I do too. This is being played tactically rather than strategically. The knife of thermonuclear war will still be there in 5 years and in 50 years. If we cave to it, we lose in the long term:

- Russia will do whatever it wants, until it crosses a line where we're drawn into WWIII; or - Other countries develop nuclear programs, if it gives a carte blanche to do anything they want

Belarus is going nuclear, thanks to our (lack of) reaction. That's just a start of what's coming.

Whether Putin launches nukes is up to Putin. It might be a bluff. It might not be. If it's not a bluff, we'll get to that point soon enough....

I honestly don’t see the strategic value in launching a 1st strike for an altercation outside your own territory. If Putin wants territory or a legacy, launching nukes is a failure because:

1) no one is around to care, or those that survived will always hate you

2) you end up destroying the very territory you wanted

But then again, you’re only wrong once.

1) Putin is crazy enough to launch nukes; and 2) that Russian nukes work in the first place

Which decision is more likely to trigger Putin to launch nukes is still an open question.

My tactical analysis says appeasement is most likely to avoid nukes tomorrow. My strategic analysis says that containment is the right strategy to avoid nukes in my lifetime. Aggression can't be rewarded.