Nuclear war? A person can go nuts and start shooting at an NRA convention, but Putin Inc has no death wish. Government is government ruled by thousands of top people and almost all are rich and want to live. If Putin goes nuts, he'll be arrested or killed by his own generals.

thousands of top people don't have access to block trigger in emergency situation.

I think you are saying they can afford Mutually Assured Destruction? I hope they're not that crazy.

I suppose it's monetarily/mechanically true, but it's almost like saying you can afford a new car when your life insurance pays out.

> I think you are saying they can afford Mutually Assured Destruction? I hope they're not that crazy.

Russia has been working on strategies for limited use of nuclear weapons; they don't believe in MAD. It's called Escalate to De-escalate:

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2017-02/escalate-...

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/munich-security-forum/2018/0...

https://thebulletin.org/why-russia-calls-limited-nuclear-str...

It's as crazy as it sounds; a miscalculation could destroy humanity. Consider that their ability to significantly influence foreign publics through social media could be valuable for the de-escalation portion. No doubt we'll see people claiming (false) equivalency between Russia's and the U.S.'s actions - 'they bombed Japan, we bombed Ukraine'.

The problem with logicing away MAD is that these hierarchies of power are built where it takes just one madman, not bound by logic, to decide to destroy everything. Then you pray for some breakdown in command down the chain. Dr. Strangelove and all that.

I find myself hoping that there's one person in every hierarchy who loves his (or her, for that matter) country and the world more than the leader, and is willing to execute the leader to prevent a nuclear war.

With the cults-of-personality in place throughout Russia, China, North Korea, and the US, I'm nowhere near believing that such a person is in the right place, but I suppose that's the difference between hope and fact.

I am saying that it's highly unlikely that Russia will start conventional war with NATO. On the other hand I am not so sure about NATO not starting the war with Russia. In that case it can easily escalate to MAD. I have an unsubstantiated feeling (probably too much r/worldnews) that US/EU citizens don't even think that it will escalate that far. I find this very dangerous.

Because Ukraine wasn't a member (only applied for membership, but hadn't met requirements) when "separtists" "freed" the Crimean peninsula to "protect" the Russian civilians "trapped" there. Shooting down MH17, a B777-200ER with 298 aboard, 50km over Ukraine using a SAM was provoked by NATO?

I think I have an idea of who will be invading, escalating, and hoping there won't be consequences.

Right. I mean, what happens if Russian forces get cornered, and use tactical nukes? That's how the Cuban Missile Crisis almost became WWIII. I've also read that the Soviets threatened to nuke Tel Aviv during the Six-Day War, if Israel bombed Cairo.

Russia has lots of small tactical nukes.

onetimemanytime - are you willing to make that bet ? I'm not.

If we want to postulate the geo-politics of a Russia so crazy as to launch a nuclear attack (hoping for no response), we can also look at the effects of having a Russia so reviled that they become the focus of the entire world's fear and hatred.

Would having a single known enemy make for a more unified and ultimately productive world?

Check my answer to another post of yours. I doubt Russia will launch an unprovoked nuclear attack but I would not put it behind them to escalate conventional war to nuclear if it will start going badly.