How the United States Would Prevent a Russian Nuclear Attack on Ukraine

Check out my book "What Caused the Russia-Ukraine War": amzn.to/3HY5aqW. You can also read it for free by signing up for a Kindle Unlimited trial at amzn.to/3QMsBr8. (I use affiliate links, meaning I earn a commission when you make a transaction through them. Even if you read for free, you are still supporting the channel.)
A recurring theme throughout the war is Russian threats of nuclear weapons use. This video examines how the United States would respond to such an action. Ultimately, such an outcome is unlikely. However, the reason it is unlikely is because of the wide menu of options that Washington has available, and that Russia would be made worse off by choosing to go down one of these routes.
0:00 Lingering Russian Nuclear Threats
2:03 Rundown
3:11 Preemptive Announcement
6:10 Preemptive Strike
8:55 Interlude: Why a Crisis Is Unlikely
9:48 Do Nothing
11:26 Economic Sanctions
14:14 Expanded Military Aid
15:59 NATO Article 5 Issues
16:53 Attack Weapons Sites
19:18 Expanded Strikes
20:01 Tactical Nuclear Strike
22:34 Strategic Nuclear Strike
23:38 The Nuclear Outlook
25:29 A Chicken-Powered Nuclear Weapon
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Media licensed under GODL (data.gov.in/sites/default/fil...
By Prime Minister's Office:
pib.nic.in/newsite/photo.aspx?...
pib.nic.in/newsite/photo.aspx?...
www.pmindia.gov.in/en/image-g...
Media licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By RIA Novosti:
visualrian.ru/ru/site/gallery/...
Media licensed under CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By Kremlin.ru:
en.kremlin.ru/catalog/keywords...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
www.en.kremlin.ru/events/presi...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
www.en.kremlin.ru/events/presi...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
www.en.kremlin.ru/events/presi...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/tr...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...

[@DawnUnderHeavenA37]

I think one of the things worth mentioning is maintaining the "nuclear taboo". It's a taboo to use them because there's the assumption that any use of a nuclear weapon will be met with swift and overwhelming retaliation. If there's failure to maintain that taboo, then it increases the likelihood of *other countries* -like say China, India, or Pakistan for example- making use of nuclear weapons in future conflicts because they see that there won't be any sort of drastic retaliation for their own usage of such weapons.

[@malusignatius]

Mutually Assured Destruction's a hell of a thing after all, you'd be M.A.D. to ignore it.

[@ToaaCentral]

@@malusignatius HAHAHAHHAHA :: |

[@joduh4665]

Also the fact that risking escalation to an all out nuclear war affects EVERYONE. MAD is a bit of an understatement, GAD (globally assured destruction) seems more fitting. Like you might not give a cluck about 2 neighbors fighting about something, but when one threatens to burn down the entire neighborhood you´re going to get involved :P

[@tigoes]

It changes in regards of usa and russia. Both have capabilities in placing a big one at any point on the globe im less that 20min with almost no likelyhood of interception.Both can use hundreds of those and still maintain deterrence. Both can wipe out any other country other than usa (or russia) and go unpuniched.

[@piotrd.4850]

You seem to ignore far worse implicaton: China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel live in reality where they have ultimate get-out-of-the-jail card. That has moderating effect on their policy. Imagine, that Russia is somehow dissuaded from using nuclear weapons or - even worse - these do not work during the attempt. All of the sudden, these countries will find themselves stark naked. You know how will they respond?

[@BazzBrother]

I think the mistake here is assuming tactical strikes will be performed on military targets. They seem to enjoy using the most capable of cruise missiles to create civilian mass casualty events.

[@Silver_Prussian]

You must be braindead or your grey matter has turned into a smoothie from watching too much pro-ua garbage. The number of dead in ukriane is over 9k for almost 2 years of fighting this death toll is mainly datributed to ukriane not evacuating their citizens on time, using them as human shields and endangering them by placing military equipment and personal in populated areas. This is all well documented btw. Compare this death toll to others within the same time frame and see whos on mass killing civilians and who isnt

[@richardgray3112]

it's a very effective strategy even if it's inhumane

[@shirleywright6879]

That was what I was thinking also. They attack the people of Ukraine more then anything.

[@triedanother2107]

@@richardgray3112it’s effective for rallying the ultra nationalistic opposition in the opponents country, but in terms of military value value strikes are rarely effective

[@scorpioneldar]

if it is used on a civilian population without clear military impact then it is a strategic strike. not a tactical one. by definition a tactical nuclear strike must be aiming to achieve a decisive battlefield impact. targeting the enemy nations morale and populace are Strategic Decisions. not Tactical ones.

[@pedersackheim4913]

Once again a well-researched and narrated video. I cannot praise your work enough, Mr.Spaniel!

