Biden Says Threat of Putin Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’

100 thoughts on “Biden Says Threat of Putin Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’”

1. If we would believe the threat of using nuclear weapons is not real, they would not be deterrent weapons at all, so why have them?

   1. The nukes in question here are tactical nukes used in presumably Ukraine i.e. not deterrence weapons, tactical nukes represents the military trying to convert nukes from the all destroying weapons of deterrence into battlefield weapons which could be used without escalating to all out nuclear exchange – think e.g. nuclear artillery shells.

      Their advantage being that they pack a lot of punch into a small packet – their disadvantage being that they leave a significant area where even your own soldiers are not happy to move in – so less suited as an offensive weapon – which is why they tried developing the neutron bomb.

      1. Are you saying they are in total control of nuclear radiation of tactical nukes? You would not mind if your home gets hit, you will move back in? Do you really trust our politicians to tell you the truth about tactical nuclear weapons? The neutron bomb was to destroy life with radiation while keeping the buildings standing, they don’t mention that anymore, but they did tell us that Iraq had nuclear weapons, that is why it had to be attacked, invaded and destroyed. They did a good job doing that, they will be just as good in Ukraine. They have trouble finding burial grounds for the Ukrainian young men KIA DURING THE irrational offensive they started is causing they don’t tell that either.
         Washington is nest full of war criminals from top to bottom.

         1. I’m saying that tactical nukes were ‘invented’ to be able to use nukes in/on the battlefield without going to full scale nuclear war – a shell fired from a gun not being mistaken for a ballistic rocket being launched.

            The neutron bomb was ‘invented’ to get over the issue with long lasting fallout – so own soldiers would be less against to move in and taking the territory as I understood it (yes it did so by killing everything with high (but very short lasting) radiation.

            My comment was only that tactical nukes are not part of the nuclear deterrence force and hence they do not have the same restrictions on use – the only thing that has kept them from being used is as far as I can see the nuclear taboo.

      2. Michael64, I don’t mean to offend you, but you are a sucker to believe such BS.

2. It is possible if NATO will carry on with the escalation and Russia starts to lose too many soldiers or if NATO terrorist attacks inside Russia will escalate too much. Also it is real if Poland initiate a military conflict with Belarus. Belarus has already tactical nukes on it’s territory.
   Of course, Russia has no need to use nukes in Ukraine. If tactical nukes will be ever used, most likely, Russia uses them against Poland and, less likely, against Germany, in order to discourage NATO from further escalation.

   1. Oh, FFS. Nobody is going to nuke Poland or Germany. They’ve already suffered enough under Anglo-American occupation. The Russian MOD openly said that the first targets for Russian nukes are London and Washington.
      There is absolutely zero sense in attacking imperial vassal states while the imperial parasites safely sit in their mansions. Cut the heads from the United Snake and Snake dies.

      1. What are you talking about? To nuke Washington means full scale nuclear war. To nuke Poland with minor tactical nukes may mean only an escalation of the hostility between Russia and NATO, or a de-escalation, in case US leadership decides they went a bit too far. US will never go to the suicidal full scale nuclear war with Russia for the sake of Poland.

         1. I have no idea what fictional world you’re living in… An attack on any imperial vassal state ALREADY means full-scale nuclear war! You think you can just throw a tactical nuke and the other guy will say “oooopppsss. I guess we really pissed them off! Better back off now!”?!

            1. You are detached from the real world. It makes no sense to talk to you.

            2. Right. It is I who suffer from delusions of dropping one tiny/small/little tactical nuke on Poland or Germany to make Uncle Shame scared.

   2. Gilbert Doctorow has the same view. He thinks that Russia might strike the airbase of whichever NATO partner is the host for F16 jets, based on the fact that those jets are capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons. Once an F16 is in the air and enters the field of the war, there is no way to know whether it is nuclear-armed or not. Then the only responsible action would be to assume that it is nuclear-armed. Leading to a nuclear response.

      That is the reasoning, as I understand it. I recommend reading his essays, at gilbertdoctorow.com

      1. Every aircraft is capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons.

      2. I mean a different motivation. If hundreds of thousands NATO militaries move to Ukraine or Belarus, Russian casualties will start to escalate to the point of unacceptable. In order to bring the bloody conventional war to the end, Putin may decide to use tactical nukes against the main logistic centers in Poland because Poland is where the main NATO forces are operating from.

