Will the American howitzers result in a battle field decapitation of Russia?

[Furion]

You seem so terrified of Russia using nuclear weapons that you are willing to do everything in your power to help Putin slaughter Ukrainian civilians. If you believe it is the will of the god that you worship that Putin win this war, then I recommend you do everything in your power to help Putin win.

What an unhinged post.

I don't think you have any clue what use of nuclear weapons would do, and your smug and cavalier attitude is juvenile.

 

[Thistle]

OK, here's a question which isn't hypothetical. Putin says that, unless the world allows him to slaughter Ukrainian civilians, he will launch a nuclear strike which will destroy the world.

He hasn't said that actually.

You apparently think

If you were about to speculate on what I think, you'd be well advised to pose that as a question.

the world should give in to Putin and allow him to commit acts of unspeakable violence against the Ukrainian people. Correct?

Nothing I've said can service reasonable grounds for this kind of an inference.

 

[Reepicheep]

He hasn't said that actually.

You claim that Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons unless the world accepts all his demands. Correct? Please supply us with a list of his demands.

 

[Reepicheep]

What an unhinged post.

I don't think you have any clue what use of nuclear weapons would do, and your smug and cavalier attitude is juvenile.

Is your support for Putin in this war absolute and unconditional? Are you in favor of Putin launching a massive nuclear attack against the world, if world leaders don't immediately give in to all his demands?

 

[Jabez]

I'm sorry that you missed the irony in my answer. I was hoping it would be self evident that this is the kind of weighty issue that a citizen of a constitutional republic ought to be contemplating.

For what purpose are you talking about matters not within your capacity to effect?

 

[Jabez]

You're welcome to characterize this as "mere chit-chat speculation and 'sharing'" if you like. We disagree as to the correct characterization of this discussion and its gravity.

Why did you want people to "agree" with you? Is that really necessary?

 

[Thistle]

You claim that Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons unless

You would do far better to cite my words because that would actually involve reading them. And if we were both looking at my words in this post then we could actually have an intelligent discussion, but it seems like that's the last thing that you want to have.

the world accepts all his demands. Correct?

Not really. In the context of this military operation Putin has mentioned not ruling out tactical nuclear weapons numerous times and he continues to do so.

Please supply us with a list of his demands.

Putin has made exhaustive speeches about his view of the proper role for Ukraine in the world as recently as this year. This is not beyond your ability to google. But as to the idea of Georgia and Ukraine becoming members of NATO, Putin drew a red line on that many, many years ago. Proving that he was serious he invaded Georgia in 2006 and Ukraine during the Obama administration, and now that Joe Biden is projecting the same kind of weakness he has duplicated his effort here during the Biden Administration. Congratulations, by the way, for your part in getting this moron elected.

 

[Furion]

Is your support for Putin in this war absolute and unconditional?

What "support"?

You are unhinged with your silly leading questions.

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

 

[Reepicheep]

What "support"?

Do you believe that Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Columbia, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, and Vietnam are doing the right thing by sending aid to Ukraine, in order to help Ukraine fight off the Russian invaders?

 

[Thistle]

For what purpose are you talking about matters not within your capacity to effect?

The predicate of your question is false. Fifth generation warfare is waged at an information level. The reason that Russia is fighting a third generation action in Ukraine is that they're very bad at fifth generation warfare. It is through open discussion of these kinds of policy issues that people of the world become informed citizens such that people like Vladimir Putin cannot simply do as they please, because they have sufficient ammunition. By the same token we need to be concerned that our own leaders do not make matters worse, and most of my comments have addressed that concern.

 

[Thistle]

Why did you want people to "agree" with you? Is that really necessary?

Speaking and thinking or one thing. When you put your understanding into words and you expose it to criticism by people who may have a different perception of the truth, this refining process is the necessary step of thinking through issues of great gravity and importance. Keeping people ignorant of reality allows decision-makers the latitude to make very bad decisions, and cost many thousands of lives. That is an unambiguous evil and it has a simple solution. That solution is daylight and it is through discussions like these that daylight is introduced into the body politic which is the foundation of all political power, without which there would be no war in Ukraine. Political power can be used for war and it can be used for peace. My suggestion is the latter.

