Tyrant Putin’s Safety Mechanisms: Chemicals, Mass Destruction, Nukes

Putin engaged in this war because he was sure to win… not only was his colossal army of 3,000 tanks, and thousands of other armored gun equipped vehicles, irresistible, but, should it falter on the ground, Putin would still win, thanks to weapons of mass destruction he has in reserve (some of which, for example neurotoxic gas Sarin, and vaccuum bombs, have been used in Syria).

Unfortunately for democracy, nuclear tyrant Putin has many “tactical”nukes, hundreds of them at the ready, and the West has very few, if any. The West unilaterally disarmed, in a sort of John Lennon peacenik strategy of turning the other cheek… as if Auschwitz had not amply demonstrated the immorality of accepting slaps all day long from lying blood thirsty brutes, and as if Lennon’s thoracic cage had not been pierced by 4 bullets [1].

So if Putin goes nuclear, he wins. At least that’s obviously how Putin looks at it: Putin could use nukes several times, hoping to scare the entire planet into submission, exerting “deterrence through fear inducement (we use Russian nuke theory semantics)… And the West will, or at least, so does Putin believes, just evoke further “red lines”, and shrink into obedience… while Ukraine is forced to surrender. Russian strategy anticipates to wage nuclear war, starting on the battlefield, and progressively “escalating to de-escalate” (Russian code words for the other side surrendering).

Short of this, Russia has other weapons of mass destruction, biological, or chemicals. So-called “thermobaric” or “vacuum bombs”, fuel-air explosives as powerful as the smallest nukes have already been used (Russian startegy considers the largest fuel-air explosives equivalent to small nukes).

At least, once again, that’s how Putin is looking at it: he has plenty of weapons of mass destruction at the ready. And that’s what the West should be ready for Putin to use a whole ladder full of rungs of mass destruction to escalate along, and thus to elevate himself, as a force and will, and that evil he identifies with goodness.

The West is not ready for this, either in its war theory, its weapons, or its expectations. The easiest way to suppress this danger would be to explain to Russian armed forces that the highest moral cause, at this point, is to dispose of Putin in a timely manner.

Hence the importance of brandishing Putin for what he is, a war criminal. Many plots against Hitler by German soldiers failed because nobody had told them it was morally correct to dispose of war criminal leadership… so they often felt morally wrong to dispose of their chief(s) [2].

Russian officers following or a fortiori, generating, criminal orders could very well find themselves jailed for life, after regime change. This is what happened in Serbia, although, like Russia or the US, Serbia was not engaged to obey the justice institutions of the United Nations (ICJ and ICC). The International Court of Justice just ordered Russia to get out of Ukraine, so the invasion of Ukraine is now officially recognized by the UN as a war crime.

The ex-Serbian dictator died in UN jail, and the top two commanders of the Bosnian Serbs are in jail for life.

To come back to the original quandary, what to do? The Biden administration is warning Russia and the world against a possible US chemical attack. That’s good. But I sure hope they prepare a response in case of the usage of nukes…

Because showing weakness, as the Biden administration repeatedly did, entice Putin to believe that a nuke would solve all his problems… and that has actually been suggested on Russia Putin TV (there is no other!)

World War Three has started, but democracy and world order can still win it, fast and on the cheap, as long as we act decisively now. Terrifying Chinese dictator Xi is part of the proper course of action… Hey, Xi may even not be re-elected by his comrades if it becomes clear that he allied himself with a lunatic loser deprived of strategic sense

Patrice Ayme


[1] the West used to have plenty of tactical nukes, either US or French… but unilaterally disarmed, eliminating short range tactical nuclear weapons, for example the French “Pluton” meant to break a Soviet armored assault through Germany.


[2] This was true all the way to the Field Marshall level. In 1943, Von Kluge, who commanded the central German front against Russia, learned of a plot against Hitler, who was visiting… Ukraine. Instead of arresting the plotters, Von Kluge advised them, pointing out Hitler was beeter protected than they anticipated! (Two attempts were made, the second one a bomb in Hitler’s plane which unfortunately froze… The general who had put it there flew as fast as possible to Berlin to remove the unexploded bomb before it could be found…) Now, if Hitler had been declared a war criminal, and a genocidal tyrant, and denounced to be so by respected international institutions, Von Kluge would have felt morally justified to order one of the many divisions under his command to just move in arrest Hitler… and Hitler and his bodyguards could have done nothing about it.


P/S: The essece of the comment above was censored at the New York Times by Helene CooperJulian E. Barnes and Eric Schmitt. This sort of opinion steering is not fundamentally different from what any dictatorship does.

The bloodied corpse on the bottom right is that of a 16 year old girl whose legs were blown off during soccer practice. To all this, the criminals occupying the Kremlin reply that the Ukrainains are doing it to themselves, or that these are sophisitcated montages by NATO, some of them involving professional actors…. A method Russian criminals know very well, as they have used it a lot…

Tags: , , , ,

15 Responses to “Tyrant Putin’s Safety Mechanisms: Chemicals, Mass Destruction, Nukes”

  1. D'Ambiallet Says:

    Are you aware that Lukashenko the Bielorusse president just said today Russia will use nuclear weapons? This supports you general thesis.


