Comment by jagrsw
6 days ago
Turning the Baltic into a "NATO lake" by controlling the Finland-Estonia strait would be an interesting idea, especially now with Finland and Sweden in the alliance. Effectively limiting Russian naval access from St. Petersburg (except for civilian traffic, subject to inspection) would certainly boost regional security.
Article on this recently: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2024/7/10/b...
An effective retaliation option, I guess kept in reserve, "just in case" retaliation is needed.
The Russians hate this and will do sneaky stuff to counter this.
> The Russians
I know it's a mental shortcut and if we wanted to be precise it would quickly become unwieldy so just a quick note, also to self, that the Russians I know don't have and don't want to have anything to do with this, are fed up with what is going on and just want to live in peace.
As a Pole by birth, I'm undoubtedly biased. However, it's not as simple as "Putin wants war, despite opposition from most Russians." Living near the USSR border and within the Soviet sphere of influence taught me that a vast majority of Russians prioritize a strong, assertive nation, often placing societal and economic development lower on their list of needs. If that means occasional invasions and killings, it's part of the game.
Putin may achieve 80%+ support through rigged elections, but even without rigging, it's likely 60%+. So, it's not a simple dichotomy of the Russian people versus Putin - it's more complex.
That said, I also have Russian friends (many now former Russians) who passionately hate the current government and condemn its actions.
9 replies →
[dead]
Russia has already anticipated this problem and updated their nuclear doctrine to include nuclear first use also against countries that would "isolate" Russian territory (Presumably thinking of Crimea and Kaliningrad).
Edit: Not sure what the downvote is. It's factually true. I don't think that necessarily means it's a bad idea or that it's a red line that should be observed when all other red lines are obviously illusions.
Russian nuclear doctorine is just words on paper and doesn't mean anything. Their nuclear doctorine already allows them to nuke any NATO country at will because "any attack by a non-nuclear power (Ukraine) supported by a nuclear power (US, UK, France) would be considered a joint attack" and "any attack by one member of a military bloc would be considered an attack by the entire alliance". And even if they didn't, there's no actual opposition that could prevent changing the doctorine as they wish.
TBF, the pieces you mention was just added some weeks ago in what parent refers to by "their updated nuclear doctrine".
It feels really meaningless to talk about "Russia" like this when in reality it's just Putin and his personal discretion, not "Russian nuclear doctrine". It's a dictatorship not a republic.
Russia is an oligarchic republic. It's neither a dictatorship nor a liberal democracy. And regardless of the power he has, Putin is still a product of the system. His eventual successor will quite likely be another similar leader.
7 replies →
The same could be said for the Soviet Union as well. The nuclear doctrine is just Putin trying to point out that he is frustrated. Luckily nuclear deterrence in general is useless in deterring anything except nuclear attack.
[flagged]
"nooo sovereign countries can't go into alliances and do what they want within their borders!!!!" - Putin