[@Aco747lyte]

William, you deserve an award for your writings. Never before have I listened with such interest. I bought your book, and what a very well researched and informed piece of literature. Thank you so much! ❤ 🌻

[@sleepybokchoy]

We need more lines on maps

[@terrylyn]

Luckily the game theory works in nuclear weapons because that decision is in the hands of a few, transparent enough for all players, and powerful enough that it trumps all other strategies. I think this is the key difference why there hasn't been a nuclear war but why there still are conventional wars. Compare to the recent attack by Hamas, that decision was made locally by multiple commanders, its consequences were not clear, outcome muddy, and finally the means for such attack were multiple, various vectors for delivering weapons, this kind of complex network of independent actors each having their own fog of war created the stage for a war to happen.

[@jpt3640]

Know what i do not understand? There hasn't been any "terrorist", or let's say "low budget combatant" that has pulled off a dirty bomb yet... why? There are many parties in the world that do not have any scruples.

[@triedanother2107]

@@jpt3640because dirty bomb use would draw ire from all the planet at once, without any redemption like “decolonization” narrative or “fight against the oppression” one. You use the dirty bomb, you show your true colors with earth becoming radioactive for potentially thousands of years.

[@rei1556]

​@@triedanother2107yep, or basically game theory still works for those "terorist" or "low budget bad actors" because even if they did or does try to produce a dirty bomb, the country they're hiding at or "hosting" them would do their utmost to prevent that unless that country wanted to be turn to glass because they'd earn a target from all the countries with nukes for allowing those "terorist/low budget actors" from ever making or even using one

[@jakeaurod]

I don't think it's that simple. While it's true that the scare factor of nukes is one reason why they haven't been used, too many people have concluded that this makes them psychological weapons. That's simply not the case. Nukes are good for taking out infrastructure, concentrated targets, and targets whose location is only approximately known or for which the delivery system is only approximately accurate, because "close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades"...and hydrogen bombs. Nowadays, we have precision guided munitions. So...

[@rrai1999]

@@jakeaurod They are psychological weapons. They are not and never have been deployed aside from the very early fat man and little boy that we all know. Therefore, despite their practical uses if ever deployed, they are not deployed. They will not be deployed. This makes them psychological weaponry.

[@judithcampbell1705]

Thank you William 💛 for your excellent work. You have put in a lot of time and expertise into this and I appreciate your updates and reports. I 💛 look forward to your next one!

[@AndreiMaguleanu]

Finding easter eggs in your videos is super easy, barely an inconvenience!

[@zachj7953]

Hey William, I just wanted to say that you speak/write in a way that mirrors pretty closely how I interact with the world. It is so incredibly refreshing to not have to translate other people's thoughts into something I can internalize within myself. So I suppose all I really have to say is thank you for sharing your content, it is a joy to watch and very informative. It is clear how much effort you put in and I wish you much success as a just reward for your efforts.

[@Vicesnake55555]

Hi. Thank you so much for the commentary and insights. I would love a video in which you talked about your top 10 books for recommendation. Keep up the good works!

[@bobbywesker6114]

Thanks for all your videos, William. I've found them very interesting and informative. Keep up the excellent work!

[@jmcw9632]

Agreed, WS and Peter Zeihan i like the most

[@JohnCSmith-lp1qr]

Misinformation. You ment 😂

[@BratBugarin]

The best prevention is negotiation and agreement. Conversation. Once you understand this, you will be richer for using your brain.

[@nicklindberg90]

​@@JohnCSmith-lp1qrcute 1 year old Kremlin Gremlin account Comrade! Good luck with your mobilization ;)

[@JohnCSmith-lp1qr]

@@nicklindberg90 Thank you sweetie 😘

[@tonyruggz4487]

You are an amazing guy..thanks for your perspectives in your videos. And your time.

[@artbyty]

Great info as usual. Best military videos.

[@heylolp9]

One of the most mysterious things about Russian Nuclear Arsenal usage is that Ukraine and her Supporters like the USA have to not only consider how to respond to a Strike but also what if that strike without outside influences fails Basically the question is not only if the Kremlin would push the launch buttons but also what would that really entail How many Nuclear Weapons does the Kremlin possess, How many and Which ones does the Kremlin believe are operational, How many and which are actually operational The flow chart of Procure Wepons -> Transport to Military Positions -> Use Weapons could be hampered by the same problems plaguing the conventional weapons used where the reliability is questioned by both sides, the Kremlin which sees the deficiencies of their conventional weapons even more clearly than Outside Observers or Ukraine since they have the actual stats about their own equipment, or they should Outside Observers and Ukraine meanwhile put out hypotheses on if and in which scope the same levels of corruption also impacted the nuclear arsenal and thus Russian Nuclear Readiness The Tendency to be overconfident in Russian Inability or overconfidence of Russian ability makes it hard to see at the truth which has to be somewhere in between and noone is publicly sure about what it is

[@anamationmax]

considering how their military is corrupt, an how troops and officers in it will outright sell their inventory for a quick buck. I wouldn't be too surprised if someone had sold off a nuke. it's like sitting on a gold mine. granted a dangerous one. but knowing how corrupt it is over there. there is always potential

[@BratBugarin]

The best prevention is negotiation and agreement. Conversation. Once you understand this, you will be richer for using your brain.