  2. Gerrit Says:

    The West and a broad coalition are in a hot economic war with Russia. A nuclear escalation has been on my mind from day one. I think we are only in danger if Biden or NATO blinks and gives in to Putin’s demands when faced with nuclear combat. So far I don’t see this happening.

    If NATO intervenes in Ukraine with air support or other direct means, then the coalition might splinter.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Hi Gerrit and welcome, only the first comment or comments with links are “moderated”….
      I agree with you I think “we are only in danger if Biden or NATO blinks and gives in to Putin’s demands when faced with nuclear combat. So far I don’t see this happening.”

      I read the Russian doctrine on escalation, it’s long and complex… But it involves nukes early on, and nukes that the West does not have in its arsenal anymore…

      I don’t see NATO splinter… For example, France’s government is very discrete, apparently not doing very much… but is sending actual combatants to Ukraine (“quantity and quality” dixit French foreign minster, who used to be the minister of defense, Le Drian…) The most hanged back country is Germany, and even it is sending thousands of missiles….


  3. Kevin Berger Says:


    Kevin Berger

    Ce lien surtout pour la notion de “mythe” sur la 2GM, que je ne peux m’empêcher de mettre en rapport/contraste avec les “mythes” concurrents sur la 2GM des USA et des godons (et des Allemands, et d’autres, même), et puis, désespérance, de la France.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Excellent lien, merci beaucoup! Certaines des idees sont 100% les miennes… Je fais depuis longtemps de longs discours la-dessus…
      Much of the twitter essay of this gentleman sounds pretty much exactly like what I have been saying for 15 years, and that nobody dares, or can, say, but he has better knowledge of Putin society from inside…


  4. Gerrit Says:

    I can’t find confirmation for unilateral disarmament of tactical nukes. The B61-12 nuclear bomb can release 0.3, 1.5, 10, or 50 kilotons of explosive energy. Its production/refurbishment has not begun (there were delays), but ca. 180 of the older variants should be in Europe already. Mods 3, 4, 7, and 10 are also ‘dial-a-yield’. I haven’t found detailed and current inventory information.


    Click to access 20-F-0568_DOC_15_B61_Mod_12_LEP_TKA_SAR_Dec_2019_Full.pdf


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Hmmm… Thanks! I read somewhere in the specialized literature, that recently there were only 100 US nukes in Europe, including Turkey… OK, considering what happened, numbers may have changed.
      In any case, there used to be hundreds of tactical nukes. And that’s the case with Putin… As you said the dial a yield has not been deployed… And why would one explode with .3 KT out of 50 KT nuke? Seems a serious waste… Also got to be very dirty…
      Point is, Putin can strike with dozens of tactical nukes and disarm Europe, including US forces, but for the UK and French strategic subs (supposedly France put two to sea). Smallest French warheads these days are 150 KT…


      • Gerrit Says:

        “And why would one explode with .3 KT out of 50 KT nuke? Seems a serious waste…”
        The official argument seems to be that B61-12 is so precise that the low yields, with less radioactive fallout, are ‘more flexible and suitable for a wider range of contingencies’ than the current type.

        The bomb design is still secret. It is assumed by many, that the lower yields are the detonation of only the ‘Primary’ without and with fusion boost. The higher yields may come from mechanical changes to the fusion Secondary and different amounts of boosting.

        The current plan is to reduce bomb parts and bombs from the active/inactive stockpile to no more than 500 active B61-12s in total.
        In comparison, only 15 GBU-43 MOAB (11 KT non-nuclear bombs) were built.

        There is a yearly exercise called Steadfast Noon. This article also contains the 100 nukes estimate:


  5. Patrice Ayme Says:

    Four Times A Year, France ‘Nukes’ Itself
    David Axe
    David AxeForbes Staff
    Aerospace & Defense
    I write about ships, planes, tanks, drones, missiles and satellites.
    A Rafale with an ASMPA missile. MBDA
    Every three months, dozens of French air force fighters, tankers and radar planes take off at bases across France, form up over the Atlantic Ocean then split up and practice penetrating air-defenses and dropping nuclear bombs on French soil.

    These quarterly exercises, code name “Poker,” don’t just prepare French forces for nuclear war—they’re also a increasingly important diplomatic tool as France aims to fill the void a destabilizing United States has left in Europe.

    According to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, the latest Poker involves a nuclear assault force including a dozen French air force Rafale fighter-bombers plus three aerial tankers—C-135FRs or A330s—and an E-3 radar plane. The defending forces include eight fighters—either Rafales or Mirage 2000s—plus at least one tanker.

    The plan is for the attacking forces from several bases to form up off France’s northwest coast. The tankers will then drag the fighters south to the France-Spain border then east across France to the Mediterranean Sea.

    There, the nuclear Rafales will split from the E-3 and tankers, descend to low level and attempt to slip past defending fighters and surface-to-air missile systems before simulating nuclear attacks—most likely by way of 300-mile ASMP-A scramjet cruise missiles.

    The weapons will be dummies. French policy bars warplanes from carrying live nukes during peacetime.

