# Outcome of nuclear escalation and general Nuclear concerns Ukraine - Russia
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Tags:** ukraine-invasion
**Created:** [April 4, 2022, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302 "2022-04-04T23:08:28Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 3
### Author:  [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/41 "2022-04-05T04:02:33Z")
If we retaliate by nuking Russia, it’s all over. I draw the line at countries we have mutual defense treaties with.
---
### Author:  [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/42 "2022-04-05T04:04:05Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#):
>
> I draw the line at countries we have mutual defense treaties with.
So Russia nuking Mexico is all copacetic, then?
---
### Author:  [@Seanette](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seanette)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/43 "2022-04-05T04:05:12Z")
@Fear_Itself, you’re starting to sound a lot like the bully apologists who want to punish victims for striking back when attacked. Newsflash: Russian nukes are just as likely to cause nuclear winter as those used by those horrible types who don’t want to just roll over and be taken over by Glorious Mother Russia.
I think about the only thing stopping Czar Dobby from having already turned Ukraine into a glow-in-the-dark parking lot for the crime of defying his imperial ambitions is realizing that yes, he WILL get himself and Russia the same treatment if he does. Telling him “no, Vlad, we’re too busy being compassionate and understanding of you to actually fight back” does not exactly solidify the “continuing to rattle your nukes is suicidal” message the rest of the world NEEDS him to believe, just so he won’t let fly.
And that’s not even getting into what China, North Korea, etc., would decide to do if they’re getting the “we’ll just roll over and play dead, throw your nukes at will, no one will fight back” message too.
---
### Author:  [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/44 "2022-04-05T04:05:26Z")
The Monroe doctrine covers that.
---
### Author:  [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/45 "2022-04-05T04:07:03Z")
[quote=“Seanette, post:4072, topic:960037”]
@Fear_Itself, you’re starting to sound a lot like the bully apologists who want to punish victims for striking back when attacked.[/quote]
The whole school doesn’t die when a bully gets punched in the nose.
---
### Author:  [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/46 "2022-04-05T04:07:40Z")
The Monroe Doctrine is not a mutual defense pact nor something that’s currently in force, and Mexico is not signatory to the Rio Treaty. Therefore, by your logic, we should not retaliate if Russia nukes Mexico.
Or how about Austria? They’re not part of NATO, so they’re fair game for Russian target practice.
---
### Author:  [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/47 "2022-04-05T04:10:16Z")
We’re wandering quite afield of current events. I am not as worried about what Putin will do in Mexico as i am of his intentions in Europe.
---
### Author:  [@Seanette](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seanette)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/48 "2022-04-05T04:13:21Z")
And when the victim who fights back is punished, while the actual aggressor gets no consequences at all?
I’m quite sure you’ve heard of school shootings perpetrated by bullying victims who snapped when the “pat the bully on the head, and punish victims for self-defense” mentality just got them further victimized. Bad analogy.
---
### Author:  [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/49 "2022-04-05T05:57:23Z")
> [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](#):
>
> Radioactivity would never penetrate a mine some thousands of feet deep
It probably doesn’t have to. Deep mines tend to have very high background radiation levels, especially gold and coal mines.
---
### Author:  [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/50 "2022-04-05T11:15:54Z")
> [@Russia invades Ukraine {2022-02-24} (Part 1)](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-invades-ukraine-2022-02-24-part-1/960037/4025):
>
> As much as I support Ukraine and enjoy all the videos of them kicking ass on social media, i am not sure Putin is playing by the same rules we are.
He is not.
> [@Velocity](#):
>
> It might be possible to get away with a first-strike on environmental grounds.
>
> Russia could nuke New York City, then tell America, “We’ve already brought the planet **this** close to ecological ruin. If you hit back, that’s your right, but consider this: then more and more soot and ash will be kicked up into the atmosphere as we keep nuking back and forth, and 8 billion of us will inhabit an even-worse, past-the-point-of-no-return atmosphere-wrecked planet.”
Nope. If a nuke is launched at New York City the US is going to retaliate before official statements can be issued or read. Anyone stupid enough to attack _just one_ city will be obliterated. And Putin, whatever else he is, is not stupid.
---
### Author:  [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/51 "2022-04-05T14:12:53Z")
Well global warming wouldn’t be an issue anymore. So there’s the silver lining I suppose.
MAD isn’t and hasn’t ever been a “any use of nuclear weapons by anyone means instant overwhelming retaliation by everyone” type thing.
It has _always_ been strictly between the US and USSR/Russia, and basically says “Any attempt at a **strategic** first strike by one side toward the other’s homeland will instantly trigger a full retaliatory strike by the other.” Meaning that if one side attacks, the other will instantly respond. There’s no concept of strategic escalation- it’s all or nothing.
That doesn’t necessarily apply to smaller scale stuff or use on other countries. I suspect that if the Russians decided to nuke a Ukrainian city or large troop concentration, we (the West) would gasp, apply whatever sanctions remain, and scowl at them. Nobody’s dumb enough to actually go to full global thermonuclear war over something like that. It’s just not worth it. But if Putin launched a ICBM at the US? We’d fire everything we’ve got immediately.
---
### Author:  [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/52 "2022-04-05T14:19:38Z")
> [@bump](#):
>
> if Putin launched a ICBM at the US? We’d fire everything we’ve got immediately.
