Will Russia use a tactical nuke in Ukraine?

[SamuelTheThird]

I think this is a real possibility. They are really starting to lose the war. Putin is old and in ill-health and his desperation will only increase. The only question is if there are enough Stanislav Petrov's still around.

Added: the Biden administration at one point assessed a 50% chance Putin would use nukes. And Putins situation has gotten a lot more dire now https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/10/09/woodward-book-reveals-us-scrambled-to-urge-putin-not-to-use-nuclear-weapons-in-ukraine_6728668_4.html?srsltid=AfmBOordqcKTcDh_FUOfcX1-1FyNTYeoViPNPuFC4J4dhrFLKk0XOKBj

[wcmagumba]

1. They might, Putin is a Russian version of T-rump with more power...T-rump loves and emulates the dictator...

Things will get bad in a hurry if they do...T-rump will let it slide but the EU and Nato not so much...and remember, Germany, France the UK and maybe others all likely have nukes...

[31j20b3]

9. Yes, they have them, and can deliver them so they might. BUT

My problem with Putin's approach is, what does it mean that you'll destroy cities to conquer them?

When the Russians are done conquering there will be NOTHING left that is worth having. Just hundreds of thousands of sick surviors burying millions, in the midst of glowing rubble that will cost trillions and take a century to redevelop.

This seems like the most profound stupidity of a conqueror I've ever witnessed.

[Emrys]

37. Given the state of Russia's stockpiles in general, even in the unlikely event Putin made such a suicidal decision,

the questions are whether they could actually launch them successfully, whether they could reach their intended targets, and whether they could actually explode as intended, given that Russia's last nuclear warhead test was in 1990. I probably don't need to point out how terminally disastrous it would be for Putin if he launched a high-profile dud nuclear attack.

If anyone wants to read a more serious analysis rather than the banter under this OP, here's RAND's take:

Putin's Failed Nuclear Threats - https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2025/11/putins-failed-nuclear-threats.html

And here's an analysis of Putin's nuclear mind games, at home and abroad, during the course of his war in Ukraine from the International Centre for Defence and Security:

Russia’s Nuclear Signalling Problem: Too Much Left to Chance? - https://icds.ee/en/russias-nuclear-signalling-problem-too-much-left-to-chance/

[ProfessorGAC]

47. Spot On

I question the effectiveness & reliability (and in some cases, the existence) of their military arsenal.
I think there is a substantial risk of them showing their weak hand if they launch a nuke that doesn't go off.

[Crunchy Frog]

45. Trump would likely take it as a licence to nuke Iran. Essentially it would break the nuclear taboo and

set a precedent for any nuclear armed country to use them in wars of choice that were going badly. Would also likely mean the end of nuclear non-proliferation.

I wonder whether Ukraine has anything special planned as a response should russia do something this insanely reckless. Like loading up a bunch of drones and missiles with waste from Chernobyl and letting loose? At that point what do they have to lose?

[Torchlight]

2. I don't see any real evidence pointing in that direction.

Putin would be considering Ukrainian responses, NATO responses, domestic political consequences and the possibility that further escalation could eventually threaten Russia itself. Ukraine's forces are relatively dispersed rather than massed in large formations, reducing the effectiveness of nuclear strikes. Russia would likely need multiple weapons to achieve operational effects, making even more escalation likely while still not guaranteeing him anything.

Up to this point, I think Putin's cost/benefit analysis is that uncertain military gains, high escalation risks, diplomatic and economic consequences, and Russia's own domestic problems will outweigh any vague benefits he could define (I'll run it by Taylor Swift and ask if she'll write a song about it for us).

[SamuelTheThird]

3. You seem to have a lot of faith in Putin's rationality

Hearing his rambling on why his invasion was justified is hardly encouraging of that

[Torchlight]

5. I have faith he's cold, calculating and crunches numbers

[SamuelTheThird]

6. I'd like to see you present evidence

What I see is a man with grandiose notions of Russian empire, one who rubber stamps continually ineffective Russian military maneuvers, and one who'd rather kill untold numbers of people than face the humiliation of a defeat.

[Torchlight]

11. I see a person who possesses a pattern of long-horizon strategic goals,

incremental escalation strategy, intelligence background shaping decision style, careful signaling and “red line” communication, and using domestic political control as a stabilizing system.