[@madkoala2130]

@@BratBugarin yeah, did you see what happen in 1938 with Czechoslovakia and Austria? They reached agreement and Hitler broke it 2 more times until Poland. Thats same with Putin, can you negotiate with tyrant that already broke several non-aggression agreements with Ukraine and expect him to hold next one. Negotiation is not an option if party you want to negotiate isnt trustworthy and seemed there is nothing that would unless you declare defeat.

[@hardtackbeans9790]

@@BratBugarin Gee!! How well russia agreement in '93 went to keep Ukrain sovereign. Then again in '15 after an invasion led to the brutal '22 invasion. If you use your brain, you see the moron putin has no problem kicking agreements to the curb if it suits his purpose.

[@islandwills2778]

​@@madkoala2130the western politicians have flat out admitted that Minsk 1 and 2 were signed to give Ukraine time to build an army and prepare for war. Not the actions of someone who wanted peace my friend

[@napalmholocaust9093]

The US spends 30 million each year in maintaining readiness of it's atomic stockpile. When we were gonna play till the mid-1980's it was all five thousand and some all available to use at once. I just wonder how many in russia are ready and how many have tin whiskers and zinc pest or wiring harnesses cracked apart?

[@halo129830]

Trade the million to billion and your closer

[@dylandarnell3657]

Russian tanks are breaking down because the crew sold their fuel and copper wiring for vodka. And those things were actually brought out, put on parade (well, at least before 2022), and used. The nukes very explicitly _don't_ get used or field-tested.

[@loonowolf2160]

Reduce numbers of nukes from 5.8k to 2.5k and USA can cuz from 30 billion to 20-18

[@jerbil9353]

The US spends more than 30 million dollars on shoelaces, mate. I think a nuclear stockpile is a little more expensive.

[@dylandarnell3657]

@@jerbil9353 woody_harrelson_wiping_tears_with_money.gif

[@nicktaylor8032]

Excellent upload. Well thought out and put across

[@General12th]

Hi William! These videos represent a tactical nuclear attack vector into my brain.

[@ChengZiYun]

9:06 Comparing this to the Cuban Missle crisis is still not a good thing. The Cuban missile crisis had multiple instances of only one person's decision that would have started ww3 and if this even comes close to the Cuban missle crisis then its still really freaking dangerous

[@StreetSoulLover]

History doesn't repeat itself, Historians repeat each other - AJP Taylor

[@Chiberia]

You're lumping a lot of events into the "Cuban Missile Crisis"... there were incidents like you described parallel and near in timeline to the crisis, but that doesn't make them part of the nukes on the island. That said, if there was a near launch incident from the crisis itself that occurred (and not the submarine, see before), I'd love to read up on it.

[@ChengZiYun]

@Chiberia it's still a consequence of the crisis. If the crisis did not happen then tensions would not have been so high. The soviet submarine's captain would not have thought that ww3 had already started if not for the US destroyers dropping dummy depth charges on it and that was a consequence of the blockade of Cuba which is a direct consequence of the crisis

[@prizefighter8699]

The same thing you are doingto russia now u did not eant cuba missiles but usa have missiles in europe and nato

[@casbot71]

Should Putin decide to use nukes, what will happen is the generals will ask Putin to choose the targets, and show them on a map. And the appropriate map just so happens to be on the fifth floor next to an open window. "Could you please stand over here, next to Colonel Clumsy."

[@sndchamp9949]

I think that’s a very strong possibility.

[@scotthazelton519]

Thanks for sharing

[@chesschicken1698]

Another brilliant analysis

[@why1638]

legit everybody became a war expert and a weapons expert on youtube after this war

[@kidbuu1328]

normies

[@user-gc1ky2rf3y]

Draw me like one of your French lines on maps Willo-san 😩

[@suckersupreme4380]

I really want this to be a top comment 💀

[@generalkenobi9782]

Whisper it into my ears Willo-San: maginot line ~ ❤😮‍💨

[@THE-X-Force]

First time on this channel .. nice breakdown! ☮

[@Alexandragon1]

Thx for the video!

[@kentmoroz3267]

The chit-chat from the various talking heads in the military & intelligence world is that the U.S.A. has discreetly communicated to Moscow that should it use a tactical nuke, the United States would target, with conventional weapons, any Russian military forces outside of Russia's borders. This would include any vessels in its Black Sea Fleet not in port in Russia.

[@stupidburp]

I have suggested exactly this response in comments elsewhere.

[@nemanja162]

Sounds like bs😂

[@BratBugarin]

The best prevention is negotiation and agreement. Conversation. Once you understand this, you will be richer for using your brain.

[@BratBugarin]

Black Sea is also Russian, right?

[@lukabudisavljevic8161]

The US does not recognize crimea as russian territory, so i would assume everything there would be targeted as well

[@philiptilden2318]

I suppose any reasonable response to Russia using a nuclear weapon on Ukraine would have to ensure that firstly, any benefit for the Russians in using a nuke was negated and secondly that Russia would pay a penalty for using one in the first place. So the response would ensure that not only would Russia have nothing to show for using a nuclear weapons, but that they are in a considerably worse situation from having done so.

