Russia launches first ICBM in history in warfare.

[Aldebaran]

I'm curious how things might play out after Trump is sworn into office. In your opinion, at what point will Russia stop invading it's neighbors. Will it require a line to be draw a line in the sand by the West? Or will it continue on, should anyone other Nation attempt relationships with NATO countries?

IOW, at what point exactly should the West bow-up to Russia?

They've only gone after Ukraine. It's only speculation they'll try invading any other country. With the strain their military has already been under and the losses they've taken, I don't see them going anywhere else anytime soon.
As for the Ukraine war, Ukrainian military should be focusing on stopping the INVASION, and not be doing invading of their own. Anti-tank missiles to take out invading tanks was fine. Anything else to fight invaders inside Ukraine is fine. But launching American missiles deep into Russia is out of bounds and is not defensive anymore. Now Ukraine becomes the aggressor, and is doing so with our equipment and technology, which really makes it an attack on Russia by the United States. THAT'S where I can see Russia justifying nuclear retaliation.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Russia is no match for NATO militarily--Putin can barely make headway in Ukraine. But if he knows the West will back down from a threat of nukes he can pretty much do what he wants anyway.

I agree. Also, Russia may have more nukes than the US, but it's not an important factor considering that the US only needs enough to vaporize all of Russia, which we have... That's all that is required... This is not like a competition on who has the most nukes leftover after both countries are destroyed. Leftovers won't matter anyways when there's nobody left to use them.

 

[That Guy 11200]

Yet you don't seem aware of the threat posed by the use of even a single nuclear weapon by the country (Russia) that is backed into a corner and has every incentive to use them.

Awww. Poor Russia, backed into a corner by it's genocidal invasion that it can end at any time.

 

[That Guy 11200]

Doesn't matter the size. Populated areas far from Ukraine have been hit. The Russian citizenry is not safe.

They aren't safe because Putin is using them in meatwaves to take a few tens of kilometers of land that doesn't belong to him.

 

[That Guy 11200]

They've only gone after Ukraine. It's only speculation they'll try invading any other country. With the strain their military has already been under and the losses they've taken, I don't see them going anywhere else anytime soon.
As for the Ukraine war, Ukrainian military should be focusing on stopping the INVASION, and not be doing invading of their own. Anti-tank missiles to take out invading tanks was fine. Anything else to fight invaders inside Ukraine is fine. But launching American missiles deep into Russia is out of bounds and is not defensive anymore. Now Ukraine becomes the aggressor, and is doing so with our equipment and technology, which really makes it an attack on Russia by the United States. THAT'S where I can see Russia justifying nuclear retaliation.

Blowing up Russian military equipment and ammunition that that will later be used in Ukraine is defensive.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

They've only gone after Ukraine. It's only speculation they'll try invading any other country.

It was only speculation that they would invade Ukraine...until they did.

With the strain their military has already been under and the losses they've taken, I don't see them going anywhere else anytime soon.
As for the Ukraine war, Ukrainian military should be focusing on stopping the INVASION, and not be doing invading of their own.

Sometimes the best defense is a good offense. And if you expect that the war will end in negotiations rather than unconditional surrender, it's good to hold some cards - like bits of your enemy's territory.

Anti-tank missiles to take out invading tanks was fine. Anything else to fight invaders inside Ukraine is fine. But launching American missiles deep into Russia is out of bounds and is not defensive anymore.

"Deep into Russia"? Seriously? ATACMS has a maximum range of 190 miles. Russia has been launching missiles and dropping bombs further into Ukraine since day 1 of the war, and Ukraine has conducted strikes deeper into Russia using entirely home-grown weapons.

For reference, here's a 190 mile radius circle drawn at ~the furthest point Ukraine has access to:

Now Ukraine becomes the aggressor, and is doing so with our equipment and technology, which really makes it an attack on Russia by the United States. THAT'S where I can see Russia justifying nuclear retaliation.

Russia can justify things however it wants, but attacking a country that attacked you first doesn't make you the aggressor.

 

[Aldebaran]

Awww. Poor Russia, backed into a corner by it's genocidal invasion that it can end at any time.

And if they use a few nukes to hit San Francisco, New York, and Washington DC, you can say, "Awwww. Poor America, getting hit with a few bombs after spending $175,000,000,000 on weapons for Ukraine to go from defending itself to attacking its neighbor."