3. The world will never forget which country first used nuclear bombs on civilians. If Truman were still alive, this accusation would be hypocritical. That said, I have little doubt that the threat of Biden using nuclear weapons is 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 real.

   1. The imperial propaganda machine and the Creepy Joke mentioning nukes is a way to prime the population for a nuclear war. I have little doubt that these parasites want to go out in ‘blaze of glory’ rather than to fade into obscurity.

      1. Agreed. It was Biden who first brought nuclear weapons into the Ukraine conversation, back near the start of the war. And talking about them makes it easier to think about using them. Even though Biden was nominally talking about them as a hazard to be avoided, it was hard to avoid the feeling that he was also making a veiled threat.

         1. It’s a psychological “don’t think about the cow” trick.

   2. Biden can’t use nuclear weapons as he wishes. People around him will never allow him to do it.

      1. Are you sure about that?

         1. Absolutely.

            1. Fine.
               Then if you are so sure?
               You should be able to post a link that proves that Russian ABM’s are ‘the best’?
               If you please…?

            2. You are confusing the comments above. Mary Myers meant not that.

            3. Perhaps.
               But my question still stands as you mentioned this earlier.

               ‘Russian anti-missile systems are also the best.’ you said.

      2. Yes, and it’s almost ironic that the sane people holding him back are at the Pentagon, while the State Department is a zoo of barking-mad neoconservatives obsessed with their vision of a US global monolithic domination that will last forever.
         Instead of the insane Air Force Generals Jack D. Ripper and Buck Turgidson in Kubrick’s Doctor Strangelove, we get the insane Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his supporting cast of Jake Sullivan and Victoria Nuland.
         God help us all.

         1. So far US leadership carefully avoid a direct military confrontation between US and Russia. What happens in Ukraine is a proxy war where, mostly, East Europeans are killing East Europeans. If Germans also join the meatgrinder, it will be even better for American militarists. Both world wars, what does concern Europe, had similar scenarios: Europeans were killing Europeans while Americans were making money.

            1. Yes finally someone who gets it! What our goal is to get China exhuasing it’s wealth and power in a war with Taiwan and Russia exhausting it’s wealth in a war with Ukraine, and eventually Saudi Arabia in a war with Iran for the same reason. Who will emerge powerful and victorious as after WWII? The USA, of course!

            2. It wont get to that.

      3. Nonetheless, I think it’s just as likely that Biden would authorize tactical nukes as it is that Putin would do so.

         BTW, It’s rumored that Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman will be replaced by Victoria Nuland around June 30th. Biden knows how to make sure the “right” people are around him.

         1. I don’t think it makes any sense for US to use tactical nukes against Russia. It will quick develop in a full scale nuclear war. Neither Poland nor Germany have nukes, the nukes on their territories are American, so only a one side nuclear war between Germany or Poland with Russia is possible. By the way, Russia has plenty of tactical nukes, more than any other nuclear power. Russian anti-missile systems are also the best.

            1. Well, ‘sense’ has no place in potential nuclear war…

            2. Really, the best? Is that how a rogue group of militants flew drones over the Kremilin?

            3. And got them shot down before they did any damage? you mean those drones?

            4. Those drones were launched from inside Russia. Maybe even from within Moscow. Antimissile systems made against missiles. The small drones they shoot usually with machineguns or down them with electronic warfare systems.

            5. I think it would be foolish to start a nuclear war and feel you are safe behind any type of missile defense system.

            6. To start any war is foolish and criminal.

            7. I agreed with you until the last sentence.
               Russian ABM’s are better than America’s?
               Sorry…I seriously doubt that.

         2. I don’t think it gets worse than Nuland my friend she was the catalyst of the civil war in 2014 that led to this war.

      4. So you really think that Biden is the one that has been making the decisions regarding the war and weapons? Considering Joe’s ongoing cognitive decline, I don’t believe he spends his days contemplating war. The ones behind the throne are the people giving Joe is marching orders and they don’t seem to have much concern about escalating to the point of direct confrontation between Russia and the West.

         1. No, I don’t think Biden is in charge of anything. I only reacted to a comment about the danger of “Biden using nuclear weapons”.

            1. Ok, my mistake.

4. The risk obviously is real, I’m glad he’s realizing that…. So WHY the heck are we escalating the war and increasing the risk of that happening?

