Putin Makes Nuclear Threats

What happens when Vladimir Putin starts feeling cornered? Sarah, David, Steve, and Jonah react to ...

By , , and

What happens when Vladimir Putin starts feeling cornered? Sarah, David, Steve, and Jonah react to Russia announcing military mobilization and think through the implications of Putin’s nuclear chest-thumping. They then turn to the politics of immigration (still very bad), and conclude with some rank punditry: is the Democrats’ momentary surge in the polls already bust?

Out of context: “To me, it’s a little like the fight: Hiter-Stalin – who is worse?”

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By , , and
Comments (96)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Kurt and Isabel Leininger

    Three cheers for David's "Hallmark Holiday" annoyance! I would add (as he briefly alluded to) that all events surviving solely by commercial hyperbole (or habitual family history) are not worth a "hill of beans" (putting it mildly). Indeed as he quipped, mothers deserve celebrating every day (and fathers too, by the way.)
    Along with NY Eve and Valentine's Day, you left out Halloween which I detest as another fake family outing, although the costumes can be cute and I'm sure dentists reap their rewards. Birthdays and anniversaries may be special and worth celebrating, but not necessarily every single year!
    (Perhaps we can form a new social/political movement ..... " Curmudgeonly Classical Liberals"... the grumpier the better.)
    Cheers - Kurt L. (1966 grad in civil engineering at Northwestern.... go 'Cats!")

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Carolyn

    DeSantis' stunt with the asylum seekers is why immigration remains an issue. Republicans like DeSantis have never cared to fix the issue; they prefer to keep it as a political issue. BTW, it's also one of the reasons we got Trump.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    TelltheTruth&DoWhatisRight

    new years: we like bc it affords opportunity to reflect on the year whether good or bad and express our hopes for the new year to come. we enjoy talking about all this with our kids. and: FIREWORKS! are really fun. Also as a kid it was fun to have permission to stay up late and watch the ball drop. So we give 2 thumbs up to NYEve.

    Collapse
  4. Tom Gibbons

    I cannot believe that while listening to this podcast I hear Jonah state that "it is horrible that" at which point I expected to hear something like "DeSantis used people this way" or the “DeSantis used tax payer money for a political stunt" BUT what I get was "that these sanctuary cities ...." at which point I had to turn off the podcast for a while. By the way neither Massachusetts nor Martha's Vineyard -- which is not a city but instead an island with six separate towns -- have passed sanctuary laws. How is the fact that he used taxpayer money for his political stunt not even worth a mention?
    I signed up for this service in major part because you promised that “When we provide analysis, we will endeavor to describe the opposing points of view with honesty and charity” where was that is this story? I can tell you that I have not heard the “honesty and charity“ for a very long time. During this podcast all four of you consistently lump all the left in one group while making sure to point out the many different points of view of the Right.
    If it was not for David French and now Kevin Williamson, I would cancel my subscription today. I had thought I was signing up for a right leaning, fact based, newsletter/podcast but it seems that all I’m getting is a little (small L) fox news. And yes, I know losing one subscriber means nothing to you but as a disgruntled Democrat, I had thought I had finally found what I was looking for from a “news publication” but that is NOT what I’m getting.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
      Sarah Isgur vertical-nib Author

      Jonah—and all of us—spoke at length on what we thought about the DeSantis stuff on last weeks podcast. But one also has to be able to see why Desantis’ stunt was so effective…bc half the country (including 40% of democrats) think 2 million apprehensions is out of control. Higher death tolls on record. This is what border states have been trying to tell these sanctuary jurisdictions that enjoy the compassionate label but don’t understand the very not compassionate reality when hundreds are dead bc they thought the border was “open” now. That’s what we were talking about this week.

      Collapse
      1. Tom Gibbons

        You can count me in the 40% of Democrats that feel that way. I did hear Jonah, Steve, David and I’m sure you say that to use people for this type of thing was deplorable last week but nothing was ever mentioned about how and who paid for this stunt. But the whole compassionate label / NOT compassionate reality thing was nowhere in that discussion in this podcast (I will grant you it has been in the past) it was at best "what a great win for DeSantis" with a little "should we treat people like that?"
        An effective stunt, yes, I guess, but I feel my point was that I did not see the "honesty and charity" to the opposing points of view I was promised. I would just like to be able to again say I agree with what he or she is saying instead of just being pissed at the end of the podcast and posting a rant in the comments

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
          Sarah Isgur vertical-nib Author

          Hmm ok I think I understand your point a little better. But don’t we have to explain why this was a political win for DeSantis and for democrats? Even if that’s an unpleasant reality?