 

[Aldebaran]

It was only speculation that they would invade Ukraine...until they did.

iIt was only speculation that Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine in the 1st place because they knew Ukraine had the backing of NATO countries, and they figured Putin was smart enough to know that. Now after a year and a half, they figure Putin is smart enough not to use any nukes. Let's see how that goes for ya.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

iIt was only speculation that Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine in the 1st place because they knew Ukraine had the backing of NATO countries, and they figured Putin was smart enough to know that. Now after a year and a half, they figure Putin is smart enough not to use any nukes. Let's see how that goes for ya.

And we're back to "Russia has nukes, so we have to let them do whatever they want."

 

[Aldebaran]

And we're back to "Russia has nukes, so we have to let them do whatever they want."

If you say so.

 

[That Guy 11200]

And if they use a few nukes to hit San Francisco, New York, and Washington DC, you can say, "Awwww. Poor America, getting hit with a few bombs after spending $175,000,000,000 on weapons for Ukraine to go from defending itself to attacking its neighbor."

Do you want Russia to be able to invade its neighbours with impunity?

You really should get rid of that Starfleet avatar. You don't embody any of their ideals.

 

[Aldebaran]

Do you want Russia to be able to invade its neighbours with impunity?

You really should get rid of that Starfleet avatar. You don't embody any of their ideals.

Ever heard of the Prime Directive?

Anyway, it's already a given that if Russia ends up using a nuke, it will be blamed on Trump. Those who are for provoking nuclear weapons use always have a scapegoat in order to not take responsibility.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Ever heard of the Prime Directive?

Anyway, it's already a given that if Russia ends up using a nuke, it will be blamed on Trump. Those who are for provoking nuclear weapons use always have a scapegoat in order to not take responsibility.

I feel pretty confident in saying that the only person I would blame for Russia using a nuke would be Vladimir Putin.

 

[Jamdoc]

It wasn't an ICBM.

Pentagon deputy press secretary Sabrina Singh told reporters that the missile was a new, experimental type of intermediate range ballistic missile based on the design of RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile.

“This was a new type of lethal capability that was deployed on the battlefield, so that was certainly of concern,” Singh said.

Intermediate-range ballistic missiles have a range of less than 3,500 miles. An intercontinental ballistic missile has a larger range of over 3,500 miles, and was developed during the Cold War by both the Soviet Union and the United States as part of each side’s nuclear arsenal.

Putin says Russia hit Ukraine with a new missile and threatens Western countries arming Ukraine

Russia notified U.S. officials about the imminent attack, using nuclear risk reduction communication channels.

www.nbcnews.com

there's a bit of nuance. When you say Medium Range or Short Range or Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile it usually conveys conventional missile attack, those are fired all the time in warfare without nuclear warheads. Sometimes the missile platforms are capable of carrying nuclear warheads but they're primarily conventional.
But ICBM's are never used in warfare with conventional warheads, they test them with dummy warheads (which is what the RS-26 used on Ukraine was doing it was like doing a test fire of the missile just with a real target rather than firing it into the ocean or uninhabited islands/desert/tundra/wasteland), ICBM is almost exclusively a nuclear armed platform.
That's what Ukraine wanted to stress in reporting the use of an ICBM. That while using dummy warheads, this was a direct nuclear threat because this missile is designed only to use nuclear warheads.
The US wants to downplay it that it was not nuclear, even though the message and threat was a nuclear one.
They're not going to start using RS-26's in conventional warfare as a normal practice. This was a warning. The idea being the next time one is used it'll be nuclear and you have no means to stop it, all of your missile defense systems are going to be powerless.

 

[Jamdoc]

To be clear, you believe that Putin is going to drop a NUCLEAR weapon within the next two months eh?

That's bold.

Especially given that as soon as Trump is elected, he's going to stop all American support for the war. Putin knows he doesn't have to last that much longer.

People keep saying that but he's been appointing people who are pro Ukraine into his cabinet, warhawks even, and Zelensky was encouraged by his conversation with Trump after the election. Why? Because he stoked Trump's ego in relating him to Reagan, the "peace through strength" position. Trump is not just going to cut funding and let Ukraine get conquered. Trump is going to try to negotiate a peace that results in Ukraine not losing much if any pre-war territory, Why? Because if he ceded a bunch of land to Russia it'd be seen as a "loss" for Trump, and Trump's ego's not going to take that. So, they're going to need to hold Kursk as a bargaining chip and do counteroffensives to take more Russian territory so that Russia has to trade Russian territory for giving back Ukrainian territory.

