Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(143,020 posts)
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 05:34 PM Nov 10

NATO Military Chief Says Troops Would Be on Ground if Not for Russian Nukes

Source: Newsweek

Published Nov 10, 2024 at 10:24 AM EST | Updated Nov 10, 2024 at 1:55 PM EST


NATO troops would be on the ground in Ukraine fighting Russian forces if Moscow did not have nuclear weapons, the head of the alliance's military committee has said.

"I am absolutely sure if the Russians did not have nuclear weapons, we would have been in Ukraine, kicking them out," Admiral Rob Bauer, the outgoing chief of NATO's Military Committee, said during an appearance at the IISS Prague Defence Summit in the Czech Republic on Sunday.

Russia has the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, followed closely by the U.S.' nuclear arsenal. Combined, Moscow and Washington control around 90 percent of the nuclear weapons across the globe.

As Moscow's troops poured into Ukraine in late February 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin placed his country's nuclear deterrence forces on high alert. Months later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the risks of nuclear conflict had become "considerable."

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/nato-russia-nuclear-weapons-ukraine-ground-troops-rob-bauer-1983425

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

dutch777

(3,504 posts)
1. Don't need NATO troops on the ground....loan the Ukrainians the NATO air forces for a couple of weeks.
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 05:53 PM
Nov 10

Would make Russian positions in Ukraine untenable. No resupply, no safe havens out of range, no hope. Don't have to cross the border into Russia. Issue would be Russians and Belorussian air defense units based on their soil. Could be very transparent upfront that this will be a conventional intervention to restore internationally agreed to borders. Give the Russians two weeks to withdraw. Just like Iraq in Kuwait. Putin could start with nukes but he knows he is dead if he does. I know, super scary, super risky but allowing Putin a win sends him, Xi and Kim Jong Un encouragement to take risks that will be even more to deal with.

Irish_Dem

(58,360 posts)
2. NATO is quick to make their lame excuses for not helping Ukraine.
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 06:05 PM
Nov 10

US military and intel services have said over and over Putin will not use nukes.
The US and NATO know that.

But it has been a convenient excuse to refuse to help Ukraine.

Irish_Dem

(58,360 posts)
4. NATO only helped because Biden twisted their arms.
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 06:20 PM
Nov 10

France and Germany were deep in bed with Putin and his oil deals.
Biden had to shame them into helping Ukraine.

US military knows the US has not really wanted Ukraine to win the war.
Dragged their feet and only gave them enough to keep the war going.
Not to win it.

US goal was to deplete Russian resources over the long haul.
Ukraine civilian and military deaths were just collateral damage in that goal.

So now it is too late. NATO is obviously making excuses for not helping much any more.
It is over.

ananda

(30,848 posts)
6. So, what do you think the real reason is?
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 07:04 PM
Nov 10

Doesn't NATO have a lot invested in keeping Ukraine free
or are they worried that Putin will attack them, even if
not with nukes?

Nasruddin

(855 posts)
11. Indirect message
Mon Nov 11, 2024, 01:12 AM
Nov 11

This is an indirect way of saying that Ukraine needs to come up with its own nuclear deterrant.

ananda

(30,848 posts)
15. And it would do that how?
Mon Nov 11, 2024, 10:24 AM
Nov 11

I do not see that happening.

And I think the USA will help
in no way whatsoever.

FakeNoose

(35,816 posts)
5. Those nuclear warheads haven't been tested or maintained since the 1990's
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 06:29 PM
Nov 10

Who knows if they even work? They probably don't. But it's a dare that NATO leaders don't want to risk. It's not worth lives in case the Russians decide to strike with nukes. So NATO is being extremely cautious, until they know more.


grandpamike1

(204 posts)
9. Bull
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 08:40 PM
Nov 10

That is the lamest response ever, especially from NATO. Russia’s is not the only Country with nukes.if he ever used one, his entire Country would be evaporated. FAFO.

Gore1FL

(21,935 posts)
10. As long as NATO continues to support Ukraine we should be good.
Sun Nov 10, 2024, 11:00 PM
Nov 10

While Iam concerned about the U.S.'s support, I hope Europe continues theirs.

mdbl

(5,488 posts)
12. Even Russia isn't stupid enough to make land they are trying to occupy uninhabitable
Mon Nov 11, 2024, 06:32 AM
Nov 11

which is what nukes would cause.

BumRushDaShow

(143,020 posts)
13. One would think so..
Mon Nov 11, 2024, 09:11 AM
Nov 11

But then they are the same country that sent troops with all kinds of vehicles including tanks, into the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, after they "captured" the still-melting-down-after-38-years-nuclear-plant, where they were digging trenches to secure the area.



(as a note, there is a fine layer of soil over highly-contaminated ground, so there are special roads built for traversing the area and going off-road can stir up that layer and release radiation into the air)



Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»NATO Military Chief Says ...