Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?

I think you are making a mistake trying to assess what "country X 'wants'".

It only takes one person to decide to launch a missile. And very few to execute on that decision.

And what an individual, or a country, wants can change.

Just because nobody had any desire to attack Ukraine with nuclear weapons at the outset, it does not mean that they will not decide to later.

Consider the fact that Putin likely thought he could get away with annexing Ukraine with little international backlash, just like the last half-dozen times he's invaded and annexed parts of other countries.

Now he is the sole leader of a country that is being completely cut off from the global economy, and made a pariah in the entire western world. The national currency, and nearly all international relations are nearly shattered.

The situation is very different than it was, and things are likely starting to look desperate.

I don't expect a large-scale use of nuclear weapons, but I would absolutely not write off the possibility of their use altogether.

The two man rule just protects against a single member of the launch crew launching a nuke. At least in the US, the commander in chief can choose to launch a nuke unilaterally

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/heres-goes-presidents-deci...

Possible but certainly not plausible. Escalation to that extent is not only contrary to, but actually invalidates, the objectives of all parties involved. To escalate to a nuclear conflict, one's goal must be annihilation of large swaths of population. There is no such thing as a "limited" nuclear engagement when tens of thousands of such weapons exist in a ready-to-launch state. Mutually Assured Destruction it very much is... or to quote an excellent 1980's movie: "The only winning move is not to play."

I think it's more plausible that Russia would use mini-nukes on certain strategic targets. It would be to signal that they're willing to go all the way, but without actually committing suicide by nuking western countries.

The nuclear super-powers are in a situation where they have enough nukes to obliterate each other - many, many times over. But obviously no-one wants to take that chance - even with all the modern anti measures they have.

I think both sides are willing to accept pretty substantial losses, if it means avoiding an all out nuclear war.

The times we've been closest to nuclear armageddon, the public didn't know about it at all.

So, yes. And no. Who really knows.