Admittedly, only an opinion though, and a thumbnail at best.

[SamuelTheThird]

13. incremental escalation strategy,

Yes but he got older and that went out the window with his rush towards Kiev. It's true his calculations in gaining and maintaining power have been brilliant. But I think the subversion of the west through asymmetric intel means have more to do with the FSB than him.

Im not saying he's definitely going to use a nuke, but I wouldnt be shocked if he did.

[Torchlight]

15. Seems a far cry from the prior 'rambling and ineffective' bit

[SamuelTheThird]

16. btw Woodward's book claims Putin was seriously considering using a nuke

Months into Russia's war in Ukraine, the United States had intelligence pointing to "highly sensitive, credible conversations inside the Kremlin" that President Vladimir Putin was seriously considering using nuclear weapons to avoid major battlefield losses, journalist Bob Woodward reported in his new book, "War."

----

The US intelligence pointed to a 50% chance that Putin would use tactical nukes if Ukrainian forces surrounded 30,000 Russian troops in the southern city of Kherson, the book says. Just months before, in the far northeast, Ukrainian troops had stunned the Russians by recapturing Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city, and were pivoting to liberate Kherson, strategically located on the Dnieper River not far from the Black Sea.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan stared "with dread" at the intelligence assessment − described as coming from the best sources and methods − in late September 2022, seven months after Russia's invasion, the book says. It caused alarm across the Biden administration, moving the chance of Russia using nukes up from 5% to 10% to now 50%.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/10/09/woodward-book-reveals-us-scrambled-to-urge-putin-not-to-use-nuclear-weapons-in-ukraine_6728668_4.html?srsltid=AfmBOordqcKTcDh_FUOfcX1-1FyNTYeoViPNPuFC4J4dhrFLKk0XOKBj

So things are getting more dire for him now

[Crunchy Frog]

42. Just wanted to point out that Ukraine never "recaptured" the city of Kharkiv because the russians

never captured it in the first place. The russians had captured, and the Ukrainians recaptured, most of the Kharkiv region which included a number of towns and villages and farmland.

I am wondering if this is the same US intelligence that predicted Kyiv would fall in 3 days, and the entire country within a few weeks, and just how accurate their assessments concerning the risk of nukes really were.

[Emrys]

46. Sullivan was out of his depth, and was a significant factor in Biden and the allies' timidity and over-caution

during the earlier stages of the conflict. His name was and is mud among most of the Ukraine commentators, and in his own way he wasn't much less obstructive than the Trump regime has been at times.

The articles I linked in my reply above give a more measured analysis of Putin's nuclear threat strategy. I'm afraid the Russians have been so dogged and predictable in trotting out the threat of nukes every time things haven't been going their way that the scare value wore off, in much of Europe at least, with the responses ranging from fatalism ("FFS, just try it then, and we'll see where we are when the dust settles" ) to informed skepticism for the reasons my linked articles set out.

Another factor I mentioned in a reply below is Belarus. That country and Lukashenko's standing is if higher with the Chinese than Russia, no doubt seeing it as a compliant stepping stone to relations with the rest of Europe after Putin blotted his copybook so spectacularly, and the Chinese would not take kindly to any action that would threaten or risk contaminating Belarus and affect Lukashenko's ability to cling to power, likely yanking Putin's chain hard if he were to seriously contemplate such an action.

[Crunchy Frog]

48. I agree, and participated in those discussions elsewhere on the internet.

I've always posted with an abundance of caution here because any perceived criticism of a Democrat is likely to be alerted on and potentially removed.

Putin makes nuclear threats precisely because they work. Actually acting on those threats would be a completely different situation, and he's a natural coward and probably not willing to find out what the potential repercussions would be.

That's my opinion anyway.

[bearsfootball516]

4. I doubt it.

As crazy as Putin is, he knows using a nuke in Ukraine would mean the end of his time in Russia. NATO and the EU have tried to stay hands off in the war, but a nuclear strike would cause a pretty quick and brutal response from them.

[SamuelTheThird]

7. What makes you think a defeat in Ukraine wouldnt mean an end to his time?

He's banked EVERYTHING on it, the entire country and its economy

[harumph]

8. Putin is just stalling for time -

He's hoping he can make a less than catastrophic exit if given enough time and if he maintains a low enough profile. He's not going to do a tactical nuke because that puts the focus back on him.

