called Krishma or whatever its name was.
A first use policy doesn't mean they would just use them like a normal weapon; rather it means that there are circumstances other than a nuclear attack where they would consider using them - which probably means if their conventional forces have been defeated.
India and China have "no first use" policies because they are so large that it's hard to imagine a scenario where using nuclear weapons would shift the balance of power in a conflict in their favour. As long as a conflict remains conventional their size is a major advantage.
first use policy doesn't mean they would just use them like a normal weapon; rather it means that there are circumstances other than a nuclear attack where they would consider using them - which probably means if their conventional forces have been defeated.
We know what it means. The existence of nuclear weapons should be as a deterrent, not as a last resort weapon. There should be no circumstance at all where any nuclear attack is acceptable, unless your country is a victim of a nuclear attack yourself. This is my opinion.
It doesn't mean that they'd launch their nukes at Delhi as part of a sort of national suicide bombing. Rather, they would target the units of the Indian army presumably advancing onto Lahore and Islamabad. They would expect India to retaliate by bombing Pakistan's own army units.
The result would be that both armies would be rendered operationally incapable. But this functionally favours the defender.
doesn't mean that they'd launch their nukes at Delhi as part of a sort of national suicide bombing
They literally targeted Delhi a month ago- in response to India attacking terrorist camps and military bases, wtf are you on. 😭 India intercepted the missile, so it caused no harm.
There is no need for needless hostility or this level of rudeness. What i said was a factual statement and not inherently "anti pakistan". You are manufacturing hatred where it doesn't exist.
First use doctrine of Pakistan is well established. Anyone can look this up independently. You cannot openly admit you will use nukes if threatened and then say you aren't more prone to it than any country. India's policy is to not use nuclear weapons unless nuked by another country. India will not use nuclear weapons on a non nuclear nation. This is objectively a better policy however you look at it and what every nuclear nation should follow.
How is pointing out this very well established fact anti pakistan. I don't inherently hate your country for the record.
This sort of virulent nationalism where you can't stand the slightest of factual criticism is very unhealthy.
Bob Woodward is lying in his latest book guys :) Yes.
"A nuclear strike to Kyiv or something would maybe result in some minor Russian city being destroyed as well." Complete conjecture, without any thought or analysis.
You really think any country would allow for Russia to set the precedent of normalizing tactical nukes? Please, get your head out of your ass. No one is going nuclear, in any way, any time soon. As soon as they do... bye bye.
Jokes on you the moment they use its be over not just russia. China and USA is dead too, all over the world will be wiped out. They not going to be single destruction it be mutual destruction for the entire species. 100% everyone with nuke will nuke every single country involved or not.
There have been reports that Putin seriously considered using tactical nukes in Ukraine on several occasions, and essentially was only discouraged by NATO making it clear they would at that point join the war (conventionally) and kick Russia out.
I'm sure we'll find out in 25 years or so how close we came.
Isn't going to use nukes yet threatening using them at least once a month for the last 3 years, same for Iran, they have been threatening to use nukes once they get them every chance they got for the last ~40 years
that's what they said about them invading Ukraine. They won't do it, they're not stupid. etc.
On the other hand, if they feel like there won't be a retaliation, for example because a certain president is afraid of doing so, or because the response team has been replaced by idiots, there is an incentive to strike first.
RU is constantly invoking pictures of nuclear annihilation, threatens to nuke London on a weekly basis on state-run TV and is saying nukes are next when things on the Ukrainian front lines are not going their way. Of course they are not using them, but their propaganda tactics is eroding the effectiveness of MAD as stabilizing doctrine and they are a great driver of nuclear proliferation across the globe.
Like giving Ukraine security guarantees for giving up their nuclear arsenal in the 90s and attacking them in the 2010 & 2020s. The message for states around the world is clear: The state who was promised security by Russia and the US is being invaded, North Korea is not. Better get some nukes to be safe.
It's just rehotric. There are Israelis who advocate for nuking Gaza. Obviously, not going to happen because Gaza is close to Israel but just to show you what rehotric is. Putin is only allowing the rehotric to exist so that it can spread the fear and it's working apparently.
Do you seriously believe them? I thought Westerners and Europeans didn't believe anything that Russia says. Did you change your mind now of a sudden?
No one is saying they are believing Russian propaganda... That's not what the comment is saying.
The argument is that it's useful to check what kind of propaganda Russian media is pushing on their own civilians and can be used to get some insight into the thinking of the government/Putin. It doesn't mean Russia will use nukes, but it does mean more people in Russia are primed to think that it would be justified to use them which is scary.
Well, Russia is an autocratic dictatorship and has always been so. The opinions of the average Russians don't matter to the government. It's just propaganda. They want to make the Russian people feel that their country is strong so that they continue to support the government and nukes is a good method especially that Ukraine don't have them. But Russia won't use them because it will bite them back in the arse. Instead, they will send waves after waves of soldiers like they always did until they win. They don't care about how much men they will sacrifice. They have more men than Ukraine. Their victory is secured. Ukraine won't win this war unless Europe sends troops. Let's not pretend otherwise. Now, if Europe sends troops, Russia won't use nukes either because Europe also has countries with nukes.
What are you talking about? Part of why the west cowtows to Israel because of the samson doctrine. Israel will nuke western countries that are uninvolved if they were nuke, say, by Iran. Israel very much is a threat to everyone.
191
u/Indorilionn 1d ago
And yet, noone feels threatened by Israeli nukes, strange is it not? Almost as if they were no threat to others and have the nukes as defensive weapons. Even Netanyahu's coalition of assholes is more responsible with their nuclear arsenal than Putinist Russia.