Putin explicitly says nukes are not necessary to fight ISIS

[The Romulan Republic]

To anyone on this board who accused me of being overly alarmist or biased about Russia, I present:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing ... ainst-isis

Russian President Vladimir Putin has broached the possibility of using nuclear weapons in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

“We must analyze everything happening on the battlefield, how the weapons operate,” Putin told Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, according to the Kremlin-funded RT.

ADVERTISEMENT

Putin noted that some of the Russia's missiles are “precision weapons that can be equipped with both conventional and special warheads, which are nuclear.”
“Naturally, this is not necessary when fighting terrorists and I hope will never be needed,” Putin added in the meeting with his official in front of cameras, according to the network.

The remarks come a day after Russia said it launched a new round of airstrikes, this time from a submarine in the Mediterranean Sea, against ISIS in the group's stronghold of Raqqa, Syria.

Russia has been carrying out airstrikes in Syria since late September, though the U.S. has blasted them as indiscriminate toward moderate rebels and not focused on ISIS.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov added Wednesday “that there is no need to use any nuclear weapons against terrorists, as they can be defeated through conventional means, and this is fully in line with our military doctrine.”

Guess he decided he wanted to compete with Trump in the field of saying insane things.

Someone needs to tell this wanker that nukes are supposed to be a deterrent against other nuclear powers, not something you chuck willie-nilley at third world jihadist groups.

[The Romulan Republic]

Also, who wants to be that before the week is over Trump will endorse nuking IS?

[Purple]

You have actually read the text? Right? Are you sure? The man said: "Naturally, this is not necessary when fighting terrorists and I hope will never be needed." It's pretty clear that the meaning is: "We don't need atomic weapons to fight ISIS. And I hope we don't need them for anything ever."

So get out of panic mode.

[The Romulan Republic]

I took it to mean "We don't need them now but we might in the future."

Maybe its ambiguous. Maybe I overreacted. But it seems to me that he could have just given a definite "No" and left it at that.

Still, it would be helpful to know more of the context.

[Purple]

I took it to mean "We don't need them now but we might in the future."

Maybe its ambiguous. Maybe I overreacted. But it seems to me that he could have just given a definite "No" and left it at that.

Still, it would be helpful to know more of the context.

It's not you. I've seen it on other forums as well. Basically the western media are spinning it that way in order to drum up a red scare.

[The Romulan Republic]

Have I mentioned that it really pisses me off when people treat the "Western media" as a homogenous whole? It smacks of prejudice, "us vs. them", and conspiracy theorist thinking. Their is a world of difference between, say, The Guardian and Fox News. And, yes, probably a lot of similarities as well. But that's no excuse to ignore the differences.

[Purple]

Have I mentioned that it really pisses me off when people treat the "Western media" as a homogenous whole? It smacks of prejudice, "us vs. them", and conspiracy theorist thinking. Their is a world of difference between, say, The Guardian and Fox News. And, yes, probably a lot of similarities as well. But that's no excuse to ignore the differences.

I agree with you on principal but you have to understand that in the context of geopolitics the term "Western Media" has a specific meaning that does not directly translate to "every news outlet in the west including your local radio station". It is a way of referring to the big ones like CNN, BBC etc. as well as their smaller but still significant local counterparts like Fox news and such which in combination perform the role of shaping the way large swathes of people in the west think of the world. And I think you'll notice that when it comes to a lot of political issues regarding Russia most of these have most of the time been in agreement ever since the cold war.

Now this might anger you. And I agree, it is angering to know large news vendors are spewing propaganda. But that's how it is and has always been and will always be. The best we can do as people is try and look up multiple sources and figure out our own opinions.

[The Romulan Republic]

Have I mentioned that it really pisses me off when people treat the "Western media" as a homogenous whole? It smacks of prejudice, "us vs. them", and conspiracy theorist thinking. Their is a world of difference between, say, The Guardian and Fox News. And, yes, probably a lot of similarities as well. But that's no excuse to ignore the differences.

I agree with you on principal but you have to understand that in the context of geopolitics the term "Western Media" has a specific meaning that does not directly translate to "every news outlet in the west including your local radio station". It is a way of referring to the big ones like CNN, BBC etc. as well as their smaller but still significant local counterparts like Fox news and such which in combination perform the role of shaping the way large swathes of people in the west think of the world. And I think you'll notice that when it comes to a lot of political issues regarding Russia most of these have most of the time been in agreement ever since the cold war.