 

[SimplyMe]

They've only gone after Ukraine. It's only speculation they'll try invading any other country. With the strain their military has already been under and the losses they've taken, I don't see them going anywhere else anytime soon.
As for the Ukraine war, Ukrainian military should be focusing on stopping the INVASION, and not be doing invading of their own. Anti-tank missiles to take out invading tanks was fine. Anything else to fight invaders inside Ukraine is fine. But launching American missiles deep into Russia is out of bounds and is not defensive anymore. Now Ukraine becomes the aggressor, and is doing so with our equipment and technology, which really makes it an attack on Russia by the United States. THAT'S where I can see Russia justifying nuclear retaliation.

No, it really isn't. Putin and other Russian leaders, and Russian government owned media have both talked about restoring the "Russian Empire." He even pushed the idea in his interview with Tucker Carlson, if you go back and listen, as his justification for invading Ukraine. If you listen to what Putin and his media is saying, it is clear they want to restore the Russian Empire which includes other countries, and portions of other countries, and will invade to restore Russia to greatness.

And if you don't like my sources, you can find plenty of others by doing a simple Internet search. One I found even talked of how Putin was trying to do it without invading countries, prior to the war in Ukraine, largely by economic and similar means -- with other articles, more recent, explaining how Putin ended up invading because Ukraine was forging ties with the West, not with Russia.

 

[KCfromNC]

People keep saying that but he's been appointing people who are pro Ukraine into his cabinet, warhawks even, and Zelensky was encouraged by his conversation with Trump after the election. Why?

Because he's smart enough not to publicly call out the future leader of the country supplying him with defensive weapons to help repel an unprovoked invasion.

 

[wing2000]

No, it really isn't. Putin and other Russian leaders, and Russian government owned media have both talked about restoring the "Russian Empire." He even pushed the idea in his interview with Tucker Carlson, if you go back and listen, as his justification for invading Ukraine. If you listen to what Putin and his media is saying, it is clear they want to restore the Russian Empire which includes other countries, and portions of other countries, and will invade to restore Russia to greatness.

...in Putin's mind, Russia is vulnerable so long as NATO is at his doorstep. IMO, his long term goal is to restore Russian control over Eastern Europe, to include Ukraine, Poland, etc. An weakend and ineffective NATO would certainly be a boost to Putin's goal.

 

[Landon Caeli]

...in Putin's mind, Russia is vulnerable so long as NATO is at his doorstep. IMO, his long term goal is to restore Russian control over Eastern Europe, to include Ukraine, Poland, etc. An weakend and ineffective NATO would certainly be a boost to Putin's goal.

...And let's all be clear - this is a Russian government agenda, wanting to govern more land and more people with tons of regulations, and ridiculous rules.

...So they let the population own firearms now. Many Muslim countries also allow their citizens to own firearms, it doesn't mean anything.

 

[DaisyDay]

It's been said that the best defense is a good offense.

This protracted war along with the latest US sanctions against Russian banks, primarily Gazprombank, is affecting the Russian economy adversely.

Rouble slides as new Russian sanctions stifle foreign trade

Pressure on currency set to continue as curbs against lenders such as Gazprombank hit export payments

www.ft.com

The US last week placed sanctions on Russian banks that had become widely used for international payments, keeping foreign trade flowing. Gazprombank played a critical role administering most payments for the gas Russia sells abroad. Losing this channel raises the prospect of a decrease in gas revenues.​

Russia’s rouble plunges to lowest rate since early weeks of Ukraine war

Rouble hit 110 against the dollar after US introduced sanctions against Gazprombank, Russia’s third largest bank

www.theguardian.com

Earlier rounds of sanctions had spared Russian gas because Europe’s economy was so dependent on it, but it is now far less reliant on Russian supplies. The Gazprombank sanctions raise the prospect of a further decrease in gas revenues and foreign currency for Moscow.

The rouble’s weakening threatens to erode Russians’ purchasing power by increasing the cost of imported goods and could further increase inflation.

The country is already contending with runaway inflation, which could climb to 8.5% this year – twice the Central Bank’s target.

The borscht index, an online cost of living tracker monitoring the prices of four ingredients needed to make the traditional soup, reports a 20% rise compared with 2023.​