Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Wednesday that Russia will view US-made F-16 fighter jets in Ukraine as a nuclear threat because they are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
“We have informed the nuclear powers, the United States, Britain and France, that Russia cannot ignore the ability of these aircraft to carry nuclear weapons. No amount of assurances will help here,” Lavrov said.
President Biden has given the green light for European countries to deliver F-16s for Ukraine, and 11 of Ukraine’s Western backers announced Tuesday that they would start training Ukrainian pilots on the US-made aircraft in August.
F-16s are capable of carrying US B61 nuclear gravity bombs, which the US stores in several European countries under NATO’s nuclear sharing program. There’s no indication the US is planning to arm Ukraine with nukes, but Lavrov said Russia will still take the threat seriously.
“In the course of combat operations, our servicemen are not going to sort out whether each particular aircraft of this type is equipped to deliver nuclear weapons or not,” he said. “We will regard the very fact that the Ukrainian armed forces have such systems as a threat from the West in the nuclear sphere.”
Lavrov added that the US and its allies are “creating risks of a direct armed clash with Russia, and this is fraught with catastrophic consequences.” In the early days of the war, NATO ruled out arming Ukraine with fighter jets because they feared Russia would perceive the move as the alliance directly entering the war, but the concerns of escalation have waned.
Lavrov has previously noted that F-16s could carry nuclear weapons, a warning that was brushed off by the Biden administration. “The first thing I would say to Minister Lavrov is: If you’re worried about Ukrainian military capabilities, then you should take your troops and leave Ukraine,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said last month.
I fear Russia is gonna be caught flat footed. Nato has been fully involved neck deep. A catastrophic event must happen before they react. Then they react by attrition of VSU. Just go head a kill the head of the serpeants and bomb decision making centers in London, Germany and US. Change the equation.
This is an anti-war site. We shouldn’t be making comments like this here.
the forums are open here, and a lot of war cheerleaders do comment here. thanks for calling one out.
I despise war. Hence my suggestion. Those leaders and high level functionaries planning the demise of soldiers and civilians never get the due accountability, just eager vilification of a chosen villian and business as usual. It sickens me. Your comment was insufficient in your description.
I apologize. Thanks for the reminder
That being said, Duane , I fully believe that the Vegetable-in Chief is perfectly capable of supporting a nuclear war, given his career-long propensity as a warmonger and the fact that he’s a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
The greater danger is that NATO has been caught flat footed, and has doubled down with bets it cannot cover.
Oh great an other red line – lets see how this unfolds 🙂
Unlike O’bummer, the Russians seem to stick by their promises.
Oh like they did with the red lines so far???
Yes. One red line resulted in the invasion of Ukraine. Like that one?
Then another resulted in taking out the electric grid in Ukraine. Still pretending it did not happen?
He had red lines, and the whole fiasco now is because we did not pay attention. So now, we don’t even pay attention to what he does when those are crossed.
So far? If you like the invasion of Ukraine, you’ll really love what he does next.
To be a red line it has to be announced not just exist in your head.
No I believe this would have happened with or without the Ukrainians violating what red line was it again? One more of those not specified?
Which red line was crossed resulting in the SMO?
I’m not likin the war on Ukraine, but I am grateful that it was Putin and not Xi who jumped the ‘gun’ – and I am loving the idea that he will compound the errors he has made so far by doing more absurd stuff – that seems to be what you are implying.
They did announce them. The US ignored them. Your comment was they’d never backed them up “so far,” but now you pretend they never had them. That is of a piece of ignoring them and what comes of ignoring them.
What redlines were announced, be specific redlines are not obscure things so just mention which redline(s) was/were crossed leading to the SMO?
The redline was fulfilled. They invaded.
Yes what redline was that, though – as I’ve stated to be a red line it has to be known – so what announced redline was it that was crossed by the west or Ukraine leading to the SMO?
Then just say Russia responded to certain situations without stating they were acting on red lines being crossed. If that allows you to win the “debate”, that’s all that matters, isn’t it?
