What is NATO for then?

[Herainestold]

The fact that America has nukes in Europe is perceived as a provocation by Russia.
It doesn't matter whether we think it is a provocation, It is how Russia perceives it that matters.
Although America is definitely more circumspect about its nukes than Russia. The Russians seem to like parading theirs around, to prove a point I guess.

[Millennie Al]

It doesn't matter whether we think it is a provocation, It is how Russia perceives it that matters.

Many seem to find your posts to be provocations. Do you think it's reasonable for them to react by being rude to you? Presumably it doesn't matter whether you think there is a provocation.

[Herainestold]

It doesn't matter whether we think it is a provocation, It is how Russia perceives it that matters.

Many seem to find your posts to be provocations. Do you think it's reasonable for them to react by being rude to you? Presumably it doesn't matter whether you think there is a provocation.

It's all they've got. Putin at least has a big red button.

Interesting piece from DW that points out that America has at least 100 weapons in Europe in various countries.
Russia at this point , does not have weapons in Kaliningrad, despite claims to the contrary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1GdP7MsRYE

[noggins]

When have NATO used nukes as a pressure tactic?

NATO has nukes in numerous European locations.

Nato’s nukes in europe are where they always were.
They have not spread east since the end of the first cold war.

[wilsontown]

And ultimately, as shpalman points out, it doesn't really matter where they are. They could be in Timbuktu and would still destroy every major city in Russia.

Even Putin understands this (I hope).

[noggins]

Well no the theory is to have smaller accurate tactical nuclear weapons than can be used if conventional defense looks like its failing. The capability to nuke cities is to stop your cities being nuked.