Russian media pundits threatening nuclear war again…

They cannot escape the retaliation strike and they know it.
This might fire back in unexpected ways: A launch order might be the very moment the -more rational- russian military starts to oppose the government.

I think you will find it is white phosphorus, to burn people and everything else on the ground.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/180455...-warfare-fears

..

Do you think he has figured out how sh*te they are yet?

Interesting comment by the lady before the video ends: "It's a scary experiment"

What scares me is that Putin could be getting to the point that he doesn't care about retaliation. Hitler like, if he thinks he's going down, taking the rest of the world with him may actually be appealing.

if it will help you sleep at night, some one is reporting that they are loading cruise missiles onto the Kilo class submarines that are based in the Black Sea.
While I hope that those have conventional tips, I think that those missiles are roughly the same class of cruise missile as Tomahawk (USN and RN).
If they have a special tip then you can have more sleepless nights. :p
I'll see what open sources have on that.
FWIW, the wiki entry indicates that some can have a special warhead
As I don't have a Jane's subscription, I may have to be satisfied with that.

It may be that Putin is not the only one with misapprehensions regarding the Ukraine situation.
A rather different perspective is in some of the financial websites, such as this one here: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2022...ng-russia.html
The short form here is that the West has shot itself in the foot with the various embargoes. These have had very limited near term effect on Russia, which received all time record energy export revenues in April ,but are hugely damaging to the global.economy. The victims will blame the West for imposing these sanctions.
The other element is that warts and all, Russia is gradually absorbing eastern Ukraine, the source of the conflict, installing civil administrations and offering expedited Russian citizenship.
Changing those facts on the ground will be problematical for the Ukraine, even with an influx of NATO gear.
Kissinger at Davos stated his view that the Ukraine will not be able to emerge unscathed from this war. He is admittedly old, but his judgement still seems sound.

Any treaty that leaves Russia in part of Ukraine means trusting Putin to keep his word, something that he's notably failed to do so far.
Will we see Kissinger holding a piece of paper with Putin's signature, saying "Peace in our time"?

Kissinger is no patsy. He knows full well that treaties are always subject to 'reinterpretation', they stay relevant as long as the parties involved defend them.
His point is that the whole world, including Ukraine, will be better off if the killing in Ukraine finally stops.
Given the price Russia has paid for the slice of Ukraine it is now occupying, it will be a good while before Putin or his successor try to take another bite.

By offering to open the shipping lanes, that looks like Russia’s thinking too.
Take a break, solidify your hold and wait (Crimea 2014-2022, = 8 years) before moving forwards once more.

Any deal with Putin is not worth the paper it's printed on. It just gives him an interval to regroup, resupply and train up cannon fodder. What we don't know is when he will run out of ordnance, provided of course that our side keeps the Ukrainians well supplied. Unfortunately it seems that rasputitsa is over.

It seems that human wave attacks are the current RF tactic. The Ukrainians need to preserve personnel while exacting a high price.

If I were Ukraine, the only way I'd accept a treaty with Russia - allowing them to continue to occupy their current gains - would be if it also allowed Ukraine to join NATO.

Otherwise, as jolihokistix notes, they'll be in the same situation within a decade when Russia is ready to take another bite. Making peace with the Russia is akin to making peace with Hitler - it's only valid until Russia decides otherwise.

Their focus is primarily on the high-tech impact.

What Newsweek doesn't consider, is the slowly, but steady encroach of the whole southern part of Ukraine. In the end, THAT is the target. The Newsweek items are just "means" to get to that target. Despite the encroachment costing Russia a huge amount of destroyed armament and cannon-fodder, history and reality shows, Russia doesn't care about these items as long as the territory is gained. And the collateral damage they cause to the civilians and infrastructure in/of the gained territory are completely out of consideration. Somewhat of an extreme long term thinking.

Yep, that would be a better security guarantee towards Ukraine, than the original treaties, which get waved aside by Russia, whenever it is suitable to them (just as with every other "agreement", though the USA is not much better in that regard).

There are numerous credible accounts of what happens to the civilian population in Ukrainian territory that is occupied by Russian forces. Territorial concessions will NOT stop the killing. The government and armed forces of Ukraine have a duty to defend all of their citizens from foreign aggression (you would expect the same of your military), and they have shown themselves to be a motivated and capable force. The decision on when to stop fighting is Ukraine's and Ukraine's alone. The wider civilised world has a moral obligation (and the means) to supply weapons that will allow Ukraine to restore it's territorial integrity. I would hope that any government that fails to do so will pay a heavy price.

Agreed, and not only that you would be cutting off the countries economic areas, gas, oil, coal, wheat and steel. Without those it would be a slow death for the Country.

Treaty etc
 

As others have said above, if Russia is allowed any gain from this, any cessation of hostilities will be worthless and last until Putin et al decide oterwise. What concerns me is the resolve of western governments to get stuck in and throw everything necessary at this to stop it in Ukraine's favour. As we have seen recently in the UK and elsewhere, domestic considerations incentivise politicians to take the easy line. I have yet to hear one make a convincing case for us all enduring hardhsip in order to fix this problem once & for all.

Without that resolve I can see stalemate, a fudged treaty and here we go again in 5 years time

That’s up to the Ukrainians to decide - and if they decide, as they have, to fight on, we should back them to the hilt including HIMARS, MLRS, aircraft and heavy armour if they ask for it.

Agreed

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FTwEwTkX...png&name=small