If we use a variant of the Sum of All Fears:
Suppose Russia didn’t launch an ICBM (which is obvious,) but rather, sneaked a small nuke somehow onto American soil into a small city (such as, Spokane or Tallahassee) and set it off - the effect would, casualty-wise, be much larger than 9/11, however, it would still be a lot less than the deaths of a nuke on Los Angeles or Chicago.
The effect would be devastating to the American economy, but Russia could then announce: “We’ve **only** hit less than 1% of America so far. You must accept it. Any attempt to retaliate, and we nuke the remaining 99%.”
Then, again, the USA is in a bind. Accepting 50,000 dead would be a tough pill to swallow, but…no choice.
---
### Author:  [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/53 "2022-04-05T14:24:39Z")
> [@eschereal](#):
>
> Like old west gunfighters, you better kill that guy with your first bullet or he will kill you with his.
The problem with this analogy is, an old west gunfighter at least has a chance to shoot the other guy before getting shot.
But that’s not how ICBMs work. When the other guy has 30 minutes to shoot back, and you’re both stuck up to your knees in concrete so you can’t just dodge the bullet, both of you are dead.
Anyone who thinks they can actually pull off a “knock-out blow” with a nuclear first strike is delusional. That might have just barely been possible in the 1950s, when we relied on actual bombers to deliver nukes, but with ICBMs, you don’t “fight” a nuclear war, both sides just get wiped out.
---
### Author:  [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/54 "2022-04-05T14:30:05Z")
> [@Horatius](#):
>
> But that’s not how ICBMs work. When the other guy has 30 minutes to shoot back, and you’re both stuck
But that’s what ballistic-missile submarines are for - so that you don’t have to shoot back immediately. You can ride out the first wave and take time to think. Your subs ensure that you have retaliatory ability, so that you don’t have to rush any decision.
---
### Author:  [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/55 "2022-04-05T14:40:35Z")
If you were to somehow interdict the enemy’s entire first-strike assault, should you shoot back?
---
### Author:  [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/56 "2022-04-05T14:44:37Z")
Yes, to prevent the enemy’s second-strike assault.
---
### Author:  [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/57 "2022-04-05T15:00:07Z")
> [@Velocity](#):
>
> But that’s what ballistic-missile submarines are for - so that you don’t have to shoot back immediately. You can ride out the first wave and take time to think. Your subs ensure that you have retaliatory ability, so that you don’t have to rush any decision.
Which makes it even less like an old west shootout. The other guy can decide to kill you even after he’s been shot.
---
### Author:  [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/58 "2022-04-05T16:22:39Z")
> [@bump](#):
>
> Well global warming wouldn’t be an issue anymore. So there’s the silver lining I suppose.
>
> MAD isn’t and hasn’t ever been a “any use of nuclear weapons by anyone means instant overwhelming retaliation by everyone” type thing.
>
> It has _always_ been strictly between the US and USSR/Russia, and basically says “Any attempt at a **strategic** first strike by one side toward the other’s homeland will instantly trigger a full retaliatory strike by the other.” Meaning that if one side attacks, the other will instantly respond. There’s no concept of strategic escalation- it’s all or nothing.
>
> That doesn’t necessarily apply to smaller scale stuff or use on other countries. I suspect that if the Russians decided to nuke a Ukrainian city or large troop concentration, we (the West) would gasp, apply whatever sanctions remain, and scowl at them. Nobody’s dumb enough to actually go to full global thermonuclear war over something like that. It’s just not worth it. But if Putin launched a ICBM at the US? We’d fire everything we’ve got immediately.
Well, sure, it’s _possible_ to have a nuclear war between _just_ India and Pakistan, as a random example that’s plausible. It would have Very Bad Consequences for those two countries which, I suspect, will largely cease to exist as organized nations but the rest of the world (aside from some territories downwind of the mess) will continue on.
But between Russia and the US, or Russia and NATO, there are so many nuclear warheads potentially at play that the consequences are different and more likely to impact _everyone_. Sure, maybe it starts with battlefield tactical nukes or dirty bombs but, and it’s potentially possible for it to stay there, but there’s a lot more path to ramp up to strategic exchanges between those two groups.
---
### Author:  [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/59 "2022-04-05T16:30:06Z")
> [@Velocity](#):
>
> Russia could nuke New York City, then tell America,
They can tell America whatever they want but they’d be wasting time they could be spending trying get out of major population centers, as the counter strike would already be en route.
What would be more debatable (and scary as you know planners on both sides have seriously considered what to do in this situation, and a plan is already in place) is what happens if Russia nukes Kyiv (or somewhere else in the Ukraine). Its not super likely, but its also not a completely crazy and out there outcome, especially if things continue to go south for Russia to the point Putin’s position is become dicey.
---
### Author:  [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)
#### Post date: [April 5, 2022, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302/60 "2022-04-05T16:30:56Z")
What I’m getting at is that third-party use so to speak, isn’t likely to spark World War 3. I mean, if the Indians and Pakistanis get into it and start nuking each other, there’s no motivation for anyone else to join that particular party. Same if the Chinese get into it with the Indians or something. Or even if the US and China get into it; the Russians and Europeans don’t necessarily have a nuclear dog in that fight.
But you’re absolutely right; any sort of nuclear use between NATO/Russia is likely to trigger a cascade of escalations and end up with a nuclear holocaust. Same with the US/China, except that the Chinese strategic arsenal is relatively small and mostly reliant on land-based missiles.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302.md?page=2)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outcome-of-nuclear-escalation-and-general-nuclear-concerns-ukraine-russia/962302.md?page=4)