So you agree these were not redlines and hence not relevant to this at all.
But to allow you to participate what situation changed in 2021 causing Putin to have to react – what actions of the west or Ukraine changed things in 2021, so that the SMO had to start in early 2022?
Can’t you fucking read?
You wrote:
So the bolded part admits that no announced redlines were breached leading to the SMO – while the underlined part suggests that Putin was merely responding to a change in the situation.
Now where did I misread that comment – when responding:
Or asking for you to answer what situation changed in 2021 as to provoke the SMO with:
“Now where did I misread that comment”
I should have asked you if you can fucking comprehend instead of read. My bad. My comment wasn’t meant to engage with more conversation on what constitutes a fucking red line or situation.. I don’t fucking care. It was just pointing out your annoying habit of creating debates over the dumbest fucking things. Now, you win this debate before you dissect my comment into 15 paragraphs. So please, I concede.
One of the problems here is that Russia made hollow threats about “red lines” for decades regarding things like eastward NATO expansion. I’m anti-war so I don’t advocate that Russia should have bombed or otherwise attacked anyone, but they should have done something. If you don’t follow through on your threats, no one takes them seriously, and that’s what happened here.
Someday soon, it’s going to happen, and Wash. and their lackeys in Europe are ensuring it will happen. Then what? will Americans wake up when NYC gets bombed?
I agree, but regarding: “will Americans wake up when NYC gets bombed?” …Just checking… Do you need an answer for that or was it a rhetorical question? (Sarcasm alert)
Then “Americans” will “wake up” and deal with all politicians in their own way, in the streets and the Gov. buildings.
I ‘d prefer DC go first, Lily.
Well, it won’t be our choice, we won’t be doing the bombing.
From Obsolete F-16s that won’t make a difference on the battlespace and will be destroyed upon arrival to now they represent a nuclear threat because they can carry nukes. Hmm.
Well, what else can carry nukes that’s already in Ukraine?
“From Obsolete F-16s that won’t make a difference on the battlespace and will be destroyed upon arrival to now they represent a nuclear threat because they can carry nukes.”
Both of those points are true and accurate. Obviously true and accurate,
I don’t care who’s smarter or who’s telling the truth. I did the math. The most benign thing those F16s will be used for is to attack Crimea or the Russian fleet in the Black Sea. They don’t have to carry nuclear bombs to trigger the nuclear destruction of humanity. If Russia doesn’t finish off Ukraine before the F16s arrive, we’re all finished. By the way, I thought you should know that I failed math in high school. (Sarcasm alert)
Putin still hops to play a softball game at all cost. Unlike DC, Putin loves his people damn too much to start a nuclear war.
He needs a touch of madman Nixon to install a bit of unpredictability.
The day Putin goes, the day, we really have to worry about a real nuclear threat.
Those who so delighted in what they imagined Prigozhin to mean were delighting in the fantasy of their own deaths.
They saw no danger for themselves, when in reality the biggest change of all was the creation of danger to themselves.
I used to think Nixon was crazy. A friend of mine was sometimes in his protection detail. He said Nixon would scurry around as if he was being targeted by a sniper. Now, I think he believed JFK was assassinated by elements in the US intelligence services. So, maybe not so crazy after all.
Wars shared that there was a poster for, “Dick Nixon Before He Dicks You.” LOL. That’s probably my favorite political poster now! But remember, Nixon was not dicked for killing millions, he was dicked for spying on the democratic party. No evidence so far as to whether the opposite could happen as the demo-rats appear to be more entrenched in the swamp.
In the bathroom in college, some graffiti said, “Pull out: that’s what Nixon’s father should have done.” (Of course “pull out” also referred to U.S. troops in Vietnam for those who weren’t there.)
I wish all the neocons’ fathers did the same. LOL
Good argument for keeping abortion legal.
Nixon absolutely believed that LBJ was involved in JFK’s assassination, saying, I wanted to be president but not enough to kill him.
Johnson purportedly told his mistress in Dallas, That sonofabitch has humiliated me for the last time!—-two hours before the assassination took place.
