Russia Will Be Forced To Declare War Against Ukraine

a reply to: Grimpachi

You mean like they already are.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Is that what MSM is claiming?

The current US protocol for deciding whether to launch a nuclear strike—developed in the early 1960s, with the advent of intercontinental ballistic missiles—has two main functions and virtues: first, it concentrates the power and authority over the use of nuclear weapons in the presidency, at the highest level of the executive branch of the US government, thus keeping it out of the hands of the military and others. Second, it enables the president to respond rapidly and decisively to a nuclear attack by an enemy whose missiles may fly from one side of the planet to the other in 30 minutes; or whose missiles launched from submarines in the oceans may fly to targets in the United States in 15 minutes. It’s critical to have a protocol that allows the president to consider the use of nuclear weapons and, if necessary, to order their use, and to have the process of implementation begin in a very, very short period of time.

The protocol’s virtues also produce its disadvantages. By virtue of the speed and concentration of authority in this protocol, the presidenthas an opportunity to effectively railroad the nuclear commanders and forces into executing even a very large nuclear strike first—preemptivelyor preventively. That could lead to a misguided decision based on an impulsive psychology or on other factors that lead to a very bad call.

[www.wagingpeace.org...]https://www.wagingpeace.org/protocol-u-s-nuclear-strike/]

Updated March 29, 2022
The Biden Administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) reviewed U.S. nuclear declaratory policy—
the statements the United States makes about when, how, and why it might use nuclear weapons to deter
adversaries and reassure U.S. allies of its commitment to their defense. But, according to an
Administration fact sheet, the NPR will not alter this policy to include a “no first use” pledge stating that
the United States will never use nuclear weapons first in a conflict or a “sole purpose” policy stating that
the sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear use. Instead, the NPR will state that “the
fundamental role of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack on the United States, our allies, and
partners.” It will also indicate that “the United States would only consider the use of nuclear weapons in
extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners.”

[sgp.fas.org...]https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/IN10553.pdf]
Somehow, I don't find this information very comforting. Certain factions always seem to change the rules when things aren't going the way they want them to.

a reply to: nugget1

China and India are the only nuclear powers with a no first use policy.

Every other power has first strike, escalation deterrence as a doctrine.

Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States,[20] and France[21] say that they will use nuclear weapons against either nuclear or non-nuclear states only in the case of invasion or other attack against their territory or against one of their allies

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Each country’s law practically reads the same.

a reply to: PassiveSeeker

NATO is the one that pushed Russia to the edge and NATO led countries are hoping to isolate Russia and China at some point i dont think things are going to work the way they believe.

a reply to: 1947boomer

In Russia, it requires the Duma to vote to declare war. That’s why Putin is careful to call this a Special Military Operation (SMO).

Putin has sole authority to declare war, according to the wki and here it is from their own constitution.



Declaration of war

and here it is from their own constitution,not sure of the site, might not be a government site. might be like a lawyer sites in the U.S.

the wording is kinda strange, but that could be just russian crooked legalese, or lost in translation

Chapter 3 Article 71 J states

Article 86 The jurisdiction of the Russian Federation includes:
j. foreign policy and international relations of the Russian Federation, international treaties and agreements of the Russian Federation, issues of war and peace;

Chapter 3. The Federal Structure

Chapter 4 Article 86 A states,

Article 86 The President of the Russian Federation shall:
a. govern the foreign policy of the Russian Federation;

Then Article 87 1, 2, 3, states,

Article 87
1. The President of the Russian Federation shall be the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
2. In case of an aggression against the Russian Federation or of a direct threat of aggression the President of the Russian Federation shall introduce in the territory of the Russian Federation or in its certain parts a martial law and immediately inform the Council of the Federation and the State Duma about this .
3. The regime of the martial law shall be defined by the federal constitutional law.

Chapter 4. The President of the Russian Federation

also i found this that i'm fairly certain is from the russian embassy press release.

