Vladimir Putin’s leading TV attack dog called for a nuclear strike on Britain in a chilling threat as World War 3 fears erupt. It comes following the revelation that UK killer drones are now being used by Ukraine for strikes deep inside Russia.
Vladimir Solovyov also demanded British arms factories should be hit and ships sunk that carry weapons to Ukraine. “Hit them with Poseidon [underwater nuclear drone],” he demanded in a primetime broadcast on state TV. “Give the British three days to learn to breathe underwater, then hit them with Poseidon.” Russia’s Poseidon underwater nuclear drone will be capable of inflicting a coastal nuclear explosion, washing a radioactive tidal wave over Britain when the weapon comes on stream, claim Moscow military sources. Last month, Putin claimed the sinister weapon is nearing completion, and will be ready to be deployed soon.
Vladimir Putin’s leading TV attack dog has issued a chilling threat (Image: Getty)
Vladimir Solovyov, Russian state TV presenter, called for a nuclear strike on the UK (Image: PAVEL BEDNYAKOV/POOL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
Get the latest news from around the world and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
The ranting propagandist Solovyov said the British Embassy in Moscow should be closed and UK journalists removed from Russia.
“When will they finally get rid of all these British journalists [in Moscow], all this vomiting anti-Russian scum, from here….?
“Drive them all out of here, and close the [British] embassy and kick them out.”
Vladimir Kornilov, another Kremlin propagandist, said Britain should be “nervous” over the revelation UK drones are striking deep inside Russia.
“They write with pride that finally British drones are hitting Russian enterprises, they name these enterprises,” he said.
“They cite an anonymous source from the British Ministry of Defence who says that Russia has been keeping us on edge the whole time….
“Now we’re showing Russia, we’re not nervous anymore….The bad thing is that they’re not nervous. Of course they should be.”
The Russian shadow fleet tanker Smyrtos was intercepted by British forces in June. (Image: Getty/Finnbarr Webster)
He threatened: “If British newspapers are boasting that their drones are already hitting civilian targets deep in Russia, then surely we can do the same. Or is that something else entirely?”
Solovyov said: “Now, strikes deep into Russia are being carried out with British weapons…this is classic Anglo-Saxon warfare. We need to understand who we’re fighting and respond asymmetrically…. ”
“We shouldn’t pay attention to what they say or what they think. They need to be destroyed.
“Starting with the Baltic states, through which drones have flown again, ending with the ports in Romania through which they’re importing weapons, with factories in England, Italy, France, and Germany, we need to sink their ships that are transporting military supplies for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
“And don’t even worry about it. There’s no point.”
Russian MP Andrey Lugovoy claimed the UK was intimidated by Putin’s warning over Russian ships (Image: Getty)
This came as hardline MP Andrey Lugovoy claimed Britain had been intimidated by Vladimir Putin’s warning Russia could arrest Western ships in the Pacific and other oceans in retaliation for the impounding of the Kremlin’s shadow fleet vessels.
“The British attempt to legalise piracy ended in another flop. Was it worth the risk?
“Vladimir Putin’s promise to respond in kind to the West’s seizure of Russian ships forced London to admit that its strength is no longer what it once was. England is no longer the ‘mistress of the seas’.”
Russia’s ‘Three-Day’ Nuclear Warning to Britain Raises World War Three Fears
The latest controversy centres on comments by Vladimir Solovyov, a prominent presenter on Russian state television who has frequently used aggressive language against Western governments. In remarks reported in August and again in October 2026, Solovyov called for Russia to use its Poseidon nuclear-powered underwater weapon against Britain, saying the country should be given three days to prepare to “breathe underwater”. <Cite refs={[“turn860880search0″,”turn860880search15”]}/>
The remarks are alarming, but an important distinction must be made: they were reported as statements by a television propagandist, not as a confirmed three-day ultimatum issued by Putin or an official announcement of an imminent nuclear attack.
The Poseidon system is designed as a nuclear-capable underwater weapon. Its appearance in Russian television rhetoric has fuelled concerns about the Kremlin’s willingness to use nuclear threats as a tool of political intimidation.