[SamuelTheThird]

10. His hope has already dwindled to nothing if thats the case

I'm basing what I type on his behavior, how the war has been conducted, and the things he has said (Im not including previous nuclear threats in that btw).

You seem to be mind-reading based on what?

[harumph]

27. A tactical nuke order would only speed up the loss.

People like Putin are players and never get to the point where they actually admit they have nothing to lose. There's always a way out (or so they think) and there is some support for this belief. Yes, Hitler committed suicide (as a last resort - he had after all sinned against the entire world - not just his own people).

HOWEVER, Stalin died of a stroke in his own bed. Franco died at 82 in his own bed. In 1998 Pol Pot died in his own bed. Idi Amin died in his own bed at 78. Putin wants to silently exit stage left. In Putin's case though, the Ukrainians will have the resolve to hunt his ass down. Maybe they'll hand him over to the Hague? Maybe he'll be droned.

[MineralMan]

12. So, do you have any other sources for this supposition?

Aside from an X video from "Special Kherson Cat?" I mean, that's not a source I recognize, really.

I've seen no evidence that there is any consideration being given to bringing nukes into that war. Is that something you hope Putin will do?

[SamuelTheThird]

14. Uh, what? The Video wasnt a source for my question

The social media post is just indicative of how Russia is now losing the war

Your response is truly bizarre. Saying I hope he uses one is over the line, but I dont report people.

Ive explained my rationale in the various responses, if youre interested

[Manatee]

17. No

he will not.

[SamuelTheThird]

18. Biden administration at one point wasnt so confident

They assessed a 50% chance!

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/10/09/woodward-book-reveals-us-scrambled-to-urge-putin-not-to-use-nuclear-weapons-in-ukraine_6728668_4.html?srsltid=AfmBOordqcKTcDh_FUOfcX1-1FyNTYeoViPNPuFC4J4dhrFLKk0XOKBj

[Crunchy Frog]

43. They also believed that Kyiv would fall in 3 days, the entire country within a few weeks,

and they begged Zelenskyy to desert his country to save his own life and establish a "government in exile".

I'm not sure that I have a whole lot of faith in the assessments that they made.

I also wonder what Xi has to say about the prospect of using nukes. He seems to have some influence and I'm not sure that he thinks something like that would benefit the Chinese economy.

[mr715]

19. Only if Taylor Swift asks them

[SamuelTheThird]

20. Any thoughts on the topic at hand?

The celebrity multi-billionaire is off-topic for this

[mr715]

21. I do not think Russia will use a nuke.

[SamuelTheThird]

22. Ok, that's a relief

I mean the best intelligence had the Biden administation alarmed, but I'll go with your sources

[mr715]

25. Again, it really comes down to whether or not Taylor Swift is involved.

[SamuelTheThird]

26. She has a huge PR machine working for her already, you know?

[sarisataka]

23. Hopefully not in the next Fortnight

Although Putin would be The 1 to use a nuke. He is a very Stupid Boy and there are few that are Crazier. It would leave a Blank Space in Ukraine but he would just say Don't Blame Me and Look What You Made Me Do. His army is dying a Death of a Thousand Cuts.

It would make Sparks Fly at the UN who would tell him You Need to Calm Down. In the end I think he will Breathe and not use a nuke, there is too much risk of Bad Blood

[Jedi Guy]

39. Well played, sir, take my rec. N/T

[GPV]

24. Why poison the land they want to steal?

[FadedMullet]

28. You make a great point, especially when you consider that Russia's military, who will already be pushing back.....

.......on the use of a nuke, will also not want to occupy a radioactive bomb site.

[SamuelTheThird]

29. Russian military who push back get pushed out of windows

Im not sure where you are getting this impression they can push back. Do you have a source for that?

A tactical nuke dropped on , say, Kyev would not affect the whole country

[FadedMullet]

30. OK, I'll play your silly game. Nuking Kiev "would not affect the whole country"? Really? Based on what exactly?

[Emrys]

32. OP needs to look at a map, as Belarus would not be in a happy place.

Then some meteorological data about that part of the world.