Even if LBJ was involved, it was the CIA and other military/intelligence/industrial complex supporters who were responsible for killing Kennedy. Johnson was great on domestic policy, like the Civil Rights Act and his war on poverty; too bad he wasn’t limited to that.
Jeff, of COURSE the CIA was involved—-Kennedy had threaten to disband it—and probably Mossad as well.
All LBJ did is pass JFK’s legislation. It was all downhill from there.
Kennedy couldn’t get the Civil Rights Act passed. Johnson was a much better politician, and he got it done. The War on Poverty was Johnson’s idea as far as I recall, and it was working great until Nixon ended it when he got elected. Not only did Nixon not care about poor people, he was racist to boot.
Johnson was a strong-arm, offering compensation for anyone who voted his way.
That’s true; he was the Democratic/liberal version of J. Ogre Hoover in that respect. On the other thing, that behavior/personality enabled him to get things done that most politicians couldn’t. Does the end justify the means? I don’t know, it’s case-by-case.
Nixon was crazy, and paranoid too. We used to think that he was the epitome of evil, then we got Reagan. Goes to show that things can always get worse.
Heh… Nixon looks like an altar boy in comparison to what we’ve endured since.
Yes, but that’s anachronizing. In his time, Nixon was hideous (in some ways, like his racism and paranoia, he still would be today). But because things have gotten so much worse, he does look like an altar boy now. That goes to show why anachronizing isn’t useful, except to show how times have changed.
Yes, but it’s looking as if whether he wants it or not, it’s coming his way.
Yes and that is the main problem that created the dangerous situation we have today. The imperial parasites only understand the language of brute force, nothing else. There is no significant nuclear threat to Russian Federation from Anglo-American empire. It is simply ridiculous to think there will be a devastating nuclear conflict with current technological and economic state of Anglo-American empire. Russia alone have total nuclear superiority, never mind combined Eurasian forces of RF, PRC and India. It will not be a nuclear war. It will be nuclear slaughter of Anglo-American empire. Kremlin is using these scaremongering tactics on Russian population simply to maintain state dominance.
And you love Putin too damn much.
Yes, it’s certainly looking as if we are getting closer to the 12:00 doomsday event. Biden or I should say Biden’s handlers keep pushing the escalation to the point where we will, if not already have crossed the Nuclear rubicon.
Yes. Depleted uranium shipment crossed that line.
Yes, and if that wasn’t enough, throw in some cluster bombs.
Yep, it started with Putin’s unnecessary invasion of Ukraine.
Yes, it’s certainly looking as if we are getting closer to the 12:00 doomsday event. Biden or I should say Biden’s handlers keep pushing the escalation to the point where we will, if not already have crossed the Nuclear rubicon.
well uncle sam sets up a “no-fly zone” every where that he invades, i wonder why Russia has not already done so in Ukraine.
Obviously, they think we’re fools and don’t know it already is before we send our US piloted F16s. If Biden, Blinken, and Nod (Nuland) are any indication, how can they be wrong? Stole that variation of the song from Sy Hersh.
Oh…I thought “Nod” was ByeDone…as in nodding off…
It works too. If it’s good for you, it’s good for me. LOL. But it appears this article is where the rhyme might have originated from: http://www.coronadonewsca.com/opinion/biden-blinken-and-nod/article_d445691a-0d08-11ec-a280-a3351dd56bfe.html
They pretty much have. Other than their own, any aircraft flying over Russian occupied areas will be shot down whenever possible. They still have to deal with AFU anti-aircraft weapons over Kyev held territory. But that is becoming less of a threat as time goes by.
I had a good laugh when I saw this:
“NEWSFLASH: So far, the best tank supplied by the Western allies to Ukraine is Challenger. Unlike all other tanks, not a single one was lost or damaged. What’s more, it hasn’t even been located yet. Its actual combat avoidance capabilities are bar none.”
And, I wonder if F-16’s sent to Ukraine might also be parked out of harms way until Ukraine can train some pilots (at least a year) and install the support infrastructure (maintenance facilities, flight preparation equipment and personnel, etc.).
