New Superweapon Poses a Bigger Threat Than Nukes

Written by Jason Simpkins
Posted October 7, 2022

As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues to fall apart, Vladimir Putin is relying on increasingly desperate ploys to regain some semblance of control. 

Part of that effort has been a renewed focus on Russia’s nuclear arsenal, which he frequently leans on to influence global diplomacy.

In a speech annexing parts of Ukraine that his army has already surrendered, Putin decried Western leaders as “satanists,” pledged to use “all forces” to defend the “new territories,” and said that the United States established a “precedent” for nuclear deployment when it bombed Japan at the end of WWII.

Now, to be clear, these threats do have to be taken somewhat seriously. 

For one thing, the consequences would be devastating — world-changing, even. And for another, there’s no telling how desperate Putin will get or how close to being deposed he may come.

But for Putin to go all-in and push the red button, the situation would have to be incredibly dire, and I’ll tell you why…

First and foremost, Ukraine's proximity to Russia is itself a deterrent. 

When the United States bombed Japan, we had the luxury of doing it from a significant distance. We didn’t have to worry about any kind of nuclear blowback. 

And by that, I literally mean the wind. 

That’s not the case for Russia. Russia and Ukraine share a 1,300-mile-long border, with less than 600 miles between Moscow and Kyiv.

So if Putin were to detonate a nuke on Ukrainian soil, there’s a decent chance that the nuclear fallout and particles of radiation would literally be blown back into his face. 

Furthermore, when a nuclear blast occurs, the radiation contaminates the clouds and moisture in the air, resulting in radioactive raindrops that, again, could conceivably come down in Russia.

Indeed, Russia would literally be nuking itself  not just for that reason, but also because it continues to claim that Ukraine isn’t really a country at all but rather a rightful part of its territory. 

Remember, the whole point of this invasion was to reclaim a supposedly renegade Russian province. Failing that, Russia has made it clear that it at least wants to claim the eastern portion of Ukraine as well as Crimea. 

But what’s the point of taking that territory back if it’s nothing but a nuclear wasteland?

Its farmland would be non-arable, its mines and factories inoperable, its people dead, sick, and unforgiving. Far from a victory, it’d be a bleak and profound defeat for not just one but both sides of the conflict.

And then you’d have to factor in the political blowback. 

The retaliation from the West would be instant and drastic. It could even provoke a military response. 

Poland is already offering to host American nukes as a potential response. And it’d have a very good case if Russia were to go nuclear itself. NATO would have to believe the case that Warsaw might be next. And they’d have to respond accordingly.

Retired U.S. Army general and former head of the CIA David Petraeus has explicitly stated that if Russia were to deploy nukes, the United States and NATO would obliterate whatever remains of Russia’s traditional forces.

Every troop on the ground, every tank in the field, and every ship in the Black Sea would instantly become a target. There’d be nothing left for Russia to occupy Ukraine with.

Even if things didn’t escalate that far, the political consequences would be catastrophic. The penalties for doing any kind of business at all with Russia would be severe. That, along with the myriad of global dilemmas posed by a nuclear war, would cause even Russia’s closest allies to step back. 

And with all that, Russian society and Putin’s regime itself would become even less stable. 

Putin’s decision to “mobilize” and conscript unwilling Russians into service has already created political upheaval at home, inciting protests and riots. 

And now those same malcontents who were literally dragged from their homes and sent to fight in a war they don’t believe in are transitioning into poorly trained, poorly outfitted, and poorly fed military units that are already on the verge of mutiny.

It’s hard to see how bringing nuclear weapons into the mix would be a boost for morale. More likely, it would add to the perception that Vladimir Putin is a violent, maniacal dictator unfit to lead. 

And it probably wouldn’t be long before he was deposed either by the military forces he abused, the oligarchs he’s impoverished, or the people he’s oppressed, if not all three.

That’s the fate that awaits Vladimir Putin if he goes down that path. The same end that befell Muammar Gaddafi.

Of course, that’s not to say that Russia poses no threat. 

It still has some capability.

For example, the country has developed a new superweapon that poses a far greater threat than nuclear weapons. And what’s worse is that China has an even better version. 

You can find out more about that here if you’re interested. 

Fight on,

Jason Simpkins Signature

Jason Simpkins

follow basic@OCSimpkins on Twitter

Jason Simpkins is an Editor of Wealth Daily and Investment Director of Secret Stock Files, a financial advisory focused on security companies and defense contractors. For more on Jason, check out his editor's page. 

Want to hear more from Jason? Sign up to receive emails directly from him ranging from market commentaries to opportunities that he has his eye on. 

*Follow Angel Publishing on Facebook and Twitter.

Banking Crisis Just Kicked into High Gear