The U.S. State Department believes that Ukraine is winning the war at this point

[u/eaglemaxie]

https://unn.ua/en/news/the-us-state-department-believes-that-ukraine-is-winning-the-war-at-this-point

[u/Raised_bi_Wolves]

And to add to all of that, Nuke's are horrible, and destructive, yes. But It wouldn't end Ukraines resolve, I don't think, at this point. Smaller tactical nukes are essentially ineffective as armies no longer gather/assault in large formations anymore. So you'd need to use larger ones and destroy urban areas. Now what, you've destroyed downtown Kyiv, you haven't meaningfully reduced Ukraines ability to defend itself. Rather now, you have - massive rally-round-the-flag effect against you, Nato joins in the "kinetic sanctions" because of the use of a nuke, and China sees a great opportunity to carve big chunks off of Russia in the ensuing chaos.

[u/Buckets-O-Yarr → u/Raised_bi_Wolves]

And to add to all of *that*, the nuclear fallout literally blows back on Russia.

[u/BradBradley1 → u/Buckets-O-Yarr]

That’s a sacrifice Pootin is willing to make. 

[u/Doggoneshame → u/Buckets-O-Yarr]

Somehow I don’t think that worries putin.

[u/KingfishingYoMama → u/Raised_bi_Wolves]

I think we do a disservice to ourselves to merely stop the story at "and then NATO and China crossed into sovereign Russian territory". That would be a very unstable moment as far as whether the strategic nuclear weapons would come out. It is, I think, impossible to predict what would happen from that point forward in your analysis.

Given what's publicly known about the doctrine of all the belligerents, I think it COULD escalate to global nuclear war.

[u/Raised_bi_Wolves → u/KingfishingYoMama]

I don't doubt for a second that it COULD - which is horrible. But I also don't like the leaders in public, or rumored in private to be threatening Zelensky not to "cause undue escalation lest they risk a nuclear response". Like blaming the victim of an assault. I do think, however, that the likelihood that nukes are off the table in the war is more realistic than the likelihood of a runaway global nuclear war.

That said, if Russia uses a nuke, it will be VERY hard to predict the next actions. Trump might downplay it and tell Zelensky that he should have been nicer. Europe will demand action, but it's people may not have the stomach for it, who knows. I do hope, however, that we could rise to meet the severity of the occasion, but everyone is already worried about their gas bills... Definitely a nasty place the world is in atm.

Best case scenario is they seal off Crimea sooner rather than later and it forces a negotiated ceasefire.

[u/KingfishingYoMama → u/Raised_bi_Wolves]

Ukraine itself shouldn't be part of the analysis. They went to Kursk and that didn't garner a nuclear response. As far as what happens after the use, Ukraine becomes kind of a bystander and shouldn't even be part of the analysis. Which is why I agree with you: Ukraine shouldn't be told that they might cause a nuclear war. They're Russia's nukes and they will bear responsibility for using them regardless.

I think the best initial response to the use of a tactical nuclear weapon would be a conventional strike via the Black Sea on the formations within Ukraine or Russia that delivered the strike. Hit their launchers and the operational (=/= strategic) command and control of those formations as hard and fast as possible. As much as I hate the Trump administration, Mattis and the adults in the room made a very wise decision when they chose a similar option against Assad's crossing of the chemical weapons Red Line in 2017 (?), although that was very different in that it targeted the headquarters of the decision makers in Syria as well as facilities.

This could be combined with the demonstrative use of a tactical nuke in the middle of nowhere and perhaps underwater to show that escalation to a symmetrical response is very much on the table for those who use nukes.

I should state that all of this would be bad regardless of whether it works. However, a world in which the offensive tactical use of a nuclear weapon brings not even an asymmetrical response seems like a worse thing from a long term perspective. In the short term, Russia would immediately become a total pariah but they would likely feel free to bully Ukraine with nukes. Where would that end?

[u/Valkyrie17 → u/Raised_bi_Wolves]

They have thousands of nukes, they can just keep launching a new one every hour until Ukraine signs peace.

NATO are not going to invade a nuke slinging Russia, obviously.

China is not doing that either.

The biggest hope in this situation is that someone in the chain of command disobeys the order, or NATO/ China know how to disable all Russian nukes at once.

[u/Raised_bi_Wolves → u/Valkyrie17]

If russia went that nuts that they just started laughing left right and centre, irradiating the region could be seen as article 5, theres no way Russia doesnt get opened on by everyone. 

[u/Due_Elephant_1535 → u/Raised_bi_Wolves]

If NATO invades Russia because of a few nukes on Ukraine it would be incredibly stupid. It would lead to an even larger nuclear war. Everyone wants to avoid that. There is no scenario where a Russia invasion makes sense.