By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian President, suggested Russia should consider “preemptive strikes” against the West in response to increased Western support for Ukraine, specifically the deployment of defensive systems. Medvedev’s comments followed the announcement of potential secondary tariffs on Moscow by former President Trump, who also indicated the U.S. would send Patriot missiles to NATO countries for eventual routing to Ukraine. Despite the push to send these systems, there is uncertainty surrounding the delivery timelines and locations, as Swiss and German officials have noted. While seen as a significant step, some, like Zelenskyy and EU leaders, are concerned that these measures are not strong enough.
Read the original article here
Russia threatens the West with “preemptive strikes,” huh? Well, here we go again. It seems like this is becoming a recurring theme, a familiar song and dance we’ve heard many times before. The core of the issue is the potential deployment of Patriot missile defense systems by NATO, which is being framed as a provocation by Russia. The immediate reaction is, frankly, a yawn.
The sentiment from many observers leans towards skepticism. The threats coming from Russia, particularly from figures like Medvedev, are often dismissed as bluster. They are considered less of a credible threat and more of a political tactic. Russia’s military capabilities, at least as demonstrated in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, are being widely questioned. Many people are pointing to the apparent inadequacies of the Russian military, and their inability to achieve their objectives in Ukraine. This leads to the conclusion that Russia is overstretched and facing significant internal challenges. The idea of Russia engaging in a conflict with NATO, a military alliance considered by many to be a powerhouse, seems far-fetched.
The narrative surrounding this situation involves a lot of posturing and brinkmanship. Russia seems to be trying to deter the West from supplying Ukraine with advanced weaponry, specifically the Patriot missile systems. However, this tactic appears to be losing its effectiveness. The world has heard these threats before, and the implications for Russia are clear: a direct military confrontation with NATO would likely lead to devastating consequences. The West possesses a superior military arsenal and the political will to defend itself and its allies.
Then there’s the issue of who is actually making these threats. The comments show that Medvedev is often the source of these declarations, a figure seen more as a mouthpiece than a decision-maker. This reinforces the perception that these threats are not necessarily a reflection of official Russian policy, but rather political statements designed to create a certain image, maybe scare the west? If the situation escalates, Russia would have to use nukes. They would suffer as well.
The potential delivery of Patriots to Ukraine further complicates the situation. Russia views this as a significant escalation and a direct threat to its military operations. The Patriot systems are advanced and capable of effectively neutralizing missile and air attacks. If Russia were to launch attacks, the west might retaliate.
There’s a sense that Russia’s current approach is failing. If anything, these threats might even be counterproductive, emboldening the West and potentially accelerating the delivery of advanced weaponry to Ukraine. The idea that this is just more of the same is the overwhelming tone.
In any event, Russia’s repeated threats of “preemptive strikes” are not being taken seriously. The international community is quite tired of hearing them. They do not deter the west anymore and it appears that Russia’s military is overstretched. NATO is planning to provide aid as quickly as possible. The west will be ready.