[SamuelTheThird]

49. Based on the radiation spread of a small tactical nuke

[Emrys]

31. He's more likely to parachute Taylor Swift in

The Biden administration supposedly made that assessment when Western intelligence still gave some credibility to Putin's "red lines".

Based on the evidence in the interim period, not even Putin's Z-bloggers believe in them any more.

I've no idea what this OP was intended to achieve, but it sounds like unwarranted scaremongering that could only serve Putin's interests.

[SamuelTheThird]

35. i intended to achieve discussion

You know, this is a discussion forum? (I get it- I blasphemously criticized a beloved billionaire celebrity for having an ICE contractor at her wedding, but still..)

It's a timely topic to discuss-

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/cornered-putin-under-pressure-use-tactical-nuclear-weapons-4496866

[Emrys]

36. I think you intended to get attention, as so often. But you don't seem to like it when you get it.

Your idea of "discussion" seems to be baiting DUers into responding to an OP of yours, then disagreeing with anyone who responds.

Monty Python even ran a sketch about that behaviour, and there are a number of terms to describe its occurrence online.

And there you go again with your Swift obsession, which a number of us have opted to parody in our replies.

Take it back to Reddit, which is more suited to that sort of gossip.

[SamuelTheThird]

50. 'And there you go again with your Swift obsession, '

You brought her up in a thread about nukes.

If we can't criticize a celebrity billionaire, something is deeply wrong with society.

[FadedMullet]

41. Sammy the Contrarian - way too many posts here. Try to live with different opinions. And chill.

[QueerDuck]

33. No.

[Bookreadingliberal53]

34. I give it 50/50

Putin needs to be more worried about the Russian people rising up and overthrowing him because of the gas running out.

[haele]

38. If they have one that works still, maybe.

Last edited Tue Jul 7, 2026, 11:20 AM - Edit history (1)

Not sure how their maintenance on them has been for the past 30 years, but bigger nukes require a lot of maintenance.
I'm sure Putin wants a huge mushroom cloud over Kyiv ASAP, but it would require they have one already being made and are able complete the manufacturing of it.
Between the Russia's cultural corruption and malaise, I'm rather doubtful that they've got a Tsar Bomba ready to deploy, especially since no one other than Putin, especially not the Russian Mob or the Oligarchs care for the Ukrainian War other than - they might have initially want a quick conflict to profit off, as they did in 2014 when Putin's "little green men" were able to take Crimea and eastern Ukraine - which significantly benefitted Russian manufacturing and shipping.

However, war in Ukraine is no longer close to ending up profitable.

There's not enough political will left in Russia to care to spend the money on getting a nuke ready.

[Jedi Guy]

40. I think he'd have already done so if he was going to.

The war has dragged on now for over four years and extracted a truly hideous amount of blood and treasure from Russia. If he was going to go nuclear the time to do it was before the tide began to turn and when the Ukrainians might have been cowed, when the use of a tactical nuke might have forced them to the negotiating table in a more rattled frame of mind.

Now they're hitting deeper into Russia than ever before with successful drone attacks and pushing the Russians back. Using a tactical nuke now will only enrage them and make them fight harder, I'd say.

The other calculus he's got to take into account is how Europe would react. Thus far the Euro nations have stayed out of direct combat and provided support to the Ukrainians. A tactical nuke going off is going to stir them up against Russia, potentially to the point of engaging in direct combat. If the Russians can't handle Ukraine they don't dare provoke the rest of Europe into getting directly involved.

But I'm not an intelligence analyst or a 4-star general, nor do I play one on TV. I'm just a random slob on the internet so what the hell do I know? Putin might reach a point where he's desperate enough to do something monumentally stupid.

[BH liberal]

44. At this point...

it is impossible to predict what Putin will do. The human race has been skating on ever-thinning ice since 1945 as nuclear weapons have proliferated. We are at or nearing the point now where one individual could touch off armageddon...autocrat, terrorist, or just a psycho with access. Not to mention AI down the road.

[walkingman]

51. If the world allows that to happen without united response....it's all over.

It will be just a matter of time until the nuclear threat escalates. Most people, including myself, cannot grasp the horror or extent of nuclear war with our current technology.

With the nuts that we elect in leadership positions around the world who have no sense of empathy or remorse for their actions, the US maybe being the poster child for such, it is simply a matter of time. Jesus will not help us, no matter what "they" say.