Now this might anger you. And I agree, it is angering to know large news vendors are spewing propaganda. But that's how it is and has always been and will always be. The best we can do as people is try and look up multiple sources and figure out our own opinions.

Agreed that one should, ideally, try to get information from multiple sources.

I understand that some people may use the term "Western Media" or similar to refer to certain major entities. But I still think their's a lot of variation even among them. They might all be anti-Russia a lot of the time, but the degree and the quality of their arguments is likely to vary considerably. I mean, would you honestly put the BBC in the same league of journalism as Fox?

[Purple]

I understand that some people may use the term "Western Media" or similar to refer to certain major entities. But I still think their's a lot of variation even among them. They might all be anti-Russia a lot of the time, but the degree and the quality of their arguments is likely to vary considerably. I mean, would you honestly put the BBC in the same league of journalism as Fox?

When it comes to hot political issues absolutely. You can absolutely see when a TV station has an agenda. And frankly it's all the same dishonest ... to me. Fox isn't any worse than CNN or BBC or what ever the Russians have. It's just more noticeable because their agenda is aimed at internal politics so its more divisive. The large gap inside your two party system means that people will constantly argue for and against Fox thus bringing their dishonesty to attention. Foreign politics don't get nearly as much debate unless someone royally screws up.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, I will have to disagree. I don't think anyone who is familiar with far Right American media can really treat it as equivalent to other major outlets. It is its own intense brand of bigoted, dishonest, partisan insanity.

But then I suppose you can say I'm biased, as I freely admit that I loath the American far Right.

[Purple]

Either way, to bring the topic of this thread into perspective Putin just revealed that his submarine launched cruise missile can also carry atomic warheads if needed. The american Tomahawk which can also be launched from submarines can also carry an atomic warhead. This whole thing is basically him saying: "I've got the same toys you do."

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, that's just the usual posturing, but still not particularly positive. I'm getting really tired of the mini-Cold War that we've ended up in.

[Purple]

Well, that's just the usual posturing, but still not particularly positive. I'm getting really tired of the mini-Cold War that we've ended up in.

Same here. Like it's just getting old at this point.

Also, I think me saying like all the time is like getting old too. But I can't seem to shake it. Like there are sentences where I just feel it needs to be. Know what I mean?

[Broomstick]

Someone needs to tell this wanker that nukes are supposed to be a deterrent against other nuclear powers, not something you chuck willie-nilley at third world jihadist groups.

Funny, the two times I can recall nukes actually being used it wasn't against another "nuclear power" (there not being any other than the US at that time). Where did you get that "supposed to"? Nuclear powers generally don't talk about the circumstances under which they'd actually use a nuke on another country. True, they should not be chucked "willie-nilley" but their use in response to sufficiently large chemical or biological attacks have long been on the table. I imagine they might be used in response to a dirty bomb as well (or not, depending on circumstances).

Fortunately, at this time IS is not at a threat level where I think anyone is seriously considering nukes. Even Putin.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yes, I know about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, obviously.

That was, however, a different time, before the concept of "Mutually Assured Destruction".

It is possible that they would be used in circumstances other than in response to a nuclear attack, of course. But they are often treated as a deterrent. Ie, the whole point of Mutually Assured Destruction.

[Starglider]

Of course the Russian propaganda machine is a couple of orders of magnitude more sophisticated than Trump's. Putin et al are constantly posturing and reminding everyone that he can nuke and/or invade their countries, while maintaining the superficial form of concern about peace, stability, sometimes even (for maximum irony) human rights.

[Thanas]

God, if I had a penny for everytime The Romulan Republic starts running around like a headless chicken.....

Raise your posting standards and critical thinking skills. This is not optional.

[Channel72]

Of course the Russian propaganda machine is a couple of orders of magnitude more sophisticated than Trump's. Putin et al are constantly posturing and reminding everyone that he can nuke and/or invade their countries, while maintaining the superficial form of concern about peace, stability, sometimes even (for maximum irony) human rights.

Considering that any one of the nations currently taking potshots at ISIS is capable of obliterating Raqqah and Mosul with non-nuclear weapons, (i.e. the US or Russia could basically just drop a MOAB on Raqqah and call it a day), Putin's comment is pointless, and yes, does nothing really other than serve as an advertisement for the Russian military. Yes, we all know Russia is awesome and is capable of blowing shit up.

