U.S. President Joe Biden appearing on 60 Minutes. (Photo CBS News)
Biden Says Nukes in Ukraine 'Would Change the Face of War Unlike Anything Since WWII'
Biden's advice to any consideration by Putin to use so-called tactical nuclear weapons: "Don't. Don't. Don't."
In an interview with 60 Minutes set to air Sunday night, President Joe Biden says that his clear advice to Russian President Vladimir Putin if he is "considering using chemical or tactical nuclear weapons" in Ukraine, would be this: "Don't. Don't. Don't."
The question was asked by news correspondent Scott Pelley, who described a current state of affairs in which Putin, after nearly 9 months of protracted war and recent gains by a Ukrainian counter-offensive, is feeling "embarrassed and pushed into a corner."
Asked what he would do in response to any kind of nuclear strike, Biden said, "You think I would tell you if I knew exactly what it would be? Of course I'm not going to tell you." But, he added, "It'll be consequential."
Such a move, said Biden, "would change the face of war unlike anything since World War II."
The comments from Biden come just days after a new report from the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs warned that a continued buildup of conventional military weapons by the U.S. and other European allies in Ukraine increases the risk of a nuclear confrontation.
"Russian aggression in Ukraine requires an international response. However, it does not justify increased U.S. military budgets, which could ultimately escalate tensions with Russia and once again lead us down a dangerous path," said Costs of War Project co-director Stephanie Savell.
Instead of increasing the flow of weapons into Ukraine, the paper advises "de-escalatory approaches" to end the war unleashed by Putin's invasion. Such measures should include "direct talks, reviving the arms control agenda, and pursuing military confidence-building measures between NATO countries and Russia."
In a series of tweets late last week, Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), winner of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize, said she was deeply troubled by the way journalists and analysts throw around the term "tactical nuclear weapons" without putting them in their proper context.
"Whether or not the risk is high or low, when we describe what Russian use of nuclear weapons would do in Ukraine, we have to mention that hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians would die," Fihn tweeted on Thursday. "Even if it stopped with one bomb, it would be an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe."
"This to me," she added, "is one of the main problems of many nuclear analysts. It is detached from reality and real people, and only talks about abstract strategy and theory. It's how we desensitize decision-makers and the public and make the use of nuclear weapons sound normal and acceptable."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
In an interview with 60 Minutes set to air Sunday night, President Joe Biden says that his clear advice to Russian President Vladimir Putin if he is "considering using chemical or tactical nuclear weapons" in Ukraine, would be this: "Don't. Don't. Don't."
The question was asked by news correspondent Scott Pelley, who described a current state of affairs in which Putin, after nearly 9 months of protracted war and recent gains by a Ukrainian counter-offensive, is feeling "embarrassed and pushed into a corner."
Asked what he would do in response to any kind of nuclear strike, Biden said, "You think I would tell you if I knew exactly what it would be? Of course I'm not going to tell you." But, he added, "It'll be consequential."
Such a move, said Biden, "would change the face of war unlike anything since World War II."
The comments from Biden come just days after a new report from the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs warned that a continued buildup of conventional military weapons by the U.S. and other European allies in Ukraine increases the risk of a nuclear confrontation.
"Russian aggression in Ukraine requires an international response. However, it does not justify increased U.S. military budgets, which could ultimately escalate tensions with Russia and once again lead us down a dangerous path," said Costs of War Project co-director Stephanie Savell.
Instead of increasing the flow of weapons into Ukraine, the paper advises "de-escalatory approaches" to end the war unleashed by Putin's invasion. Such measures should include "direct talks, reviving the arms control agenda, and pursuing military confidence-building measures between NATO countries and Russia."
In a series of tweets late last week, Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), winner of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize, said she was deeply troubled by the way journalists and analysts throw around the term "tactical nuclear weapons" without putting them in their proper context.
"Whether or not the risk is high or low, when we describe what Russian use of nuclear weapons would do in Ukraine, we have to mention that hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians would die," Fihn tweeted on Thursday. "Even if it stopped with one bomb, it would be an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe."
"This to me," she added, "is one of the main problems of many nuclear analysts. It is detached from reality and real people, and only talks about abstract strategy and theory. It's how we desensitize decision-makers and the public and make the use of nuclear weapons sound normal and acceptable."
In an interview with 60 Minutes set to air Sunday night, President Joe Biden says that his clear advice to Russian President Vladimir Putin if he is "considering using chemical or tactical nuclear weapons" in Ukraine, would be this: "Don't. Don't. Don't."
The question was asked by news correspondent Scott Pelley, who described a current state of affairs in which Putin, after nearly 9 months of protracted war and recent gains by a Ukrainian counter-offensive, is feeling "embarrassed and pushed into a corner."
Asked what he would do in response to any kind of nuclear strike, Biden said, "You think I would tell you if I knew exactly what it would be? Of course I'm not going to tell you." But, he added, "It'll be consequential."
Such a move, said Biden, "would change the face of war unlike anything since World War II."
The comments from Biden come just days after a new report from the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs warned that a continued buildup of conventional military weapons by the U.S. and other European allies in Ukraine increases the risk of a nuclear confrontation.
"Russian aggression in Ukraine requires an international response. However, it does not justify increased U.S. military budgets, which could ultimately escalate tensions with Russia and once again lead us down a dangerous path," said Costs of War Project co-director Stephanie Savell.
Instead of increasing the flow of weapons into Ukraine, the paper advises "de-escalatory approaches" to end the war unleashed by Putin's invasion. Such measures should include "direct talks, reviving the arms control agenda, and pursuing military confidence-building measures between NATO countries and Russia."
In a series of tweets late last week, Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), winner of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize, said she was deeply troubled by the way journalists and analysts throw around the term "tactical nuclear weapons" without putting them in their proper context.
"Whether or not the risk is high or low, when we describe what Russian use of nuclear weapons would do in Ukraine, we have to mention that hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians would die," Fihn tweeted on Thursday. "Even if it stopped with one bomb, it would be an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe."
"This to me," she added, "is one of the main problems of many nuclear analysts. It is detached from reality and real people, and only talks about abstract strategy and theory. It's how we desensitize decision-makers and the public and make the use of nuclear weapons sound normal and acceptable."