Firstly, going to note that you have not explained what a state should do in such a situation.
So, your argument is that you a priori expect NATO to never invade a nuclear-armed state, even though we already have a posteriori confirmation that NATO was trying to start a war with Russia, and has done things like try to occupy Kursk, as well as perfidiously either using civilians for military actions or masquerading military forces as civilians, as well as drone strike civilians?
Sure, nuclear weapons do make NATO act more cautiously, but let’s not ignore that it has historically been very willing to take aggressive action against the USSR and its allies after the USSR developed and produced nuclear weapons.
Name one nuclear-armed state America has dared to invade.
Firstly, going to note that you have not explained what a state should do in such a situation.
So, your argument is that you a priori expect NATO to never invade a nuclear-armed state, even though we already have a posteriori confirmation that NATO was trying to start a war with Russia, and has done things like try to occupy Kursk, as well as perfidiously either using civilians for military actions or masquerading military forces as civilians, as well as drone strike civilians?
Sure, nuclear weapons do make NATO act more cautiously, but let’s not ignore that it has historically been very willing to take aggressive action against the USSR and its allies after the USSR developed and produced nuclear weapons.