“…combat avoidance capabilities…”. My type of tank!
The British only sent 14, a laughable number.
But then, it turns out they only had 56 in their whole army, and no spare gun barrels nor an ability any longer to make them. THAT is laughable.
When done laughing, notice they are doing their best to enlarge this war.
Yes. I have noticed. The Brits and the Poles are pushing very hard, and I suspect that it’s more about who has something to gain/protect than about what they genuinely believe is best for their respective countries.
They aren’t using any English junk in battles. There simply aren’t any of these tanks at the front. Not present. Absent.
These cowardly English rats are just like cowardly Pentagon rats. They just want free advertising for their war gear without actually having to prove combat capabilities.
I love the way these types are so casual about it -the violent annihilation of hundreds of thousands. It takes a really defective specimen to talk the way Kirby (such a cool dude) does.
You’re talking about basically souless psychopaths. They don’t have the capacity to feel compassion or empathy and therefore they have no problem with hundreds of thousands or millions dying. Spawn of Satan.
Yes, they really are a type of sub-species. Mutatis mutandis, Byron’s estimation of Castlereigh, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, “Cold-blooded, smooth faced, placid miscreant dabbling his sleek young hands in Eiren’s gore.”
Yeah, but that’s who’s running the planet, and we have allowed it.
You’re over the target and….. it’s a direct hit!
They had no qualms about nuking tens of thousands of Japanese civilians in WW2 , i have no doubt the same mentality is alive and well , however if the US main land comes under attack it will be a different story , what the yanks are up to is dropping nukes by proxy ie nothing to do with us it was Zelensky we told him not to use them , it1s the same lame excuse the Brits use when Saudis use British weapons in Yemen .
“The first thing I would say to Minister Lavrov is: If you’re worried about Ukrainian military capabilities, then you should take your troops and leave Ukraine,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said last month.
But if you go scorched earth on Ukraine because of those capabilities, we’re ok with that.
You wonder how evolution somehow allowed Kirby to survive. Maybe WW3 will fix that?
Unfortunately WW 3 would fix a lot of innocent people too. A nuke doesn’t discriminate between psychos like Kirby and people that were just being stupid by allowing people like Kirby get anywhere near powerful positions.
In mowing down a field of vile weeds, few pretty flowers will get crushed in the process. No doubt.
Few vile weeds in a field of pretty flowers does not justify use of sharp scythe, just some tactical herbicide.
Anal Yzer exercising his antiwar views.
And the animals too, Sambor 🙁
Two legged critters aren’t really an intelligent species. Just clever (sometimes). And obviously deadly (often). A personal example of both traits displayed itself where I live which is in the country. Coyotes have been in the neighborhood long before I lived here. In fact for Millenniums. Part of the ecological balance is maintained by the predation of these animals. One of their favorite foods is rabbit.
In the evening the howls are often heard (it can be quite a racket) and if one listens, individual voices can be discerned. Over the years I became rather found of hearing them. Picking out individuals by their voices. That was most nights. I haven’t heard them as of late. But I have noticed a large increase in the rabbit population. My fear is some dumb axx has managed to kill off the local pack. I hope I’m wrong. I would miss them. And I’d be stuck with dealing with rabbits. Which breed like, well, rabbits.
There are many types of intelligence, and humans only excel at a few of them, like cleverness and intellectual things.
But far more important is that humans fit the medical definition of being a cancerous tumor on the planet (out of control growth that consumes the host). Doesn’t have to be this way, but humans focus on all the wrong things like ego, intellect, and unnaturally & very harmfully manipulating the physical/natural world. Instead we should be focused on wisdom, empathy, and expanding our consciousness, while leaving the physical/natural world alone as much as possible.
Same way it allowed you 🤷🏽♂️.
If Russia goes scorched earth on Ukraine because of those capabilities, then they could equally go scorched earth on any other neighboring country with similar capabilities
If other countries allow themselves to be used as fodder by the west to weaken Russia, then you are correct.
