Well yes? Is there any indication, given Putin’s back to a wall that he would not order nukes as a final fuck you ?
Given the performance of the Russian military what makes you think that Russian nukes (and the people who operate them) are any better?
US intelligence and capabilities are likely much more effective than anyone knows.
Uh, yeah?
If you have nukes you can pretty much do whatever you want, short of launching them at another nuclear power. That's just like, reality.
Remember this the next time everyone bellyaches about "unfair sanctions" or whatever when some country even hints that they're pursuing a nuclear program.
There was something about liberty and safety and deserving neither that some US president said long time ago that I think might very much apply here.
"Henry Kissinger, who wondered in his 1957 book Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy if extending the American deterrent to all of Europe at a time when the threat of total destruction hung over the US itself would actually work: ‘A reliance on all-out war as the chief deterrent saps our system of alliances in two ways: either our allies feel that any military effort on their part is unnecessary or they may be led to the conviction that peace is preferable to war even on terms almost akin to surrender... [1]"
In summary, the concern you raise is actively discussed in security circles. Post Ukraine, it's increasingly common to see the absolute nuclear taboo questioned.
Until the first nuclear power lobs a tactical nuke and doesn't suffer reprisal, we'll be in an uncomfortable transition period, analogous to the time immediately preceding MAD. (And let's be honest. If Putin lobbed a tactical nuke at Ukraine, does anybody seriously think he'd face military force?)