American politicians and nuclear war

Consider the escalations that have already occurred, and those that are now explicitly threatened by Russian and Ukrainian leaders:

"Putin officials threaten to escalate attacks after Moscow oil refinery blown up in Kyiv drone strike" | The Independent 

"Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov warned of “massive coordinated strikes on a regular basis” in response to the [Ukrainian] strikes, which hit [Moscow’s] oil refinery for the second time this week."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-live-putin-trump-zelensky-g7-news-b2998092.html

Now let's see what Ukraine has said:

"Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned that “if Ukraine burns, your Moscow will burn” (12:44) as he ramped up his rhetoric after overnight drone strikes on the Russian capital (9:55, 11:41, 15:00)."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/jun/18/ukraine-russia-moscow-strikes-nato-defence-ministers-hegseth-rutte-latest-news-updates 

Hello?

You don't need a Ph.D. in international relations or a codeword clearance to see that the possibility of this escalating yet further is, to put it mildly, too great for comfort.

Suppose Russia does launch devastating strikes on Kiev, and Zelensky follows through with his threat of devastating strikes on Moscow (does he have that capability? I don't know, but he says he does).

So then how will Russia respond?

They certainly have the capability to drop a nuke on Kiev.

And then what?

Both France and England have nuclear weapons. Would they use them?

Would Ukraine's supporters in the U.S. demand that America responds in kind? I'm sure we would hear that talk from some.

In my view, it would have been far better if 

1. America hadn't propped up Ukraine to the extent it has, 

which would have led to 

2. Ukraine being forced to accept the terms for peace that Russia has been offering for years. 

But oh no, in the minds of the decision makers that was something which had to be avoided.

The huge problem is that Ukraine's supporters in the West have allowed such escalation scenarios to become all too plausible.

With their comparisons of Putin with Hitler, Russia with Nazi Germany, and the 2020s with the 1930s.

=≠=======

 

Also, an escalation by the UK:

"Biggest ever UK drone package for Ukraine announced, including more than 120,000 drones, supplying cutting-edge battlefield technology"

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-announces-biggest-ever-drone-package-for-ukraine-to-push-back-putin

Does that make the UK party to the war?

If those UK-supplied drones start hitting critical targets in Russia, will Russia retaliate against critical UK facilities?

===========

The overall perspective is that some countries in Europe, and to some extent the United States as well, are in a de facto state of war with Russia, which has risen to the point where damaging strikes are being made on the Russian homeland. At what point will Russia decide to strike back? Have the relevant leaders seriously considered this question?

==========

For how the "Grey Lady" minimizes the concern over where this could lead, see its 2026-06-19 article 

" ‘Game Changer’? Too Soon to Tell. But Ukraine Flexed in Striking Moscow." - The New York Times https://share.google/bf3shtTOgxccCPSjr

"Mr. Zelensky [secured] a statement of “unwavering support” from the Group of 7 industrialized nations during a summit in France."

Note how that confirms that this war is indeed a war of European nations against Russia.

This exchange of strikes shows how the offensive capabilities of each side overmatch the other sides defensive capabilities. But Russia still has the ultimate card to play. No one should push them into playing it.

More from the NYT article:

"this week’s developments reinforced a growing sense of confidence in Kyiv that it would be able to force the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, to the negotiating table"

Force Putin to the negotiating table, or proke Russia into the use of nuclear weapons? That the NYT won't point out this alternative only proves how they are hiding key possibilities from its readers.

To borrow a metaphor: If you poke a bear enough, it will claw you. People should not ignore that possibility.

See

"Putin formally lowers threshold for using nuclear weapons" | PBS News 

"The new doctrine allows for a potential nuclear response by Moscow even to a conventional attack on Russia by any nation that is supported by a nuclear power."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/putin-formally-lowers-threshold-for-using-nuclear-weapons

=========

Daniel Ellsberg's documentary "An Ordinary Insanity":

https://youtu.be/xofgctP2hTY

===========

2026-06-26 update 

"Russian hawks urge Putin to escalate war, drop US talks as Ukraine strikes deep" https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-hawks-urge-putin-escalate-war-drop-us-talks-ukraine-strikes-deep-2026-06-26/

"Calls for tougher measures are not new. Nationalist voices have long pressed for full mobilisation, ‌the destruction of Kyiv's government quarter, the assassination of President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and strikes on European drone factories. Some hawks have even called on the Kremlin chief to consider using tactical nuclear weapons.

...

"Why are we not using nuclear weapons, which our forebears developed and stockpiled with the full might of the nation precisely for this purpose?" [a Russian] asked."

==========

John Mearsheimer wrote about this on 2026-06-13

https://open.substack.com/pub/mearsheimer/p/what-nuclear-taboo

Prof. Mearsheimer contends that the West has forgotten the lessons of the Cold War, specifically the risks of backing a nuclear-armed great power into a corner. He argues that Western attempts to "knock Russia out of the ranks of great powers" through sanctions and military support for Ukraine have been extremely provocative and dangerous.

Updated in this 2026-06-15 video 

https://youtu.be/7MrVcpz5a0o

The Nuclear Deterrence Argument: Karaganov argues that Russia is under pressure to restore deterrence against the West. He posits that a limited nuclear strike on European targets could force the West to back down, claiming the United States would not risk a full-scale nuclear war in response (0:07-0:42, 4:52-6:07).

Potential for Escalation: Both Mearsheimer and Karaganov agree that the escalation ladder would likely move from conventional conflict to a limited nuclear warning. Mearsheimer expresses concern that Western leaders fail to provide a clear strategic objective for a potential war with Russia, making the current trajectory dangerous.

========

John Mearsheimer spends the first 10 minutes of this July 1, 2026 interview emphasizing the risks the West is running in aiding Ukraine in striking deep into Russia:

https://youtu.be/tc1BrkihWyI

He views the risk as very, very real.

This is not just great power competition. This is direct physical attack on the Russian homeland. How long will it be before the Russians retaliate?