I don’t understand this argument. This is like blaming a woman for being raped.
What???
John Kirby. What an asshole.
John Kirby has two assholes. An lower one and and upper one just above his chin. Both produce the same thing.
Assholes have a use , the best part of Kirby ran down the inside of his moms leg .
I need to learn more about article 5. It seems to me that there might be a difference between retaliation and attack. To elaborate: If Russia attacked Poland without provocation, I assume that would invoke article 5. But if Poland attacked Russia by sending in an F-16 that might be carrying a nuclear bomb, and Russia destroyed both the plane and the Polish airfield used to launch the plane, would that also invoke article 5?
If the answer is yes, and that it doesn’t matter who started it, then there is the matter of whether or not the other NATO countries would choose to engage.
My sense is that if Poland knows what’s good for itself, they had better get buy-in from the other countries 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 they allow F-16’s to be launched from Polish airfields.
It doesn’t appear the Pentagon is ready to send F-16s:
https://kyivindependent.com/pentagon-ukraine-battlefield-conditions-for-f-16-employment-not-ideal/
Also what’s stopping Russia from bombing the airfield which will ground fhe planes?
That airfield will probably be in a neighboring country such as Poland. Because, from what I have gleaned, F-16s require a very clean runway to prevent debris from entering the turbine intake.
Absolutely true about the runway requirement. But NATO would be reckless beyond belief to permit one of its members to provide basing for aircraft attacking Russian forces. I don’t think the US masters of the NATO universe are quite that reckless. They really don’t want to trigger WWIII. They might do just that, through arrogance and stupidity, but they are probably not dumb enough to deliberately push Russia to the point where it believes it needs to attack bases in, e.g., Poland.
Correct. Any fighter craft launched from Poland would be considered to be a direct act of war against Russia. Russia would take out the offending air field. Most NATO nations would likely NOT invoke article 5 as Poland would be viewed as the instigator/aggressor.
I agree. And it wouldn’t make much difference if Article 5 were invoked. It only obligates each ally to “. . . take such action as it deems necessary . . .” Armed force is mentioned, but definitely not prescribed. Thoughts and prayers might might satisfy the obligation. 😏
Would any NATO members commit to war with Russia in response to Russia taking out a Polish base used to attack Russian forces? I think the chances are slim to none.
And Slim’s in Amarillo 😉
I also assume they’re not insane enough to want WWIII. The problem is that they want global hegemony so much that they’re willing to risk it.
“We will regard the very fact that the Ukrainian armed forces have such systems as a threat from the West in the nuclear sphere.” So what does this mean? Is Lavrov saying that supplying these weapons will widen the war to other western countries and that Russia will attack them directly, perhaps with nuclear weapons, or that Russia will try to destroy the F-16’s as soon as they reach Ukraine. I would think the latter would happen anyway.
It seems to me this F-16 thing has not been thought out. First we can be pretty sure neither the US or Russia don’t want a full blown nuclear exchange but a tactical exchange in Ukraine is a possibility and Russia has the advantage, so if we put F-16s in Ukraine they immediately become targets so we will have to park them in some other country and attack Russia from there but that will make those other country’s legitimate targets in Russia’s mind so I figure we better think this thing through.
What makes you think that China, under whose “nuclear umbrella” Ukraine resides, would limit itself to a “tactical” nuclear response to a Russian nuclear attack in Ukraine?
What?
TK believes that if Russia used nuclear weapons in Ukraine that China is obliged to nuke Russia. This based on a comment made by Xi prior to the 2014 US/NATO coup in Ukraine….. Yeah. I know.
Fact is that the US is far more likely to use nukes in Ukraine….. That would mean, by TK’s premise, that China would nuke the USA and NATO.
No, it is not based on a comment made by Xi in 2014. It is based on a treaty between Ukraine and China signed in 1994 and renewed in 2013.
And it’s not about what I “believe.” It’s a treaty obligation. That’s a fact.
Could China withdraw from the treaty? Yes.
