Some potentially dangerous military situations. PART 1.

Doc: Some dangerous situations
Version: 0.2
Date: 02 may, 2022
By: Albert van der Sel
Status: Starting

** Please refresh the page to see any updates.**



Note: I had already some text, created up to 24 march, 2022. However I consider that text
as being "expired", due to all changes in World security, since that date.
That old text has been deleted. I have to admit: it was not accurate, since reality turned out
to be different.


Below is new text, constructed as of 30 April, 2022.

Important:

- Nobody reads this anyway, but I must say beforehand,
that the text below, reflects my personal opinion only.

- Just to make sure a possible reader understand: I am pro Europe, pro USA, pro Nato.



1. The European "Cuba crisis", or Russia's "Trojan Horse" in Kaliningrad:

You undoubtly know about the Russian threats, to use nuclear weapons, if Nato interferes
with the Russia-Ukraine war.

I am quite sure, that up to the 30th of April, there were at least 5 spoken threats
by either Putin, Lavrov, and Medvedev.
The last statement (up to the 30th of April) by Putin, mentioned a harsh and "lightning fast response",
as never seen before.

It is known that around 2018, the Russian Federation transported short range nuclear tactical missiles (among others: the Iskander).
to Kaliningrad. This is a Russian enclave, in the heart of Europe. Yes, believe it or not. Almost in the middle of Europe.
It's located between the Baltic States and Poland. If it's new to you, just look it up in a map.

If you doubt the presence of short range nuclear tactical missiles in Kaliningrad, then just Google around a bit,
using keywords as nuclear missile and Kaliningrad.

This all is not new. It was known since (around) 2018. Too bad Nato did not acted as it should have, once this fact
was known.

It's why I call it "the European "Cuba crisis". Really close by, we have tactical nuclear missiles which can reach
any location in Europe, in a matter of minutes.

In the present conditions, a truly very dangerous situation.

I believe that the "lightning fast response" where Putin spoke of, can be connected to the tactical nuclear missiles
in Kaliningrad. Indeed, they can reach any place in Europe, in mere minutes.

I do not think Putin is boasting. There is a limit to what Europe and USA can do to help the Ukraine.
Ofcourse, I support all actions of Europe and USA, as long as they take care of the limits which exists.
Otherwise..., as I believe, we have at least a limited nuclear assault from Russia.
Sorry for that. But it's the way I see it.

For a better understanding of the terrible statement above, please see section 2.

2. Breach of the INF treaty. Shorter range nuclear missiles:

Russia and the USA, both posess plenty ICBM's/SLBM's. These are the larger missiles, often with a range
well over 10000km, and often in MIRV configuration. These are typically used for deterrence.
You might say that they are (sort of) useless, unless one want to destroy civilization.
These are called "strategic nuclear weapons".
If one side launches these weapons (from silo's, subs, and other means), the other side will do too, resulting
in the end of civilization. A full nuclear war indeed.

On the other side of the spectrum, we have smaller missiles, often with a limited range, of say 400km, 1000km or so,
but most often well below 5500km.
Usually they have one warhead, with a limited yield (say 10kT, 20kT, and most often well below 100kT).
These are called "tactical nuclear weapons" and in principle could be used on the battlefield.

There is no need for all sorts of details here, but we can say that in the past, both Russia and the USA,
had plenty of different sorts of tactical nuclear weapons as well.

It was generally percieved, that shorter range, and lower yield, nuclear missiles, would reduce the treshold
for a nuclear conflict. Indeed, we understand that "just" a lower yield 10kT short range missile, is more apt
for battlefield circumstances compared to the larger ICBM's/SLBM's.

In 1987, both the Sovjet Union and the USA, signed the INF Treaty.
It prohibited the manufacture of short-range (up to 1000 km) and short medium-range (up to 5500 km) nuclear missiles.

The USA honoured the treaty, but the Russians did not. They secretly developed a range of different models and types.
When former pres. Trump was informed of this fact, he was furious as Hell, which I fully understood at that time.

There you have it. It follows that the Russians have the advantage to use tactical nuclear weapons, which allows
them to blackmail Nato, or even start a limited nuclear war.
You ask yourself: would Nato risk a full war, if Russia only uses a few tactical nukes ???
Most will not like me for this: I have strong doubts, and actually, I really do not think so. That's a personal opinion.

Maybe this section contributed in understanding section 1 above.

In hindsight, I regret that the West stepped into the INF trap, although the intensions were honourable.
I hope Nato will adress "the gap" as soon as possible.

You probably will see, that I consider a nuclear assualt on selected targets in Europe, as a realistic scenario.
It would be "great", and I believe also appropriate, if the USA would go to DEVCON 2 status, and also would
consider to station a number of B2's in Europe.

3. One of the goals of Russia: Ukraine fully land-locked, and Moldova must fall too.

Collary: Means of Exports (like grain etc..) from the Ukraine, will be destroyed/hindered.
Collary: Ukraine having Ports/access to Black sea, will be gone. Ukraine will be Fully dependent on Russia.


Ofcourse, nothing in this note is "new" or "fantastic", or something... It's all well-know stuff.

A few weeks after the Russia-Ukraine war began, I was amazed how poorly the Russian army performs.
But ofcourse, the Ukrainian soldiers are superb.

Military analysts generally seems to have consensus, that the Russians want to have all of the south (all territory in the south
bordering the Black Sea), and all of the Donbas region (including Loehansk and Donetsk).
Presently, it is 2 may, 2022, and it looks like the Russians will eventually succeed their objectives.
Although, fierce opposition exists from the Ukrainian forces.

Now, you have seen the title of this section, as well as both collaries.
If Ukraine want to export by sea, they now might go via Romania. If the Russians want to hinder that, they might
attack (with whatever means), the transport while in Romania. Then..., they are crossing Nato territory.
What then might happen..., I am not sure, but it cannot be good. That's why it is in this note called "possibly dangerous
military situations....".