   1. Better question is, why did Putin initiate the escalation by invading Ukraine?

      1. Putin is only the president. A broad team od highly capable Russians committed to what is going on in Ukraine after being poked, prodded and provoked by borrow and spend US politicians. Everything bankrupt US progressive democrats and republicans do is using money borrowed from working people.

         1. Progressive democrats have had close to zero influence in putting together budgets. Exactly zero during the Trump administration, not much more than that in Biden’s administration.

            Biden has done a masterful job of neutralizing and marginalizing progressive democrats. The star of the democratic budgets the first two years was Manchin, not Sanders.

            1. The budget measures US congress, it is no fault of Senator Sanders. Progressive democrats voted 100% for funding the US led war to break up Russia, that is the measure of their choices.

         2. The money isn’t borrowed. It’s stolen.

      2. Because, amongst other things, Kiev was mounting it’s own military invasion into the Donbass, a predominantly ethnic Russian region of Ukraine, and the prospect of ethic cleansing, at best, or outright genocide was high. Russians in Kiev were already being targeted so nothing fanciful about this.

         1. The “escalation” was the 2014 US instigated coup in Ukraine. The creation of the Donbass republics was a reaction to intervention by an outside power that installed a Russophobic regime.

            Washington DC wanted this war, thinking to return Russia to the supine status it was in the 1990’s. Didn’t work. Now, the US (NATO) has “sown the wind” and is “reaping the whirlwind”.

            1. Julio down in the schoolyard, knows all that but feigns ignorance.

      3. And why did the West not allow for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to end in late March and early April of 2022 when they decided that weakening Russia was more important than saving Ukrainian lives and stopping its destruction? Especially with the very real possibility of that deal being much better than what the eventual outcome of this war will produce.

         1. Why would in be up to “the West” to “allow” or “not allow” Russian decision-makers to reverse their decision to invade Ukraine?

            1. I didn’t say “reverse”. I said “end”.

               https://news.antiwar.com/2023/06/18/putin-shows-african-leaders-draft-treaty-on-ukrainian-neutrality-from-march-2022/

            2. There are three ways for an invasion to end.

               One is victory. But the window for a Russian victory closed a year or so ago.

               The second is getting your ass thrown out. But it seems unlikely that the Ukrainians can fully accomplish that, either.

               The third is to finally say “OK, we’re not doing this any more.” And that is a decision that is entirely in Russian hands. They may WANT something in return for doing it, but whether they get that thing or not, they can decide to go home any time they choose, and if they do there’s not a goddamn thing “the West” can do to stop them.

            3. And the fourth would be with a peace agreement. And whether or not they WANT something in return, it still would put an END to the invasion.

            4. That doesn’t even rise to cynicism.

      4. Better question is why are you here?

         1. better question, why are you so ANAL

            1. Triggered?

5. “The president previously recognized the danger of nuclear war but has done nothing to ease tensions” Dave DeCamp.

   I wonder if Putin has done anything to ease tensions.

   1. Yes, the Russian government has many peaceful diplomatic missions going world-wide ae all times.

   2. >>> “I wonder if Putin has done anything to ease tensions.”

      That statement suggests either abysmal ignorance or deplorable dishonesty.

   3. He (Russia) tried. They were rebuked by the West in late March and early April of 2022.

      1. BS. He invaded. Stop defending him so much.

         1. Don, you asked the question. I just answered it with a fact. I’m not defending anyone.

         2. You should try to comprehend the difference between legal vs illegal in domestic law as well as international law.
            I know that your comprehension of events is based on the last thing that preceded hostilities, but your deliberate obtuseness regarding the roll that history always plays in leading to conflict makes your drumbeat pretty annoying.

      2. Don just doesn’t do history. Period. He apparently believes that events erupt out of thin air.

6. Biden mumbles quite a lot of things – it’s a mystery why his incoherent ramblings are taken seriously.

7. I do believe the majority see it all so clearly, it scares me how they don’t care. The deep state keeps pushing this BS on us bc they are such cheats. Can we get our country back? Is it possible? Ukraine was set in motion years ago by Obama and scumbag Biden. Russia Russia Russia has been made to be the boogie man. Biden is a filthy corrupt traitor to the USA.

