A nuclear strike followed by a NATO air offensive would be quite an escalation, the subject is averting it. Preferably by just saying what they're going to do, instead of current vague "most severe consequences"
It's often said that Putin didn't quite get Biden's cautious threats seriously and thought he can get away with his escalation in February, and that he wouldn't go with it if he has been told about how he would in fact face the almost 1% of NATO land forces potential that would demolish his army as it did happen.
Sort of similar of how Saddam wasn't straight up told DON'T OR WE'LL FUCK YOU UP in these very words instead of the cautious diplomatic crap in the case of Kuwait 1990. He also didn't take it seriously, because they didn't tell him in the terms he would understand. (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-03-21-mn-658-story.html)
A nuclear strike followed by a NATO air offensive would be quite an escalation, the subject is averting it. Preferably by just saying what they're going to do, instead of current vague "most severe consequences"
It's often said that Putin didn't quite get Biden's cautious threats seriously and thought he can get away with his escalation in February, and that he wouldn't go with it if he was told he would in fact face the almost 1% of NATO land forces potential that would demolish his army as it did happen.
Sort of similar of how Saddam wasn't straight up told DON'T OR WE'LL FUCK YOU UP in these very words instead of the cautious diplomatic crap in the case of Kuwait 1990. He also didn't take it seriously, because they didn't tell him in the terms he would understand. (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-03-21-mn-658-story.html)
A nuclear strike followed by a NATO air offensive would be quite an escalation, the subject is averting it. Preferably by just saying what they're going to do, instead of current vague "most severe consequences"
It's often said that Putin didn't quite get Biden's cautious threats seriously and thought he can get away with his escalation in February, and that he wouldn't go with it if he was told he would in fact face the almost 1% of NATO land forces potential that would demolish his army as it did happen.
Sort of similar of how Saddam wasn't straight up told DON'T OR WE'LL FUCK YOU UP instead of the cautious diplomatic crap in the case of Kuwait 1990. He also didn't take it seriously, because they didn't tell him in the terms he would understand. (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-03-21-mn-658-story.html)
A nuclear strike followed by a NATO air offensive would be quite an escalation, the subject is averting it. Preferably by just saying what they're going to do, instead of current vague "most severe consequences"
It's often said that Putin didn't quite get Biden's cautious threats seriously and thought he can get away with his escalation in February, and that he wouldn't go with it if he was told he would in fact face the almost 1% of NATO land forces potential that would demolish his army as it did happen.
Sort of similar of how Saddam wasn't straight up told DON'T OR WE'LL FUCK YOU UP instead of the cautious diplomatic crap in the case of Kuwait 1990. He also didn't take it seriously, because they didn't tell him in the terms he would understand.
A nuclear strike followed by a NATO air offensive would be quite an escalation, the subject is averting it. Preferably by just saying what they're going to do, instead of current vague "most severe consequences"
It's often said that Putin didn't quite get Biden's cautious threats seriously and thought he can get away with his escalation in February, and that he wouldn't go with it if he was told he would in fact face the almost 1% of NATO conventional potential that would demolish his army as it did happen.
Sort of similar of how Saddam wasn't straight up told DON'T OR WE'LL FUCK YOU UP instead of the cautious diplomatic crap in the case of Kuwait 1990. He also didn't take it seriously, because they didn't tell him in the terms he would understand.