[@user-cd3mu4bm8f]

It’s at 69 nobody else like it

[@greghight954]

@@user-cd3mu4bm8fI don’t have a clue what you are trying to say.

[@SergeyZ88]

И что они сделают? Санкции введут? Кстати, единственная страна применившая ядерное оружие это США.

[@Viktor-bb]

Россия не применить ядерное оружие а вот США вопрос

[@Viktor-bb]

​@@greghight954да, да как в оон небензя сказал слепы😂

[@Imperceptible_parachute]

Fascinating insights. Thank you.

[@jacklu8752]

Fascinating video as always!

[@Flight_of_Icarus]

I'm personally of the opinion that slapping yet more economic sanctions on Russia after the usage of a tactical nuclear weapon is very limp wristed and not a fitting response to an escalation of that gravity. I think that a more appropriate response would be a direct conventional military intervention in the war on the side of Ukraine. Maybe that doesn't have to mean NATO ground soldiers marching into the country, maybe it means intervention via the air war, with no strikes on Russia itself. Maybe that means striking Russian targets inside Ukraine, including Crimea. It would mean Americans and Russians shooting at each other, which is a step never reached in the Cold War, but tactical nukes weren't a step reached either.

[@SergeyZ88]

Вот мне интересно. Кто ты вообще? Ты готов умереть за Украину? Ты знал, где она находится на карте до войны? Ты понимаешь, что атака российских войск американцам это объявление войны со всеми вытекающими последствиями включая обоюдные ядерные удары? Неужели ты думаешь, что правительствам западных стран не плевать на Украину и они не будут погибать за неё. Почему они до сих пор не вступили в войну?

[@Viktor-bb]

От этих санкций Европа теряет иглы и кнопки смешно😂

[@Thepuffingyank]

if one of those landmines had gone off, would it be safe to say that would be a major cock up?

[@REVOLVER_NOIR]

Excellent work here!

[@RobertReg1]

Great talk as always

[@AnP865]

I think the Israel situation already has quietened down somewhat in terms of media intensity. Maybe it will flare up but it seems attention will be going back to Ukraine.

[@davidiceberg2744]

Nah, it's gonna be US vs Iran next and possibly US. vs China after when they decide to create a blockade around Taiwan. Also the US presidential elections are coming soon, so the federal government needs to start any new wars before the election so the candidates can campaign on ending the war, but being unable to do it because the genie is already out of the lamp

[@dogechrist]

Hmm interesting take. I think it’s more likely that Ukraine gets 20-40% less funding this winter, and even less next spring. Russia is only increasing their war budget.

[@wadahmohamed975]

Indeed, israel is really pushing it's luck this time The big media would stop covering their traces before losing all legitimacy

[@realtruth4804]

Ukraine has disappeared into the background, not just because of war in Gaza, its also because the US don't want to broadcast the embarrassment of failure (again)

[@forgottenfamily]

I'm curious about one option: a no fly zone (either pre-emptive or responsive) over Ukraine ostensibly as a way to intercept nuclear launches but you could imagine it scaling up to shooting down any Russian missiles or, as we saw in Libya, performing some CAS support. Is this even feasible and if implemented, would it be effective?

[@lolmaker777]

A no fly zone has all the same downsides it had at the start of the war. with questions like "What -if- when a plane with a US pilot gets shot down?".

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

If you going to do a no-fly-zone, you might as well go full conventional. It has all the same risks except the latter is far more effective response. Only reason why no-fly-zone is useful is for asymmetric targets where it is easily enforceable without escalation.

[@piotrd.4850]

There's no way to realistically implement it. Iraq was far smaller country and more favourably placed, with Coallition having twice number of aircraft than European NATO has altogether.

[@piotrd.4850]

@@neurofiedyamato8763 Nah. Russia would just have to sit and wait for month, until cost of sustaining such monstrous operation in terms of money, men and machine fatique and expenditure of fuel puts operation to standstill.

[@Omega0850]

It would be a declaration of war against Russia, which would almost certainly escalate into a nuclear war. I don´t see how this would help anyone. We should help Ukraine by providing weapons as we do, and - in my opinion - we should donate lets say 10 nuclear weapons to Ukraine. There are way too many idiots in Russia which think that they can nuke Kiev and Nato just wouldn´t react. We have to show them that this is not the case.

[@b.griffin317]

Thanks for serving our as generation's Herman Khan. More rational thought about 'the unthinkable' is necessary than ever to properly navigate these perilous historical waters and not have our thoughts be clouded by irrational emotionalism.

[@creepinasicrawl]

My boi coming thru wit dem lines on da maps

[@mogreen19]

"Frolic around & find out" - I'm dead

[@TheSkyGuy77]

Lmao

[@Arccosyne]

Quality content

[@crissdizick9403]

Not his content. Made by another creator.

[@Arccosyne]

@@crissdizick9403 Who?

[@crissdizick9403]

@Arccosyne Perun is the name, I think. He releases one video a week. Excellent content put out by him. I watch him every Sunday.

[@crissdizick9403]

@@Arccosyne Yes, Perun is the original creator. We'll worth your time to look at his analysis.