 

[Thistle]

Do you believe that Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Columbia, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, and Vietnam are doing the right thing by sending aid to Ukraine, in order to help Ukraine fight off the Russian invaders?

I think a better question would be if there was a clear road to a peaceful settlement of this issue, would the countries on this list to be more excited about the prospects for peace, or more concerned about the fact that the bullets that they purchased didn't end up killing someone?

 

[Reepicheep]

Not really. In the context of this military operation Putin has mentioned not ruling out tactical nuclear weapons numerous times and he continues to do so.

Which countries do you think Putin is going to use his nuclear people against? Is it your fear of Putin following through on his nuclear threat that made you decide to support Putin's invasion of Ukraine?

 

[Reepicheep]

I think a better question would be if there was a clear road to a peaceful settlement

I know of no road to a peaceful settlement. What are you suggesting that road is?

 

[Thistle]

Which countries do you think Putin is going to use his nuclear people against?

At the moment, my primary concern is that he would use it against a NATO member like Poland because I can't see that it would be a great tactical effect within the borders of Ukraine. The reason you might want to use against a NATO member is that this would up-end the strategic board as it is now set. Understand that there is no strategic reason to do this, other than to look at the board after this game changing event occurs, and see if it works better for you than what you have now. This in my view is the scariest and most likely possibility.

In all of the recent video footage that we have Vladimir Putin is not within 60 yards of any of his advisers, and this is precisely the kind of decision that you could undertake to change the calculation, when you have no real hope of getting any useful information out of your advisers.

Is it your fear of Putin following through on his nuclear threat

What is your motivation for refusing to address yourself to the possibility of nuclear escalation?

that made you decide to support Putin's invasion of Ukraine?

What is your motivation for this counter factual statement? A rhetorical bludgeon aimed at silencing discussion that you don't approve of? Curious minds would like to know…

 

[Furion]

Do you believe that Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Columbia, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, and Vietnam are doing the right thing by sending aid to Ukraine, in order to help Ukraine fight off the Russian invaders?

Do you believe they are doing the right thing?

 

[Thistle]

I know of no road to a peaceful settlement.

And if you continue down the path you're going you won't find one either.

What are you suggesting that road is?

The same one that Zelenskyy has mentioned several times now. Unfortunately Western nations and their intelligence operations know all of the political adversaries of Zelenskyy to his right and at a moments notice are willing to engineer one of them into being his replacement forestalling any path to peace.

 

[Reepicheep]

Do you believe they are doing the right thing?

Yes. Do you?

 

[inertia]

That's what is being reported in the news.

Right! The accuracy depends on the kind of ammunition that we are shipping with those howitzers. Some of the ammunition types are so accurate that they literally can pull off a command structure decapitation operation in conjunction with sufficiently accurate intelligence. And signal intelligence (the kind that we are very good at) is the best explanation for how we've been able to take out Russian generals so far. I do use the term "we've" advisedly.

In my opinion, sending our latest, top tier, technologically advanced weapons into a non-U.S. controlled militarized warzone is a mistake, unless the Pentagon has something else in mind.

It's reasonable to expect that Russian operatives within the Ukraine Army are taking notes.

Thank heavens somebody has a good sense to deny what we're doing. But naturally when you have the combination of a admission and a denial, coupled with the fact that affirms the admission, I don't have to tell you what people rationally believe.

I'm hopeful that historians will eventually uncover a large percentage of the truth if the Russians eventually end this nonsense and move on. On the other hand, if the Russians win, rumors, outright lies, and propaganda will prevail and the strategy of nuclear extortion will begin a new era of international borderline disputes.

I'm gratified to see that you're taking this concern seriously enough to acknowledge it. I hope that that's an indication of a broader recognition sufficiently to be detected by the political advisors of our current administration. Heaven knows if foreign policy considerations on their own would be enough to actually influence of foreign policy decision with this current team in the White House.