27. The Russian Federation shall reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy. The decision to use nuclear weapons shall be taken by the President of the Russian Federation.
28. The activities to fulfill tasks assigned to the Aimed Forces, other troops and bodies shall be organized and carried out in accordance with the Defense Plan of the Russian Federation, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation, orders and directives of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, as well as other statutory acts of the Russian Federation and strategic defense planning documents.

Employment of the Armed Forces, other troops and bodies, and their main tasks in peacetime under the conditions of an imminent threat of aggression and in wartime

don't shoot the messenger, just posting what i've found.

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: PassiveSeeker

NATO is the one that pushed Russia to the edge and NATO led countries are hoping to isolate Russia and China at some point i dont think things are going to work the way they believe.

Russia pushed Russia to the edge by treating the people in sovjet satellite states like absolute garbage , they out of fear turned to NATO.

Actions have consequences.

a reply to: PassiveSeeker

It doesn't take a declaration to declare war.

Anytime a military moves into another country and attacks, it's a war.

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: PassiveSeeker

NATO is the one that pushed Russia to the edge and NATO led countries are hoping to isolate Russia and China at some point i dont think things are going to work the way they believe.

Nato didn't make Russia invade a sovereign nation and start committing war crimes. That was Russia's choice and they should be condemned for it. They lost world sympathy when they became the aggressors.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: 1947boomer

Maybe the Duma will have some accidents if they don't do it.

Heart disease is no laughing matter. It can kill anyone at any time.

originally posted by: Darkblade71
a reply to: PassiveSeeker

I don't know this for certain,it is just an idea, but I wonder if a declaration of war will allow Russia to use tactical nuclear weapons, where as at this point, as a special operation, they cannot, due to Russian laws...?

That was my first thought too.

a reply to: PassiveSeeker

Yeah, I mean really, how dare the Ukraine fight back on Russian soil, after Russia invades. How dare they!!! The nerve of some people, right??

Seems to me that if you invade a country, you've kinda already declared war...or am I missin' somethin' somewhere along the line??

a reply to: seagull

It really has to do with actual legal terms within Russia, from my understanding anyway. Special Military operation gives him authority within their legal framework to do certain things. Much like the US or NATO not calling many of their escapades(wars, invasions) over the last 70 years wars but Police Actions or humantarian interventions and whatnot. It's all about the way Putin needs to frame this conflict legally within Russian law.

You and me, we call it what it is, an invasion and a war. POS heads of state call things by weasel words so they can do POS weasel things. Legalese is a bane on humanity, imo.

Putin can declare a special military operation. Is there anything that limits the scope of that operation? I believe Putin can use as many troops as he wants to as long as he wants to without having to formally declare war. At least until he meets with substantial opposition from his own party.

a reply to: PassiveSeeker

Putin's propaganda machine is preparing the Russian people for wartime conditions. So the groundwork is laid for the call up of conscripts and converting manufacturing and industry to wartime production. Moreover, Putin's so-called special military operation embraced an undertrained, poorly structured and led military force. In contrast, Ukraine understood that warfighting requires a national effort.

Russia's efforts to move away from peacetime conditions will take 3 - 4 years to pay dividends. Nevertheless, retraining the armed forces with combined arms in mind, upskilling civilian workers, finding competent military commanders, and calling up conscripts are in the pipeline.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: PassiveSeeker

Yeah, I mean really, how dare the Ukraine fight back on Russian soil, after Russia invades. How dare they!!! The nerve of some people, right??

Seems to me that if you invade a country, you've kinda already declared war...or am I missin' somethin' somewhere along the line??

The US has invaded tons of countries to do special military operations. Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Laos, Syria etc does that mean USA declared war against these countries?

Would it be OK if Yemen or Somalia sent some "secret agents" over to fight back against American civilians? They are just fighting back for their country, how dare they, eh?

The US invaded Iraq on the grounds of chemical weapon without declaring war.

a reply to: TikTokTaz

In fact, the US has technically not been at war since the end of World War II

There hasn't been a declaration of war since 1941. Even when Saudi Arabia invaded Yemen in 2015 they never declared a war.