[@Arccosyne]

@@crissdizick9403 I am subscribed to both. I dont see what you mean. They're similar sure, but I dont think the content is the same.

[@Khal_Rheg0]

Thank you!

[@ArsenicShooter]

Wow I like what you do , it is really instructive !

[@misstruly5482]

I still think this is predicated upon Putin being a rational actor... and I'm not definitely not convinced of that. As in, I'm not sure we can assume deterrence would be effective, nor the promise that India/China would stop buying oil. And I'm not sure they even would stop buying oil, especially when China is completely energy-dependent.

[@noregerts8038]

There is a dangerous assumption that nuclear strikes will solely be used against military targets and not on civilians like against Kyiv. While still as unlikely as a tactical nuclear strike it is something to consider.

[@walentystankiewicz8486]

The last two nuclear strikes were used against civilians. It is easy to deliver this kind of blow.

[@peterchampagne4079]

Good job thanks😎

[@desgoulding7154]

Very informative video.

[@richdobbs6595]

I think an economic quarantine would be the most like response, perhaps with dunking of the Kerch Strait Bridge and sabotage of the TurkStream pipeline. Seizing of oil bound to China and India equal to their imports of Russian hydrocarbons. Ramped up delivery of long range weapons to make the land bridge to Crimea infeasible.

[@Silver_Prussian]

You already imposed an economic quarantine, it didnt work. The bridge was attacked several times with only two times being damaged with minor injuries, repaired in record time. Sabotaging this pipeline openly or even discretely will be a disaster for the western world as they might lose an important ally in the face or turkey. Really I cant express how happy I am for the useful idiots who want to expel turkey from nato, if such idiots are present in all the important places, it would be like giving the russian bear a chainsaw. If you think you can order around countries like China and especialy India (who's an friend the west can lose real quick with such attitude) you are delusional.

[@triedanother2107]

There are still hundreds of companies making business as usual with Russia, and I doubt they will after nuclear aggression.

[@billwilliamson1506]

It would take a huge effort of multiple countries to corral Russian export efforts, as any successful shipment will be made as a triumph, no matter how small. Russia would form a culture of resistance and retreat within themselves and be further isolated as a result, counter productive to US interests. Efforts should be made to and only to bring Russia into a global community and unify them with Europe while hampering their more conservative base. Russia still views itself as a major power (in many ways above China) and so it will not go down without a fight nor a whimper

[@richdobbs6595]

@@billwilliamson1506 You don't seem to realize how bad Russia's geography is. It has only a few sea ports, many of which are far distant from potential customers. And by applying secondary sanctions those customers could be dissuaded from purchases. Russia has always had a culture of resistance, so that wouldn't change. We are talking about a response to a tactical nuke, for god sake!

[@bluemarlin8138]

@@billwilliamson1506It would actually be quite easy to strangle Ruzzian oil and gas exports (and really, most of its sea trade), because the vast majority goes through the Black and Baltic Seas, and NATO controls the entrances. Even if you didn’t blockage Murmansk and Vladivostok (which the US definitely could do), it would cripple Ruzzia’s economy and ability to finance the war, because most of its income is from oil and gas. It would take years for Ruzzia to shift its infrastructure to compensate, but even then, it could never fully do it. Ruzzia simply can’t export enough through pipelines to come anywhere close to what it can export via ship. And bringing other heavy items like ores, timber, and grain across land in large quantities is cost-prohibitive. Ruzzia has always been a prisoner of its geography. The quest for more ports, along with a bloodthirsty culture derived from hundreds of years of Mongol occupation, has been the driving force behind Ruzzian imperialism for 500 years. Ruzzia may think it’s still a superpower (and it never was without the rest of the USSR), there’s no reason we should indulge its delusions. Ruzzia needs to be forced to realize its place.

[@olavl8827]

Good video, again. I do worry sometimes about how far this current war could get out of hand. It's good to be reminded about the unlikeliness of global nuclear war. Thank you. The following is not a fatal error in the video but it struck me as incredibly US-centric. That's probably understandable since you're American, but I feel I must point this out: 9:05: "We have already referenced the Cuban Missile Crisis twice here. That process began with the Soviet Union deploying nuclear weapons to Cuba." The acute crisis (the one that nearly escalated) certainly did start with the Soviets placing nuclear missiles on Cuba. But the process as such, that led to that crisis, began a bit earlier. I'm sure you are aware. The US were deploying their own nuclear weapons, threatening the USSR, to Italy and Turkey in the year prior. Also, there were ongoing American hostile actions at the time against the Cuban revolution: Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose, all kinds of terrorism and assassinations etc. The CIA even went so far as to ally themselves with the Mafia to try to get rid of the Castro regime and reinstate neocolonial rule over Cuba. So there was recklessness and criminal behaviour on all sides. The missiles did not appear there just for nothing. People might forget all that when you casually say "That process began with the Soviet Union deploying nuclear weapons to Cuba." It's like saying that the war between Israël and Hamas only started with the horrible attacks by Hamas on 7 october. Or that the war in Ukraine only started on 24 feb. 2022. These large conflicts were all years, sometimes decades in the making.

[@fencserx9423]

Deterrence is not stopping an action from happening. It’s making it VERY VERY clear how you will respond to a certain action so that they chose otherwise

[@trueriver1950]

Loved the menu options for lines on maps or French Fries

[@cockatoo010]

I guess that the announcement (and first use) of ATACMS in Ukraine happened while you were reaserching this, right?

[@GenPatton0043]

just a quick note in regards to hitting the Russians on Ukrainian soil with a tactical nuke, there would be little to no radiation contamination from a US strike. The US would, without a doubt, use an airburst detonation as they produce virtually zero fallout. Now, the Russian's may use a ground burst which could potentially create significant radiation exposure. (But militarily, that doesn't make a lot of sense for them either.)

[@nothanks9503]

Bioweapons make way more sense

[@angis888]

​@@nothanks9503bio weapons would bring a lot worse reaction then even tactical nuke....I mean...who d fuk would be goong along with that? Kim Yong bro maybe...thats it

[@Kannot2023]

​@@nothanks9503look at corona virus, it was not very effective

[@BratBugarin]

The best prevention is negotiation and agreement. Conversation. Once you understand this, you will be richer for using your brain.

[@BratBugarin]

@@nothanks9503 The best prevention is negotiation and agreement. Conversation. Once you understand this, you will be richer for using your brain.

[@victoriahigman6802]

Thanks

[@Gametheory101]

Thank you!

[@echo_9835]

How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb, with Dr. Spaniel.

[@eduardbeeken5299]

Wie met het zwaard omgaat zal er zelf mee sterven. Grjs.

[@EPFForsyth]

WTH are you talking about, there is no break through...The Ukraine is losing the battle of attrition...With no realistic gains, since June.

[@julianmerkle6880]

Very good video

[@kwazar6725]

Good analysis and fair representation

[@Chrishelmuth1978]

Around 12:05-12:10, did he claim the US used nukes defensively? Really? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 100% offensive use of atomic weapons.

[@stevecomstock3563]

True so what we did what we had to do. We were tired of war.

[@LewisPulsipher]

Wouldn't a reasonable response be for the USA to wipe out as much of the Black Sea Fleet as possible (conventional weapons only)? Affects the Ukraine war directly, indicates what more can happen if Russia uses yet another nuke, is not nuclear, does not threaten civilians (depending on how hard the naval bases are hit). Russia can be warned that this will happen, and then carrying it out, with further warning of what will happen next, must convince the Russians to stop using nukes.

[@richardgray3112]

Russia would likely attack nato targets in europe or in the u.s.

[@Chiberia]

Pretty sure this is what most of the intelligence community thinks has already been communicated to Putin

[@billwilliamson1506]

That among basically any military target being up for grabs. Putin I think is aware of these signals and is trying to prevent an Iraq scenario

[@danielxbox28]

you think that wouldn't spark a bigger Nuclear war? People really dont think

[@goglebert]

you are pretty naive in idea that some military losses may convince kremlin to any deescalation in case of nuclear weapons would be used already.

[@Iamthelolrus]

I like to think that instead of traditional grease, the blue peacock bomb used butter for lubricant.

[@CaptainPepega]

It's crazy how the U.S. is the only thing holding the western world together 😯

[@fuzzyspackage]

👍💪🫡🫶

[@Mud_AleX]

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@davidbanner6230]

@@Mud_AleX The West should put the Russian Oligarchs under pressure by asking them ‘If push came to shove’ would they support Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons? Meaning would they be prepared to risk the annihilation of themselves and their families for Putin’s madness…? With the underlying threat of what would we do if they were willing take such a risk?

[@tigerjongreen]

You are simply the best in terms of political/ military analysis. Many thanks.

[@purplecat4977]

That frolic around/find out graph made me laugh so loud that I freaked out my cat. The comic timing on that was perfect.

[@tyllerboomgaarden7344]

What happens if an embassy gets hit with a nuke as well?

[@jakeaurod]

Thanks for taking a serious look at nuclear options. So many people assume it can't happen because MAD and "if one goes they all go", because they read it on the back of a cereal box or something. I think the cross-domain response makes the most sense. In a way, that's the crux of the problem. Even a "tactical" nuke used on the battlefield would mostly try to serve a strategic function of scaring people into fearing further escalation. However, using conventional arms to sink the Russian Black Sea Fleet would call Putin's bluff and be the geopolitical equivalent of "Cool story, Bruh." That being said, I still see nuclear war as a possibility, because using a "tactical" nuke on the battlefield might not be a bluff. Putin might want the USA and NATO, et al. to attack Russia, conventionally or nuclearly, to give Russia a _casus belli_ for attacking the west directly. This may sound ridiculous to some, but Putin may conclude that the West might have more to lose than Russia and that Russia can better weather a nuclear war and subsequent degradation to its industrial base and economy. With the damage from sanctions and re-armament of the West, Putin may see Russia slipping further and further behind and out of parity, and conclude that a wider nuclear exchange would bring Russia back into parity. If I remember my International Relations courses, war is an exercise in Realism, and that theory sees countries seeking relative advantage even at the expense of absolute benefits. Like Satan said in Paradise Lost, "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."

[@GeekfromYorkshire]

A nuclear weapon is a delicate thing, it requires sub-critical masses to come together under precise timing. The two bombs dropped on Japan had been carefully assembled at 1g by experts, placed carefully on a slowly taking off bomber, slightly over 1g then experienced 0g-1g til it detonated. A rocket is not a gentle thing. It's one thing to demonstrate a rocket. It's another thing to demonstrate a static nuclear detonation, or dropping from a bomber. It's an entirely different order of required reliability to put a nuclear weapon on a rocket. If someone attempted a first-strike you'd get some weapons who detonate near you, some who detonate at the wrong place and some which don't work at all (and so become a dirty bomb). And Russia has not been maintaining it's weapons.

[@user-wp6ik8si8v]

You forgot one thing. When a man comes to the end of the road , when a man finds his back against the wall he may give up and may even take away his life - Hitler - But there may be others how will think die and let's die - others how will say to hell with all of you and press the button. Not all of us will sit and weigh the option at that critical moment. I don't know if you factored that in your assumptions. There are always the -come what may people don't forget.

[@amsalkhan4754]

8:52 #whereputin found him behind the letter m in the sign

[@AchyutChaudhary]

5:10 I think that’s the best option, considering that the 2 Asian Giants 🇨🇳🇮🇳 are the only ☢️ Nuclear Powers to have adopted a ‘No First-Use’ policy for their Arsenals (perhaps as they’re literally home to over 1/3rd of Humanity between themselves 😅). Nice video & keep up the good work btw!! 👍

[@nothanks9503]

But regardless of policy they can both just do what they feel like anyway Policy means nothing from Asian countries they are authoritarian and thus can’t be trusted

[@spectrumboy5992]

​@@nothanks9503while this is true but dont consider other western countris as any saints. They have their equal share of evil.

[@braedanquigley7500]

@@nothanks9503India is literally the largest democracy in the world what are you yapping about bro

[@BratBugarin]

The best prevention is negotiation and agreement. Conversation. Once you understand this, you will be richer for using your brain.

[@treetop5752]

We already gave them ATACMS, Brilliant Research

[@johnfinkbiner3599]

Any viewers who think that Blue Peacock was a weird idea should look up project Orion. Oh,and also the Davy Crocket infantry weapon which was actually deployed. There’s no cold war craziness like US cold war craziness.

[@AFistfulOf4K]

Before escalating to strategic nuclear strikes they could target Russia's navy in international waters and/or their military presence abroad (like in Africa) in a way that was impossible to decisively prove who is responsible.

[@Silver_Prussian]

You assume they would sit and do nothing when they have the means to retaliate and what makes you think they wont use tactical warheads on the us navy and use bases. Not only that the us does not have bases exactly everywhere.

[@panan7777]

​@@Silver_Prussian And then suddenly ALL of their submarines vanish?

[@AFistfulOf4K]

@@Silver_Prussian Sometimes accidents happen, like that Chinese sub.

[@briant5685]

which hollywood movie is that..??

[@theo1216]

Z heads talking about nuking countries as if its some genius military tactic, not realizing Russia would be turned into a wasteland with retaliatory strikes.

[@aar0n709]

Retaliation from whom? Most Europe doesn’t have it especially not Ukraine.

[@theo1216]

@@aar0n709 Where tf did you get that information? That statement is so stupid I'm having a hard time deciding if you're trolling or just incredibly misinformed.

[@mukkah]

8:20 aawwww that's so cute you put JT up there like any nation gives a p00p about canadas opinions hehe ^_^' Love the vid and appreciate the effort it takes to make this content (keeping the script working n' alive for over a year is dedication to your channel, bro) ~a random canadian viewer dude

[@AugustoNizzoMcIntosh]

It is time for you to write a new book. I bought it and read it already.

[@Jonathan_Strange]

What about US invasion of *Kaliningrad* in response to Russia launching a Tactical Nuclear Missile?

[@aar0n709]

Russia has nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad

[@Jonathan_Strange]

@@aar0n709 🤷 and so? Are you saying it's even more reason for Kaliningrad to be overwhelmed?

[@oldworldpatriot8920]

Step 1: literal thoughts and prayers Step 2: revisit old Fallout New Vegas infrastructure planning

[@kingace6186]

Today, I learned that the Cuban Missile Crisis had a casualty. Seasoned U-2 pilot, United States Air Force Major Rudy Anderson.

[@JinKee]

Is Putin still alive right now or have his health problems caught up with him?

[@nic0fpvnicolas606]

19:17 that screen showing the "top" command running, as an image for cyber war is hilarious

[@bollywoodsongs751]

As an indian I can say this person is intellectual than most of the western media

[@mikeswiental4815]

As Russia has stated and we all know to be true= Russia will not be using nukes unless NATO gets directly involved and also threatens Russian territory- so this "hysteria" driven video is done out of desperation now that Russia is winning the war.

[@0816M3RC]

You believe Russia? 😂😂😂😂 Also Russia can't even take Avdiivka.. so how are they winning the war?

[@teresadeacon7667]

@@0816M3RC You still laughing! Prehaps not.

[@JoeyBlogs007]

One option is to back Ukraine even more, as stated in the video.

[@JoeyBlogs007]

Allow Ukraine to deal with the Russian navy.

[@JoeyBlogs007]

Effectively nullifying it as an offensive fighting force.

[@justadddiesel]

When are you going to make an audio version of your book?

[@victoriahigman6802]

I think you’re brilliant and funny mr.Spaniel

[@LewisPulsipher]

An all-Russia blockade is another possible response. That would put the teeth in economic sanctions that are not present now. And much more swiftly doom the Russian economy. And if there was some fighting on the high seas, again minimal damage to civilians.

[@Gr8putin]

Their subs will be sitting idle ? Isn’t blockade considered act of war internationally ? Russia is stretched from pacific to black sea. Blockade will thin out us naval forces china can take advantage of it

[@goenzoy]

Just wonder how you want to police it.Lot of trade of Russia goes to China as well with a 4000 km long border

[@NmaeUnavailablesigh]

How do you plan to do that on Russia land borders?

[@LewisPulsipher]

@@goenzoy Russia's exports and imports reach it by sea and by pipelines. Pipelines to Europe can be stopped. You cannot stop trade with China, but that trade, by land, is really minor. We are STILL in an age when water transport far outweighs land transport.

[@Mastercane98]

Logic 404. Wake up lewis, you are daydreaming again. I wonder how can old people who have lived through different conflicts can be this clueless.

[@martinbarford]

a lot of sense here

[@yabutmaybenot.6433]

Needs more lines on maps. I need my fix William.

[@romach1647]

another blah blah?

[@queenbrightwingthe3890]

Your brain goes blah blah.

[@killingmasheen]

A nuclear detonation wouldn't just have an effect on the immediate target area but the atmosphere as a whole as the fallout plumes circle the planet irradiating far away countries across the globe. Even if it's well within radiation exposure limits, the crackle of the geiger counters going off when yesterday they hadn't would quickly begin to make people believe they too were attacked.

[@user-ug2yv1hs7q]

But all we're doing now is thinking and by that nothing is being done....we must fight unconditionally

[@PavelMosko]

And this is where it does not make sense for us to fight a proxy war with Russia. In the unlikely event Ukraine does begin to win, there is more temptation to escalate on the Russia's side. And none of this benefits the American people. Infact, the push to advance NATO eastward for the last 20 years does not make sense, when you see how little the other NATO members pay for their defense compared to the United States.

[@Qwerty-jy9mj]

The results speak for themselves, then again at the time the alternative would have been to allow them to become Russian satellites

[@markmuriithi]

The US gains access to the countries. She can station military bases and even nukes in these countries. This allows US to project power better, both militarily and diplomatically. Even if, those countries devoted a substantial part of their budget to the military. It would be insignificant compared to the US budget.

[@lifedecoded9842]

"us" OK mr Pavel Mosko, dude named like someone roleplaying a KGB spy...

[@agentorange9867]

Lol, "Pavel Mosko" Try harder next time

[@gabrielclark1425]

I makes sense though if you're a politician taking bribes from foreign interests!

[@LprogressivesANDliberals]

How many air defense do we have? Tbh I think we are pretty open and if a coordinated attack happened we won’t stop more than half

[@martingrzanna2005]

those lines on maps jokes in the vid I´m dying 😂😂😂

[@Misiulo]

You know about that US observing capabilities. We were led to believe that not even a fly can fart in Gaza without Mossad knowing and look what just happened. So it makes me wonder.

[@Red-Magic]

16:53 Your timing is impeccable. We just got another example of a US retaliatory strike on a weapon site this Friday

[@ioannestheiberian3955]

"we'll meet again! Don't know where, don't know when! But I'll know we'll meet again, some sunny day!"

[@machdaddy6451]

Great dissertation. Seems Is like evryone is promoting a book?

[@channelshmanel9882]

Using a tactical nuke would be the dumbest thing Russia could do. Ordinary people around the world would absolutely freak out, and demand an extremely strong reaction, regardless of politics or any other factors. The condemnation of Russia would be universal. Support for Ukraine would be ramped up by a factor of 10 while simultaneously the sanctions against Russia would be taken to the most extreme possible level. Any country violating the sanctions would find themselves the subject of similar extreme sanctions. No one would have anything to do with Russia or her oil. Russia would quickly find itself having to decide between complete governmental reformation, or mass starvation.

[@bponterci]

Interesting.

[@AymanKhan]

13:29 I would feel that $100 billion is mere pennies when it comes to the question of retaliatory measures FOR A NUKE, but I also remember that as per Iraq's Saddam, his cassus belli for invading Kuwait was their withholding of $1Bil of a $10Bil compensation package negotiated by Bush Sr. for Kuwait slant drilling.

[@scottsmith7051]

plucking nightmares !,