Since that prediction, it looks to me that the chances of a nuclear weapon being used there has increased. So far I've only seen the Guardian reporting on the evacuation of Russians and Russian sympathizers from the region, announced by the Russian puppet governor who requested and received official Russian help in evacuating. To me, this is an ominous sign. If a nuclear explosion is planned there, this would be a first step.
Putin's apparent weakness is a reason it could happen. Russia's missile attacks on Ukraine this past week were seen as a vicious but futile response to recent humiliating defeats, without military advantage. Russia used a number of expensive weapons in the attack, and western analysts say they are likely to be depleting their available missiles, since they cannot get high tech parts from western sources anymore. If this is so, then Putin has pretty much only his sizable arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons left as "options." Several weeks ago Putin repeated that all types of weapons can be used--and more than hinted this includes nukes--in Russia's self-defense. He then began the elaborate charade of essentially annexing parts of Ukraine into Russia, and one of those places is Kherson. All of this looks like step by step preparation, though so far no one in the west is saying so publicly.
Putin's groundwork has also allowed the US and western Europe to figure out exactly what they will do if Russia uses nukes. The element of surprise is gone. The world will be shocked, but it is unlikely that Putin will gain military advantage because of it. Quite the opposite. But exactly what will happen can't be known, except that it could happen very fast. This is another case of letting slip the dogs of war, of self-renewing and escalating violence--with uncontrollable consequences. It all has a tragic inevitability about it.
Why is that a threat to the Republic? There was a debate in the pages of the NYTimes this past week on whether the US faces a second civil war. As usual, the semantics of it cloud the issue (exactly what is a civil war?) But one journalist who has been interviewing far right/Christian right zealots for decades, wrote in the Atlantic that if and when Trump is indicted for just about anything, large scale political violence is likely to break out. He cited in particular how heavily armed these people are, and what they are expecting to do with those weapons. He said that at gun shows during the Obama presidency, the reason people gave for stocking up on military weapons was the fear that because of school shootings, the feds were going to come after their guns. Now (he said) what he hears more often is that they are convinced they are fighting a war against the Great Replacement etc., and the government is their enemy. They are preparing to fight the federal government in particular.
Another participant in the discussion, a NY Times columnist with a deep knowledge of American history and the Constitution, agreed that political violence is likely, but the US has often suffered some small scale political violence. And he wondered if these people have the stomach for large scale, sustained warfare against trained troops. I agree that this is uncertain. So far political violence has been perpetrated by individuals or small groups, almost always against the defenseless: congregations in a church or synagogue, old people in a supermarket, children in school. In other words, the act of heavily armed, camo-clad cowards.
Even the attack on the Capitol last January showed division. Some people came to commit violence against the Capitol police and anyone who stood in their way. Most others seemed more interested in taking video with their phones and posting it, breaking things and taking souvenirs. No one can really predict what might happen (the dogs of war again) but we are quite possibly going to find out.
Then there is the upcoming election--another grave threat on many levels. The election polls appear useless and other surveys of attitudes etc. are contradictory, but the punditry suspects the momentum in favor of the Democrats because of the abortion decision is waning, and continuing inflation and rising gasoline prices are favoring Republicans. Because they are so much more likely to fix that, and their candidates have detailed policies and plans to do so. Just kidding.
The old 33% of the electorate who were Always Trumpers now seems to have become 40%, and Republican power brokers are looking only at the R, not the candidate. Will voters follow, and support the certifiably insane, the holy warriors, the authoritarians and white supremacists, the thoroughly corrupt, the dangerously stupid? Will this be a wave election one way or another, or a state by state, district by district decision?
We probably won't know for days and possibly weeks after election day. And unless our news media has gotten better and better equipped to cover this story, we may not know how corrupted the election processes are in individual districts and states. We can be sure that Rabid Right Republicans will extol every one of their victorious candidates as elected righteously, and every election they lose as illegitimate.
Again, all this domestic potential for Armageddon has historical preparation, and an air of tragic inevitability. But it may not happen on a very large scale, at least not this year. However, a Republican controlled House and/or Senate next year may well usher in mayhem, as they hold the country and world economy hostage to go after old people (by slashing Social Security and Medicare) as well as young women, immigrants and the planet. Meanwhile as officeholders these brainless and heartless fanatics will have no capacity to govern, especially in times of complex crisis.
Well, enjoy your day. Every day you can enjoy.
