Ukraine has been attacking the Kursk and Belgorod oblasts with missiles for months, and they haven't gotten nuked yet. Russian nuclear doctrine is not "something happens in our territory and we nuke them back", it is "an enemy threatens the existence of the Russian state and we may resort to nukes".

If it was the former, Kiev would already be radioactive cinders.

Russia losing their conquests may change the calculus. In any case, no one is going around saying the west is threatening Russia with an unprovoked nuclear holocaust.

Putin didn't say they were. He said they were making nuclear threats, which they are both actively (supporting Ukrainian attacks on nuclear power plants) and passively (the USA alone reserves the right to a first-use nuclear strike and nearly every war game they run against a big enemy like Russia or China results in one). Furthermore, they openly support calls for the Russian state to be destroyed, which triggers Russia's defensive nuclear policy.

I don't watch videos because most of it is just conspiracy garbage (especially from folks like Helical). Mind giving a summary?

I only watched the first couple minutes, seems to be some guy saying entirely reasonable things about Russia having a legitimate fear of NATO, and not acting this way because Putin is irrational and hates Europe.

If the US is making threats, they are threats to retaliate to Russian nukes, not threats to initiate a nuclear war. So if Russian policy genuinely is "no nukes first," they have absolutely nothing to worry about and neither do we.

I however do not trust them to refrain.

Your country is the only one to ever use nukes, it maintains a policy of using nukes first, it supports attacks on nuclear power plants with onsite waste storage.

Pretty bizarre to look at history and say "someone else will start a nuclear war."

We maintain a policy of *refusing to rule out first strikes* to assure strategic ambiguity. That we train that way reinforces the policy. It does not mean that we seek out to use them first. It exists to make you think twice, and even thrice. It is extremely tortured logic on your part to claim we "support attacks on nuclear power plants" and your appeals to emotion go nowhere with me.

It would be too long to write everything down here, you could just open it and discuss but instead you will just stay on your position because your fragile dont want to be proven wrong.

I also aint the one regurgitating on a constant basis the regular propaganda like you do. I mean I dont have a problem with people blindly blaming russia for everything, unless they are from a country who's doing worse, if we exclude the past months.

Yes, that's the justification for maintaining a first-strike policy and it would almost make sense if the US had not, in addition to actually dropping nukes on cities, many times throughout history directly threatened other states with nuclear war. We also know that at multiple times the US has come very close to launching huge nuclear attacks against countries both with and without their own nuclear arsenals.

Russia, China, France, India and Pakistan and many others all have nuclear weapons. Only America maintains a policy of using them first. If the policy made sense, more countries would adopt that posture.

America maintains this policy because America believes it can win a nuclear war.