          Collapse
          1. Tom Gibbons

            Yes, you are right, I guess that is part of the reason I listen. It was just hearing Jonah start with the "what is horrible" and expecting to hear ' "that they used people as pawns" and then hearing, at least to my ear, "is the left". That made me yell at my radio and turn it off. That makes my dog riding with me very nervous as he does not know who I'm talking to. I stand by my comment that I'm not see the endeavor to describe the opposing points of view with honesty and charity but perhaps I'm just more Left than the Center-Left I like to believe I am

            Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    The Bell Tower

    I always imagine the first caveman “discovering” fire and burning his caveman community to the ground followed by Caveman Congress banning the use of fire for the next 1500 years. In other words, he would have feared it long before he might discover how to control it, never mind convince the rest of society that he could use it without endangering everyone.

    David has forgotten more than I’ll ever know about all this stuff but I would argue that the real danger of Putin using a tactical nuke would be exactly the opposite: it would reinforce the thoughts Sarah implied in her question.

    We were all raised to fear a nuclear exchange with War Games and The Day After and all the drills and the rhetoric, etc. If the world sees a tactical nuclear strike with devastating but localized or limited damage, it might make humans more likely to use them again in the future.

    And a tactical nuke aimed at a battlefield target is different than a massive nuclear exchange aimed at major city centers the way I understand it. I’d much rather the fear of nuclear weapons remain a menacing hypothetical about the end of all things than it happen in reality and for people to go “Was that it?”

    That would be an irrational response for sure but you may have noticed we’re pretty irrational these days and in this particular circumstance, I’d prefer irrational fear over dangerous curiosity.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Jason Godwin

    The Not Worth Your Time segment was definitely worth my time. Three cheers for hating on Valentine's Day and New Year's Eve.

    Collapse
  7. GregS

    So let me push back on Jonahs position on Catoggios argument.
    Jonah thinks that its OK for Youngkin to support Kari Lake or for Desantis to support Mastriano because (a) Youngkin and Desantis are not as bad as Trump and they would not pose a danger to the country, and (b) the crazies will wither on the vine once Trump is gone.
    So basically Jonah thinks supporting crazy people is fine if you think they arent going to be a long term threat, snd the fact that you support crazy people should not be taken as evidence that you might *do* crazy things yourself.

    Therr are many problems with this argument.
    1) First, even if I grant all your arguments, you are basing your sanguine outlook on the assumption that Trump will be off the scene very soon. A lot depends on this assumption. Because if Trump lives another 10 years and exerts his malign influence on just an unshakeable 25% cultist portion of GOP voters, the crazies will bring down our country if the rest of the GOP lets them.
    2) Second, the argument that "the crazies will be brought in line by our institutions and systems" was exactly what got us Trump. Is it hubris or misplaced optimism that leads you to make the exact same argument again about very similar people?
    3) supporting crazy people that *you know are crazy* is a crazy thing to do. It shows at least that you will do crazy things if you think it is in your pwrsonal political interest. It is merely your assumption that at some point people like Youngkin and Desantis will refuse to do something crazy that benefits them because they're more worried about our country. What supporting evidence for this assumption do you have from their previous public actions?

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    JP Hunerwadel

    The early discussion centers around Putin's potential use of "tactical" nuclear weapons, so let me say, as a writer of military doctrine, including the Air Force's doctrine documents on use of nuclear weapons, strategic attack (not all--or even most--of which is nuclear), and counter-WMD, that there is no such thing as a "tactical" nuke. Even if the intended first-order effects of a nuclear weapon were supposed to be limited to the immediate battlespace (that is, at the "tactical level of war"), use of any nuke, or even, I suspect, a dirty bomb or EMP, would be so shocking that the second-order consequences would be "strategic" (that is, at the level of whole wars or whole nations and alliances). Use of a nuke on European soil, against Europeans (as in Ukraine) would, needless to say, be even more shocking to Europeans, and I don't think our discussions of Putin's potential use have taken into account the anger, fear, and demand for action that such an event would engender.

    Collapse
  9. Sharon Brown

    Agree completely about artificially created holidays. I now feel empowered. Until now, I have kept these thoughts to myself as cultural taboos rather than be labeled a Debbie Downer. Thank you for sharing.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Sarah I can’t believe you forgot what state you live in… I mean I’ve occasionally gotten my age off by a year but I’ve definitely never mistook VA for FL.

    Collapse
Load More