    The Poker war games usually follow the same basic plan. The duration of the strikers’ sorties—up to four hours—matches the flight time from French bases to western Russia and back. Paris began organizing Poker exercises shortly after forming its airborne nuclear-strike force with Mirage IV bombers and C-135FRs back in 1964.

    Paris’ nuclear deterrent also includes four French navy submarines each with 16 M51 intercontinental ballistic missiles. The French navy’s own Rafale fighters, flying from the fleet’s sole aircraft carrier, also can carry nukes. France’s atomic arsenal includes around 300 warheads.

    France’s nuclear force-structure is unique in Europe. Where the United Kingdom deploys all its atomic weapons on submarines, France stubbornly maintains air-deliverable nukes.

    “The airborne component has specific advantages,” the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris explained in a 2019 study. “The first one is accuracy, which is much better today than that of the sea-based ballistic component.”

    “That is the reason why, if it can participate in the full-spectrum of nuclear missions, it is particularly valuable either for the exercise of the warning or for a limited and tailored planning.”

    In other words, nuclear-armed Rafales gives Paris the option of signalling its intention to wage nuclear war … or conducting limited atomic strikes. All without giving away the location of the more powerfully-armed submarines.

    Poker is the mechanism by which the French air force exercises this particular atomic muscle. But there’s also a diplomatic component.

    As the United States under President Donald Trump began to pull back from international alliances while also ramping up its production of new, and provocative, types of nuclear weapons, French president Emmanuel Macron began engaging in a kind of atomic diplomacy.

    America’s European allies once could count on American nukes for deterrence. Macron and his administration have urged them to look to France, instead. The French government rarely announces the Poker war games, but it made an exception in February 2019. “We Europeans cannot remain spectators of our own security,” defense minister Florence Parly said.

    “France’s vital interests now have a European dimension,” Macron said this February. He invited France’s European allies to join in the French military’s nuclear war games, presumably including the Poker exercises. “European partners who want to do so will be able to be associated to French deterrence forces’ war games,” Macron said.

    It’s unclear what exactly this might mean. It’s also unclear whether any countries have accepted Macron’s invitation.

    But the offer stands—and the opportunities are plenty. France pretends to nuke itself four times a year, and it shows no sign of stopping.


  6. Gmax Says:

    Your patience for pro-Putin criminal propagandists is amazing


  7. Kevin Berger Says:

    Kevin Berger
    Pour info, je “suis” touitteur avec beaucoup d’intérêt/méfiance/répulsion (faut voir la nature même du bouzin), voire une hypocrisie certaine (mes “touitteurs” préférés ont tendance à être des français atlantistes et/ou dans la diplomatie/écosystème de think tanks, ce qui est à hurler de rire), mais cehttps://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1498377757536968711 est une trouvaille récente intéressante je pense.

    Sinon, dégout plus que jamais envers les anglos, avec la conviction encore renforcée par l’épisode covid qu’ils sont “autres”, un “variant” (hé) européen qui n’est pas “monté” comme nous culturellement/historiquement/etc, x1000 pour les ouèssès qui sont des godons, mais sans aucune restriction ou contrainte, de ressources, de voisinage, de population,…

    Sinon, pour en revenir au premier lien sur la “taille de la Russie”, j’avais surtout trouvé intéressant la nature de “colonie”, “sources de matières premières”, etc, et bien sûr, le rôle joué par les marchands anglo-normands qui font l’âme anglo.

    Poutine avait commencé à faire bander les fafs un peu avant le 11/09 ? il me semble, avec son “dans 20 ans, la France sera la colonie de ses ex-colonies”, ce que j’avais fini par trouver ironique, car bien trop tardif : la France et l’Europe, ont été et sont la colonie de leurs ex-colonies, les USA (exactement le même schémas que pour la Gb mais en mode x1000, cf. les contraintes absentes), et l’URSS (et de son reliquat russe, en mode quart-monde).

    Ce qui conclut mon petit message, et me ramène à cette histoire de “mythes 2GM”, polonais, ouèsses, godons, russes, teuton,… desquels ont ne peut pas sortir (jusqu’à la prochaine ?) et qui concernant la France, nous (ou la) tuent.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Beaucoup a dire a tout cela…
      The US/Trump developped excellent vaccines, thanks to the startup culture.
      That Europe has less starup culture. That’s a big problem… And a consequence of greater European fascism.
      I have written hundreds of pages on the machinations of the US Deep State… All the way abck to 1607…
      However, the US Deep State leveraged faults in European culture, in particular Englsih machinations (they are the ones who leveraged Prussia and its militaro-racism, starting in 18C), German-Prussian racist militarized fascism, and Russian ethnic imperialism…


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      It’s not the fault of Anglo-Saxons if, say, a country like France decided to degenerate mentally and intellectually.
      An example is fracking: France has at least 100 years of consummation of natural gas, which could be fracked. A law was passed, making French fracking unlawful, even at the exploratory stage, and, instead, make possible for Puttin to spend trillions on armaments, including hypersonic weapons (of at least three different types, deployed, some of them starting more than a decade ago). This is all high treason against democracy.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: