[Goose]

Russia certainly isn't "powerless" to do anything. However, they too are concerned about widening the war. IMHO in so far as our arming Ukraine becomes effective enough that Russia (Putin) has to deal with the fact they might "lose" (where we aren't sure what losing actually is), the more probable he will do something drastic to scare us (or the EU) into stopping. Your take on the subject is rational. Unfortunately, Putin's probably is not.

What do you think is the likelihood that Putin resorts to nukes?

Sadly, I have no idea. Certainly no sane man would do so. There is always the hope that those ordered to do so would simply not do it. Russia has always promulgated the idea that using a tactical nuclear weapon in Europe was a rational "sign" to the other side that continued advances would result in a nuclear war (escalate to de-escalate). While NATO never publicly agreed with this idea, it did resonate back in the years that NATO was drastically outnumbered by the Warsaw Pact forces. It was a "last-ditch" option.

In this case, neither Russia nor NATO are getting invaded and in danger of being overrun. Rationally, even the "signalling" option should be off the table. What will Putin do? Rationally, he doesn't invade Ukraine. Rationally, he would have just bought Crimea (with the implicit threat of invading if Ukraine wouldn't sell). The sad fact is that nobody has any idea what he will do. That is one of many reasons he has to go.

[Goose]

Russia certainly isn't "powerless" to do anything. However, they too are concerned about widening the war. IMHO in so far as our arming Ukraine becomes effective enough that Russia (Putin) has to deal with the fact they might "lose" (where we aren't sure what losing actually is), the more probable he will do something drastic to scare us (or the EU) into stopping. Your take on the subject is rational. Unfortunately, Putin's probably is not.

What do you think is the likelihood that Putin resorts to nukes?

Sadly, I have no idea. Certainly no sane man would do so. There is always the hope that those ordered to do so would simply not do it. Russia has always promulgated the idea that using a tactical nuclear weapon in Europe was a rational "sign" to the other side that continued advances would result in a nuclear war (escalate to de-escalate). While NATO never publicly agreed with this idea, it did resonate back in the years that NATO was drastically outnumbered by the Warsaw Pact forces. It was a "last-ditch" option.

In this case, neither Russia nor NATO are getting invaded and in danger of being overrun. Rationally, even the "signalling" option should be off the table. What will Putin do? Rationally, he doesn't invade Ukraine. Rationally, he would have just bought Crimea (with the implicit threat of invading if Ukraine wouldn't sell). The sad fact is that nobody has any idea what he will do. That is one of many reasons he has to go.