Has China withdrawn from the treaty? No. And it could, in about ten seconds and with a simple public announcement,.
I do not believe that China would nuke Russia over Ukraine, because I don’t assume that Xi is a fucking idiot.
What I assume is that Xi has, without public fanfare, let Putin (who is not a fucking idiot either) know that crossing a red line which would require China to either nuke attack Russia or lose massive amounts of global respect for publicly blowing its longstanding, freely undertaken, and non-withdrawn-from treaty obligations out its ass would not result in a good outcome for Russia.
It might be a good idea for you to review China’s statements relevant to that treaty, in the months since the Russian invasion.
It might be a good idea for you to actually say whatever it is you’re hinting at.
It really should be obvious. Events since 2013 have entirely reordered relations among all of the relevant parties, the US, Russia, Ukraine and China. China’s official statements and its behavior over the past year and a half make it entirely clear that it’s going to do exactly nothing that will endanger its increasingly-essential relationship with Russia.
Treaties never survive fundamental changes in the circumstances and geopolitical order that prevail when they are made.
As for your notion that China would lose “global respect” if it didn’t fulfill an obligation pursuant to a treaty that is obviously now inapplicable, that’s just silly. China understands quite well that the collective West respects it not at all, that it rather sees it as a target. China also understands that is in no danger of losing respect among the nations of the rest of the world, the ones that matter most going forward..
Actually, China has reacted very, very carefully. They went from a “no limits” partnership with Russia to “now, wait just a fucking minute” the instant the invasion started.
If China wanted out of its obligations as Ukraine’s “nuclear umbrella” holder, it could be out of those obligations with a simple statement that, as you put it, there have been “fundamental changes” and it will no longer be bound by the treaty.
Until and unless it does so, the treaty is clearly still applicable. China keeps its word, or it doesn’t keep its word. It can CHANGE its word any time it wants prior to the obligation coming due. It hasn’t done so.
On the other hand, it hasn’t made a big deal out of strutting around in public saying it will nuke Moscow if Moscow nukes Ukraine.
The obvious conclusion is that Xi had a quiet “don’t even think about that shit, it would embarrass us and that would be bad for YOU” word with Putin.
Actually, China has reacted very, very carefully. They went from a “no limits” partnership with Russia to “now, wait just a fucking minute” the instant the invasion started.
If China wanted out of its obligations as Ukraine’s “nuclear umbrella” holder, it could be out of those obligations with a simple statement that, as you put it, there have been “fundamental changes” and it will no longer be bound by the treaty.
Until and unless it does so, the treaty is clearly still applicable. China keeps its word, or it doesn’t keep its word. It can CHANGE its word any time it wants prior to the obligation coming due. It hasn’t done so.
On the other hand, it hasn’t made a big deal out of strutting around in public saying it will nuke Moscow if Moscow nukes Ukraine.
The obvious conclusion is that Xi had a quiet “don’t even think about that shit, it would embarrass us and that would be bad for YOU” word with Putin.
China plays the long game. They’ll sit and watch how events go. I don’t think China will nuke Russia because Russia isn’t going to nuke anyone. However, it would not surprise me if China hasn’t set its sights on resource-rich Siberia. There’s quite a bit of turmoil in Russia and the break up of the Russian Federation IS a possibility. China might just decide to benefit from Putin’s Folly.
“[China] went from a ‘no limits’ partnership with Russia to ‘now, wait just a fucking minute’ the instant the invasion started.”
Umm, no. 2/24/2022:
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/24/china-refuses-to-call-attack-on-ukraine-an-invasion-blames-us.html
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202306/1293202.shtml
I could fill the page with similar, relevant links. And I imagine I’m not the only one here who could do that without breaking a sweat. I probably won’t bother, because the continuing reality of the “no limits partnership” is entirely obvious. Neither Moscow nor Beijing is dumb enough to weaken it.
You seem to “imagine” an awful lot of things without breaking a sweat.
But you are right that “Neither Moscow nor Beijing is dumb enough to weaken it.”
