Well, sure, but the plan goes into action only after the Kremlin has done some grievous harm to US interests, e.g., by causing thousands of nuclear warheads to explode over US city centers. We shouldn't as a nation embrace some totally impractical code of ethics that even we do not follow and try to use our military forces to punish transgressions of that code as if we are the world police.
If we as a nation (the US) are going to confront nuclear powers like Moscow, shouldn't US civilians be a whole lot more prepared for a nuclear war than we actually are?
The chances of a nuclear attack are very low even if we keep on confronting Moscow, but if the very-low-probability outcome actually does come to pass, literally millions of lives would be saved by a cheap investment in readiness now.
As a sovereign nation, I believe the Kremlin has already gone too far with what has happened in Ukraine, and they could still do much worse, both in Eastern Europe and the world. The world must be prepared for what escalation comes next. Better to have a plan and not need it vs needing a plan and not having it imho.
To be clear, I do not believe this is warmongering; this is asking if and when we’ll disarm a warmonger (if at all). If the consensus is we’re going to let them run roughshod over civil society until they’re gone, them the breaks I guess.