I saw some people in the Ukraine megathread advocating for Russia to not launch the nukes in return if America were to nuke them, and it's scaring me the fuck out rn.
If whole premise of MAD is that a nuclear first strike, while killing your enemies, would be suicide. The whole premise is that of a Mexican standoff where if one party shoots, the other shoots also.
The suicidal nature of a nuclear first strike is the only thing keeping the world from nuclear devastation rn.
Please don't fucking advocate for victims of an American nuclear first strike to not retaliate.
(BTW, America is the only power who hasn't relinquished their right to a first strike anyways)
The only way the concept of a "red line" works is if you actually do pull the trigger when it is crossed
If you don't, your opponent now knows you were always bluffing. The equation actually becomes much much less stable because it's now completely unpredictable what actions would provoke a decisive response.
This is why my personal nightmare scenario for this war is if Russia utilizes a tactical nuclear weapon against an exclusively military target in Ukraine. Such an action would beg a response by the West in some way, but since the use of such a weapon wouldn't be targeted against NATO forces, it's completely unpredictable how the West would actually respond. But if it doesn't respond, it gives Russia a free hand to use more tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, and even worse would open Pandora's Box regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons by any nation.
Hmm. It sounds like one solution to this scenario would be for Ukraine and any other state fearful of such a tactical strike to form some sort of defensive alliance. Of particular value would be one which includes powers capable of delivering a commensurate retaliatory strike. If only such a treaty organization were already present in the region 😟
that's exactly how we got here though