Which is why Xi presumably gave Putin a heads up to not even consider shattering it like poorly blown glass.
“. . . Xi presumably gave Putin . . .”
You’re certainly free to presume. I think your presumption is at odds with the evidence of Chinese behavior and communication, but so it goes.
If circumstances arise that lead Russia to decide that the use of nuclear weapons is justified and necessary (very unlikely), it is exceedingly unlikely that China’s principal concern will be with Russian action.
OK, so no problem:
You think that the Chinese regime would break its word and shirk its freely undertaken and multiply reaffirmed obligations on an issue of major importance, rather that preserve its reputation by exiting those obligations if it no longer wants them, as it is completely free to do.
I don’t. It’s not that I consider the Chinese regime any more trustworthy than any other regime, but it does strike me as self-interested enough to not put itself in a position where it would essentially be forced to stand on top of a tall building with a megaphone yelling “DO NOT TRUST US! WE ARE LYING SACKS OF SHIT! WE MAKE PROMISES AND THEN BREAK THEM!” when it’s so easy to not be in that situation (and where getting out of that situation with a public announcement would help Russia, creating a nuclear threat by proxy to scare the bejabbers out of the Ukrainians).
We evaluate Chinese intentions and motivations differently. No biggie. At least one of us is wrong, but being wrong on the Internet isn’t a felony or anything.
It was in 2013, not 2014. It was a pledge which involved Russia. “The pledge was signed with then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who had the backing of Russia, in December 2013 in Beijing”.
“China pledges unconditionally not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear Ukraine, and under the conditions of Ukraine suffering an invasion using nuclear weapons or suffering the threat of such kind of invasion, to provide Ukraine with corresponding security guarantees pledge also included the defense of Ukrainian sovereign territory. ”
So….. obviously China has not involved itself in the supposed violation of “sovereign territory” claimed by the post 2014 putsch regime after the Russian annexation of Crimea. The reason for this is because Russia was willing to let the Kiev regime settle things in Ukraine via the Minsk accords. That didn’t happen because the Minsk accords were a con job by NATO countries. The idea that China doesn’t understand these things is ludicrous.
China and Russia are de facto allies. China understands that the Russian nuclear doctrine states that Russia won’t use nukes unless they are attacked with nukes or under imminent threat of being nuked OR if there is an existential threat to Russia.
The last is the operative principle. If NATO intervenes directly and Russia’s leadership sees that the existence of the Russian state is in jeopardy, Russia may well use its nuclear weapons. Fortunately, NATO isn’t capable of defeating Russia. The caveat is that a long drawn out conflict may be considered to be a threat to Russian survival.
All this and the deaths of hundreds of thousands can be laid at the feet of a belligerent NATO controlled by the US. Without the 2014 coup this wasn’t going to happen. Even then, if the Minsk accords had been implemented there would have been no war.
1. Wow. Very weird.
2. Yes, everything we know suggests that nothing likely to happen in the battle with Ukraine would trigger Russia’s policy on the use of nuclear weapons. I don’t think the US is likely to use them either. However, if it decided to intervene directly to prevent a collapse of Ukrainian forces, the US certainly isn’t prepared for success in a conventional war on Russia’s doorstep, so . . .
I don’t see nukes being used in forcible future anywhere in Europe, never mind “Russian doorstep” such as Ukraine. The Anglo-American empire does have every reason to use nukes in Europe.
The only way to control these terrorists is with a direct threat of annihilation. Kremlin need to issue a direct statement that any kind of nuclear detonation or a dirty bomb in Europe will result in complete annihilation of US and England.
It’s avoidance/misdirection type of trolling. Actually a very good example of use of such tactics.
The goal is to make Russia attack European vassal states. Especially economically insignificant vassal states that the empire need to clean up from population. Such as former Warsaw Alliance counties. I have very strong doubts that any kind of nuclear weapons will be used in Europe. The North American Terrorist Occupation kinda works to prevent it. But not in a way most people think. I don’t know anyone still delusional enough to believe anything coming out of imperial centers. Any agreements or treaties are simply discarded by the empire. So this belief that US or England will run to protect European vassal states is simply idiotic. The occupation of Europe works to prevent nuclear war because an attack from any imperial vassal state will justify use of nuclear weapons against Washington and London.
