NATO Trainers In Ukraine Eventually Means To Putin Russia Fighting NATO!

In the recent past the government of France said it would like to send military trainers into the country of Ukraine to train Ukrainian soldiers and it would like other countries who are Ukrainian allies to do likewise. Although the intentions here by France are highly commendable for this is a completely unjust war by Russia against Ukraine, Russia is stealing Ukrainian land and it is indefensible; however, this is an extremely unwise and dangerous move for what it could provoke from Russian President Vladimir Putin. Prior statements by Vladimir Putin as it pertains the war indicate that Putin considers an eligible option using tactical nuclear weapons if he believes the NATO alliance is threatening Russia. Although NATO trainers training Ukrainian soldiers in Ukraine probably would not be enough to provoke Putin along these lines, the issue raised here is not that simple because military trainers often expand their role to advising the troops their training on live battlefield tactics, in addition, military training roles often officially morph into the trainers accompany the troops they train into battle to help with tactics and strategy to further help the ally in need. This mission creep should really worry all citizens in NATO countries especially those in Europe because although Putin probably won't go nuclear this year when Ukraine is weak from last years failed counteroffensive and their shortage in fighting units and Putin's forces have momentum albeit minor momentum. The real alarm is in 2025 when Ukraine will be in a position to make another counter offensive or when Russia comes to the point where the battlefield casualties from this war cannot be maintained and Vladimir Putin needs a political face saving off-ramp. When that time arrives Putin could use NATO trainers guiding Ukrainian forces on the battlefield against Russian troops as NATO engaging in war against Russia and threatening Russian security and sovereignty and use tactical nuclear weapons in the war against Ukraine inside Ukraine which would kill directly or through radiation poisoning high tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians. Of course this would bring devastating military consequences against Russia's air and missile power as President Biden retaliates the way he said he would and the consequences of the retaliation would cause Putin to have to withdraw his forces from Ukraine. But Putin would have political cover he could honestly say he had to end the war because NATO got involved it wasn't because Putin and the Russian Army got beat and he could then rally his people to rebuild the Russian army to defend against NATO's military aggression against Russia. Likely resulting in a timeline of ten to fifteen years from now when Putin has rebuilt his military Russia again engaging in a military invasion of Ukraine or maybe directly a NATO country. Let us permanently cage Vladimir Putin and authoritarian Russian regimes in Russia not give them any lifeline!

 

look I hesitate to reply here ....but......

....putting aside all the myriad reasons that nuclear weapons will not be used.....nobody putting out this narrative has yet clearly explained their theory on the benefit gained from their actual use! The conflict as it stands today has tailed off to the Russians utilising small unit mobile infantry tactics; they're sending small ah hoc units into contact over a massive front against small mobile Ukrainian defensive formations. Additionally these attacking/defending units may consist of small ad hoc mechanised support but nothing larger than say 5-10 vehicles and typically less than 5 per assault. Simply on the basis that there are no large Russian assault formations ready to exploit any gaps or weaknesses and artillery firing conventional munitions and "glide bombs" etc have proved effective (and FPV drones even more so) in interdicting Ukrainian defenders; also the only metric employed by Russian MOD seems to be based on quantum of land taken not physical objectives like taking Kyiv or Odessa for example why would you need a nuclear weapon? Just on the basis that there is no overall plan, no large mechanised maneuver taking place or no formations available for exploitation - on a cost benefit scale what possible use would a tactical nuclear weapon have???

The nuclear narrative is just that....it's simply a tale put out to scare people and influence timidity and inaction....

 

The 'narrative' is also blindingly self deluding. NATO doing X will force Russia to use nukes you say? Simply implies that by default NATO will use them them to. How on Earth does that scenario 'help' Russian interests.

 

yeah....the whole spiel around nukes is comical....

Although I did like his comment about.....

.....the great thing about being a dictator is that you can do or say what the f**k you like.....any "off-ramp" would probably be a 9mm in the back of the head in Lefortovo

 

I'm not sure Ukraine will be on a position to laugh any kind of major offensive in the foreseeable future. Both sides are consolidating their defensive positions and attacking as fast as they can and attacking has become a grind. And a 'grind' favours Russia because it has the numbers.

Ukraines best bet may simply bleeding Putin dry and playing for time. Killing 3 or 4 attacking Russians for every Ukrainian casualty isn't sustainable for Russia long term even though Putin doesn't give a flying **** about how many of his own people die to feed his delusions of Russian 'Greatness'.

 

And we’ve heard the exact same thing with every single thing NATO has done thus far.

Send them Abrams tanks and it’ll mean WWIII
Send them F16s and it’ll mean WWIII
Send them Himars and it’ll mean WWIII
Send them ATACMS and it’ll mean WWIII
Let Ukraine hit targets in Russia with NATO munitions and it’ll mean WWIII
Approve Ukraine joining NATO and it’ll mean WWIII

on and on and on and on. Being wrong never gets old with you people.

Unfortunately, this Neville Chamberlain stuff never gets old with the actual leaders of Western nations either who have to slowwalk the hell out of every new thing provided to Ukraine hence why this war is on year 3 with no end in sight. Ukraine has been fighting with a hand tied behind its back.

Seriously, how many times can you be juked by Putins BS before you wise up?

 

well...Germany and the US still have an excessive fear that Russia will use a nuclear weapon which is why they remain overly cautious in their dealings with Ukraine....it's purely are reactive strategy based on incrementalist steps. If or until the US gets over that psychological hurdle than unfortunately Ukraine will have to live with a 1916 level of warfare....