However, dramatic statements about nuclear weapons do not, on their own, establish that an attack is being planned. Assessing the actual danger requires examining official decisions, military developments and intelligence assessments rather than relying solely on provocative broadcasts.
Britain’s Support for Ukraine Fuels Russian Anger
The dispute comes against the backdrop of Britain’s continuing support for Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly criticised Western military assistance, particularly when it believes weapons or technology supplied by NATO countries are being used against targets inside Russia.
British governments have maintained that Ukraine has the right to defend itself against Russia’s invasion. London has also worked with its allies to strengthen European defence and maintain pressure on Moscow.
Russia, meanwhile, has accused Western countries of becoming increasingly involved in the conflict. The resulting confrontation has produced diplomatic warnings, economic sanctions and growing concern about the possibility of miscalculation.
In May 2026, the UK condemned Russia’s nuclear rhetoric and missile signalling at the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, arguing that such threats undermine trust and increase instability. British officials also stated that the warnings would not deter the country from supporting Ukraine’s right to self-defence. <Cite refs={[“turn860880search2”]}/>
The disagreement illustrates the challenge facing both sides: each presents its actions as necessary for security, while viewing the other side’s decisions as provocative.
NATO Sends Its Own Message to Moscow
Britain’s security is closely linked to NATO, whose members have committed themselves to collective defence. The alliance’s purpose is to deter attacks against its members and coordinate a response if an armed attack occurs.
In late September 2026, Russia warned NATO that it could use its nuclear arsenal if the alliance attempted to isolate Kaliningrad, a Russian territory bordering Poland and Lithuania. Reuters reported that the warning included the possibility of strikes against NATO decision-making centres in the event of a direct conflict. <Cite refs={[“turn860880search13”]}/>
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte subsequently urged Moscow to stop issuing nuclear threats and reiterated the alliance’s commitment to defending its territory. <Cite refs={[“turn860880search16”]}/>
These developments demonstrate that nuclear rhetoric is not confined to television commentary. Official Russian diplomatic communications have also referred explicitly to possible nuclear retaliation under particular circumstances.
Nevertheless, the distinction between a conditional threat and an imminent attack remains essential. There is no basis in these reports alone to conclude that Britain has received an authenticated order giving it three days before a nuclear strike.
Could the Crisis Lead to World War Three?
The prospect of direct conflict between Russia and NATO is a serious concern because both sides possess substantial conventional military capabilities, while several NATO members maintain nuclear arsenals.
A direct confrontation could develop through a deliberate military decision, but escalation could also result from misinterpreted signals, an accident or an incident that governments struggle to contain.
That is why diplomatic communication and military risk-reduction measures remain important, even when relations are deeply hostile.
At the same time, the existence of nuclear threats does not mean that a world war is inevitable. Governments have strong reasons to avoid a conflict that could cause catastrophic destruction, and deterrence is intended partly to prevent attacks by making their potential costs unmistakable.
The danger lies in the possibility that deterrence could fail or that leaders could misjudge the other side’s intentions.
For ordinary Britons, the headlines can understandably cause anxiety. Yet sensational descriptions of nuclear annihilation should not be confused with verified assessments that an attack is imminent.
What Happens Next?
Britain is likely to continue monitoring Russian military activity and coordinating with NATO partners while maintaining its stated support for Ukraine. Moscow, for its part, may continue using nuclear rhetoric to discourage Western involvement in the conflict.
The immediate significance of the latest controversy is therefore political and strategic: it demonstrates how nuclear threats are being used in an increasingly confrontational relationship.
The crucial questions are whether Russia’s rhetoric is accompanied by concrete changes in military readiness, whether diplomatic channels remain open and whether Britain and its allies can prevent individual incidents from escalating.
The reported three-day warning is frightening language, but it should not be treated as proof that a nuclear attack on Britain is scheduled.
For now, the broader lesson is that nuclear threats demand serious attention, accurate reporting and measured responses. Britain must consider the risks to its national security, while NATO must preserve credible deterrence and keep channels for communication available.
As the war in Ukraine continues to shape relations between Moscow and Western capitals, avoiding a direct Russia-NATO confrontation remains one of the most important security challenges facing Europe.