Have you seen any of these recent press events involving Vladimir Putin? He is not within 30 yards of any of his advisers. It seems patently obvious to me that there is no one "close enough"to Vladimir Putin to tell him anything he doesn't want to already hear. And going on the theory that his top advisors can't read his mind that would suggest to me that Vladimir Putin is operating this operation without any adequate intelligence of what's going on at all.

As to your suggestion about Putin's strategic thinking I believe that's completely misplaced. I don't think that Putin is thinking strategically at all. To my mind of Putin appears to be contemplating provocative actions that will change the assumptions on the strategic board. I can't think of any tactical reason to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, as it appears consistent with current US military doctrine that the offensive capability is widely dispersed and not subject to elimination by a nuclear strike.

I am simply sharing analysis from a portion of a book by one of "France’s foremost policy analysts and historians and a leading global authority on international nuclear security" produced by the Rand Corporation. The author, Thérèse Delpech was nearing her death as she completed the book.

- Her analysis about the threat itself is multidimensional

So if we illuminate using nuclear weapons in the theater of action the next most likely place would be in nearby supporting nations like Poland. There would not be a strategic reason to do this it would simply be to create new conditions and assess whether those new conditions are more favorable to Russia than the conditions currently. The current conditions are not favorable to Russia we have large-scale cooperation by NATO against Russia and from Russia's perspective changing that status quo could hardly be worse from their point of view.

"Unfavorable" is an understatement

This is precisely the kind of decision that is available to a leader who can no longer get actual "advice" from his advisers, on the ground that they will be disappeared if they make one wrong move. China is already in that circumstance.

Russia may be significantly past the point of no return on that hopeful thought. Do you have a second most hopeful wish? Because that may end up being our go to silver lining.

This may be a parent to everyone in our chain of command… Hopefully. The difficulty comes in on that last link to Vladimir Putin on the Russian side.

In my wishful thinking, Putin will call the undeclared war a victory tomorrow, withdraw all troops, and announce a cease-fire and hold another military parade.

- Great propaganda
- Imaginary Nazi's would have been eliminated in his mind
- Russia can restart its economic rebuild with the rest-of-the-world.

Now...back to reality....
___

 

[Thistle]

In my opinion, sending our latest, top tier, technologically advanced weapons into a non-U.S. controlled militarized warzone is a mistake, unless the Pentagon has something else in mind.

It's reasonable to expect that Russian operatives within the Ukraine Army are taking notes.

That's to say nothing of the fact that between Ukraine and Russia we have two of the most corrupt political systems anywhere on planet earth, and the confidence that our most sophisticated equipment will not fall into enemy hands I can't see is based on anything better than wishful thinking. But again this is the administration that made the Taliban the fifth best equipped army on planet earth.

I'm hopeful that historians will eventually uncover a large percentage of the truth if the Russians eventually end this nonsense and move on. On the other hand, if the Russians win, rumors, outright lies, and propaganda will prevail and the strategy of nuclear extortion will begin a new era of international border line disputes.

I hate to break it to you but in the context of the Cuban missile crisis John F. Kennedy agreed to remove our Jupiter missiles from Turkey. So there's no new precedent being established here. I for one am happy that I've been able to achieve my current age in spite of the Cuban missile crisis' ugly precedent or no.

I am simply sharing analysis from a portion of a book by one of "France’s foremost policy analysts and historians and a leading global authority on international nuclear security" produced by the Rand Corporation. The author, Thérèse Delpech was nearing her death as she completed the book.

- Here analysis about the threat itself is multidimensional

Am I wrong to assume that you're sharing it because you agree with it?

"Unfavorable" is an understatement

And also the primary motivation for the kind of action we are most concerned about.

In my wishful thinking, Putin will call the undeclared war a victory tomorrow, withdraw all troops, and announce a cease-fire and hold another military parade.

- Great propaganda
- Imaginary Nazi's would have been eliminated in his mind
- Russia can restart its economic rebuild with the rest-of-the-world.

Now...back to reality....
___

Which is the difficulty, because the reality we're facing is not very hopeful, and the silver linings are few and far between.