There’s no such thing as a “tactical exchange” of nuclear weapons. Even Eisenhower recognized that. Once the nukes start flying there’s no way to limit them to “tactical” ones, and even those are a lot more powerful than you probably think they are. Keep in mind that Russia has a doomsday machine, and if nukes are launched at Russia, tactical or otherwise, it’s game over for the Earth and the life here.
Lavrov is a painfully serious guy. If he says this, he means it.
It does not matter in the slightest if we disagree. It does not matter in the slightest if he is “wrong.”
What matters is that he believes this action is a nuclear threat. Why? Because he will necessarily react as if we made a nuclear threat.
Nuclear threats must not be made lightly, recklessly, unknowingly.
Perhaps that is the point — Biden is deliberately making a nuclear threat on behalf of Ukraine. Fine. Own that. And by the way, that does show that Putin was correct to see NATO in Ukraine as a nuclear threat, and to launch a war to stop it. We can’t have that both ways.
Lavrov is the foreign minister of Russia. If he says something, it’s not because he necessarily believes what he’s saying, it’s because he believes that saying it will, or at least may, produce results/reactions favorable to Russia.
Just as painfully serious. He has shown us that constantly.
Perhaps in private he has a sense of humor?
https://www.c-span.org/video/?299941-9/why-leaders-lie
It seems to me most likely that Lavrov does indeed believe that giving Ukraine fighter-bombers known to be capable of delivering nuclear gravity bombs is a nuclear threat. Given the identities and history of the parties opposed to his nation, and the prevailing circumstances, it would be unreasonable for senior Russian officials to believe otherwise.
Pretty much every airplane on earth is capable of delivering nuclear weapons.
And the possession of nukes is a nuclear threat.
F-16s change nothing in either of those respects, and Lavrov is no moron, so it seems unlikely he’d believe anything that stupid.
Sure, any aircraft is at least theoretically capable of delivering a nuclear weapon of some sort.
F-16s, however, are specifically designed with the capability of delivering B61 tactical nukes in mind. And B61s are deployed in Europe. And F-16 units of the Dutch and Belgian air forces are training to use those aircraft to deliver those B61s, as partners in that spiffy “nuclear sharing” program the US cooked up.
The two crucial intersecting criteria in risk assessment are the probability of the risked event occurring and the level of impact if it does occur. Lavrov is certainly not so stupid that he wouldn’t treat giving those airplanes to Ukraine a serious threat.
German pilots have been training to fly and deliver nuclear weapons capable planes.
He is a very experienced and competent diplomat, he knows dealing with Americans for decades that they can’t be trusted, they are killers. Demented Biden is one of them.
It would be dereliction of duty if the Russians ignored the demented president with no one even knowing who is in charge of the policies, Washington is a Mad House with the inmates controlling the show.
Well, why wouldn’t he, Mr. T?
The problem is that no one can trust the Americans. Russians have learned their lessons the hard way and are smart enough to respond accordingly. What would you do if you were in their shoes, how many times could they lie and deceive you and break agreements before you get the message?
Lavrov’s comments don’t sound much different than Kennedy’s comments during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/address-during-the-cuban-missile-crisis
The issue isn’t really nukes. The issue is actually providing these jets to Ukraine. Unless they will disassemble them and ship over in parts to Ukraine, they would need to take off from air fields in so-called “European allies” countries. And that means Kremlin will need to destroy these air fields. The issue isn’t escalation in regard of Russian war with Anglo-American empire. Pretty much all European vassal states in Europe are disposable for Anglo-American parasites. Even such significant vassal states like France and Germany. The goal isn’t to escalate the war with Russia. The goal is to MAKE these European vassal states fight Russia while remaining on the sidelines. Imperial cowardly pests will not lift a finger to help anyone in Europe who is foolish enough to start a war with Russia.