This is pretty much the definition of “Kremlinology.” Let’s turn the sound off and theorize based on some old man’s twitching…
When twitching of an old man is what you have for data, then Kremlinology is what you get.
Looking at the transcript, turning the sound off and watching Putin twitch is more productive. Second paragraph in, he’s already blustering about sham referendums being “people have made their choice”. A US president couldn’t lie that much – the snickers from the audience would drown them out.
“For those interested, the best way to prevent the use of nukes and escalation is to emphasize preparedness. Not on the Federal level, but to show that State and local governments have taken steps to ensure continuity of government and services. ”
This is good advice but I don’t think it is a deterrent.
It looks like Putin wants his land bridge to Crimea and had he done this a month or two ago and then asked for peace, he might have got it. Now? Doesn’t look like Ukraine will stop and wont be pressured that much by the West to do so because Russia has shown themselves to be too weak. The tradeoffs between letting the war go on vs ending it quickly have changed.
The challenge is in ending the war without Putin acting out of spite and in preparing counters should he do so.
This is good advice but I don’t think it is a deterrent.
The Swiss have this in spades. Of course the Swiss don’t posses nuclear weapons either, so I have to agree with your assessment.
Should Putin strike with a ‘tactical’ nuke, there is a lot we can do in response that is non-nuclear. A lot.
Nor do I think Xi would sit still for having a major trading partner in the EU carved up with destroyed infrastructure and/or drifting radioactivity.
This is pretty much the definition of “Kremlinology.” Let’s turn the sound off and theorize based on some old man’s twitching…
When twitching of an old man is what you have for data, then Kremlinology is what you get.
Looking at the transcript, turning the sound off and watching Putin twitch is more productive. Second paragraph in, he’s already blustering about sham referendums being “people have made their choice”. A US president couldn’t lie that much – the snickers from the audience would drown them out.
“For those interested, the best way to prevent the use of nukes and escalation is to emphasize preparedness. Not on the Federal level, but to show that State and local governments have taken steps to ensure continuity of government and services. ”
This is good advice but I don’t think it is a deterrent.
It looks like Putin wants his land bridge to Crimea and had he done this a month or two ago and then asked for peace, he might have got it. Now? Doesn’t look like Ukraine will stop and wont be pressured that much by the West to do so because Russia has shown themselves to be too weak. The tradeoffs between letting the war go on vs ending it quickly have changed.
The challenge is in ending the war without Putin acting out of spite and in preparing counters should he do so.
This is good advice but I don’t think it is a deterrent.
The Swiss have this in spades. Of course the Swiss don’t posses nuclear weapons either, so I have to agree with your assessment.
Should Putin strike with a ‘tactical’ nuke, there is a lot we can do in response that is non-nuclear. A lot.
Nor do I think Xi would sit still for having a major trading partner in the EU carved up with destroyed infrastructure and/or drifting radioactivity.