[Titan Uranus]

Romulan Republic, Russia has been absent from the world stage for some time, since the collapse of the USSR in fact.

What you have read is a document advertising the fact that the Russians have pulled themselves up far enough to start acting like a great power again.

That is all that Putin meant by this, along with some minor saber rattling. Stop assuming that your ideological foes are wildly insane, and you will be able to make sane predictons about what they will do.

In addition, it will prevent you from dropping dead of a heart attack before age 25. For your own physical safety, please stop and think before you bring yourself up to full froth.

[Elheru Aran]

If we *really* wanted to go all out and blow IS off the map, we can. Russia can too. We don't even need nukes to do the job and neither do they. And both of us know this perfectly well. The main reason we aren't going to is collateral damage would be unacceptable. Of course Czar Putin is going to wave around his nuke-dick every now and then, the only reason we don't is we have a little margin of more taste...

[Iroscato]

"The Romulan Republic looses(sic) mind, thinks Putin is about to nuke IS"

Seriously, go form your own forum with Cosmicalstorm, Laan and Lord Falcon if you're gonna keep up this level of hyperventilating. In the meantime, cheers for the mini-heart attack

[Crazedwraith]

The remarks come a day after Russia said it launched a new round of airstrikes, this time from a submarine in the Mediterranean Sea, against ISIS in the group's stronghold of Raqqa, Syria.

This phrasing is weird. It seems to suggest Russia has submersible carriers?

[K. A. Pital]

I have fixed the title to something that has really happened.

Sorry, but saying the exact opposite of what the quoted person actually said is plain dumb. And misleading.

I thought about more direct action with this thread, because it is so stupid, but decided against further steps for now.

I will also leave here the full paragraph with Putin's quote translated.

И "Калибры", и ракеты Х-101 зарекомендовали себя очень хорошо. Это новое, современное и высокоэффективное, теперь мы это понимаем, высокоточное оружие, которое может оснащаться как обычной боеголовкой, так и специальной, то есть с ядерным наполнением. Естественно, в борьбе с террористами этого ничего не нужно, надеюсь, никогда и не потребуется.

Both the Kalibr and the Х-101 missiles have proven themselves very well. They are a modern, novel and highly efficient weapon, and as we could now see, a high-precision weapon, which can carry ordinary warheads as well as a special payload, i.e. nuclear. Of course, this is absolutely not necessary to fight terrorists, and I hope that it will never ever be necessary.

Find here anything that implies your dumb title if you can.

[Grumman]

The remarks come a day after Russia said it launched a new round of airstrikes, this time from a submarine in the Mediterranean Sea, against ISIS in the group's stronghold of Raqqa, Syria.

This phrasing is weird. It seems to suggest Russia has submersible carriers?

He might be referring to submarine-launched cruise missiles.

[The Romulan Republic]

Romulan Republic, Russia has been absent from the world stage for some time, since the collapse of the USSR in fact.

What you have read is a document advertising the fact that the Russians have pulled themselves up far enough to start acting like a great power again.

That is all that Putin meant by this, along with some minor saber rattling. Stop assuming that your ideological foes are wildly insane, and you will be able to make sane predictons about what they will do.

In addition, it will prevent you from dropping dead of a heart attack before age 25. For your own physical safety, please stop and think before you bring yourself up to full froth.

I would say that Russia has been fairly active for the last few years at least, starting with the Ukraine, but that it is a minor point.

Also, I will note that I am 26, and that it is thus physically impossible for me to die before 25.

"The Romulan Republic looses(sic) mind, thinks Putin is about to nuke IS"

Seriously, go form your own forum with Cosmicalstorm, Laan and Lord Falcon if you're gonna keep up this level of hyperventilating. In the meantime, cheers for the mini-heart attack

1. People who wish death on other people because they don't like what they say are scum.
2. Go fuck yourself.
3. I won't address the comparisons to certain other board members only because I don't wish to drag up shit from past threads and be accused of violating the vendetta rule.

To everyone else:

I will acknowledge that I overreacted, that I reached a conclusion that was not supported by the available evidence. I will note that I am far from the only person to reach this interpretation, however, that my interpretation was essentially the same as the article I posted, from a source that I personally have found to be, for the most part, reliable, or at least not extremist, in the past. Should I have been more critical, more cautious? Yes. However, this was an honest error on my part, and I deny absolutely any accusation of dishonesty.

Apologies for any inconvenience.

Edit: You may consider that a formal concession.