8. “Biden Says Threat of Putin Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’”

   Threat of a dictator and his criminal son ending American democracy is real. Senile angry Joey Biden is the most corrupt tyrant ever installed in the White House.

9. All proponents of nuclear deterrence doctrine – of which President Biden is one – know that the threat to use nukes is real: otherwise they would not have kept the peace, according to the theory. But nuclear weapons can’t keep the peace forever.
   https://patternofhistory.wordpress.com/

   1. What peace?

10. I suppose it shouldn’t surprise anyone if Russia gets the idea of opening a base in Cuba and putting a few nukes on the site. Considering our moves in Europe, who would blame them?

    1. Russia and China should establish bases in Cuba and help them build nuclear weapons to counter American bases near their borders. They should establish bases in Iran and help them build nuclear weapons to keep Israel and the US out of their territory.

11. ‘When it happens, and I know it will, I want to be stoned on a blue sky
    and blonde hash, the gold seal still visible…”

12. Biden Says Threat of Putin Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’

    …. And there is no threat from NATO towards Russia whatsoever…!

13. President Biden warned Monday that the threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin using tactical nuclear weapons is “real.”

    Translation: Russia is winning in Ukraine and the U.S. and NATO are planning to use tactical nuclear weapons and blame their use on Russia.

    1. It is unlikely that US will go that far. They may help Ukrainians to make a dirty nuclear bomb. Kiev regime tried it already but failed because the factory where they were making the device was destroyed by Russian missile. Also they tried to destroy a nuclear power station, but unsuccessfully.

       1. In Washington they are really crazy and criminal, they are capable to do anything. Look at the irrational offensive and the killing of the Ukrainian young lives. They can’t find enough land to bury their bodies, what is left.
          What a shame to be American now.

          1. Why should they bother about the lost of Ukrainian lives if Ukrainians themselves don’t bother about that?

             1. A tad cynical, don’t you think?…

             2. Only the corrupt war criminals in Ukraine and D.C. who benefit from the war don’t care. The Ukrainian people voted for Zelensky because he campaigned promising peace, instead, he and his neo-Nazis dumped the Minsk agreements with US consent and took the $$$ bills , what else could have motivated them to throw their nation to the wolves? The Ukrainian people did not want this war, even Zelensky was ready to end the war, but Biden said no, like Boris said, they are not ready to end the war. It is always the elite, the real war profiteers who want war for money and more power, not the people, they will be manipulated to convince themselves to want war. Why else is corporate MSM controlled and dissenting voices blocked? Western MSM is singing the same government song, in all NATO countries.

14. Joe, you are not crazy, just senile.
    There is a difference.

    1. Unfortunately, the consequences of acting under the influence of either condition are potentially disastrous. Either way, we should probably start thinking about a nice place for him to visit for a while- perhaps the rest home at Boca Del Vista.

       1. Maybe Biden was crazy first and dementia started later. He is getting worse by the day.

    2. Joe is senile and crazy.

15. I think I’d own Biden in poker.

16. Yeah.
    And the threat that the Commander-In-Chief of the most powerful military on the planet is senile…is real.

17. Bye-Done, the great peacemaker?… I’m checking out my homemade bomb shelter just to make sure that I’m fully supplied and ready for Armageddon. (I’ve been sober for almost three years but if nuclear war breaks out, I’ll be drinking Black Russians and smoking a ton of good dope…)
    Inhale……………………………………………………………………………

18. On Biden’s threat to use nukes. For the grossly unaware on this board unwittingly and lazily embarrassing themselves trafficking ignorant, ahistorical nonsense (if you’d been keeping up, none of Ritter’s exceptionally cogent exposition, pasted link below, would be totally new news to you. Try to read the whole way thru for good health, at least, even if facts can’t dent your dogmatism, like an extra dog year before the US provoked apocalypse you’ve all been clamoring for without a clue that you in fact very much are):

    https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/21/scott-ritter-on-horse-radishes-nuclear-war/

19. Great, the Dotard in Chief is surrounded by people who don’t take real risks seriously. Jesus jumping Christ, this is a terrifying little article that will be lapped of by the ownership class who already believe nothing bad can happen to them.

20. Not crazy. Just ignorant and senile.

    1. Exactly why I enjoy your posts OB1. (!)

21. Biden Says Threat of Brandon Using Tactical Nukes Is ‘Real’

Comments are closed.