I’m focused on your suggestion about fighting dirty.
If Russia uses a nuke, I am very confident Nato will step in and give Russia pluperfect (and probably nonnuclear) hell for it. I’m good with that. But, while I respect Machiavelli’s analysis of the politics of pragmatism, I also hold that the end does not justify the means.
The Russian use of a chemical agent, if that stands up to investigation, concerns me. That is a use of a listed wmd, and could lead to “category creep” in what is considered acceptable warfighting.
In my estimation it is not enough for Nato to escalate, but positioning a bomber wing or two in Ramstein andor RAF Fairford might have a focusing influence. I don’t know.