You're missing my point. Various news sources are reporting that Putin "threatened to use nuclear weapons" with the patently obvious suggestion that he was threatening a first strike and explicitly said that he would use nuclear weapons in that. Now I'm not disputing the inference that can be drawn from what he said. That's obvious. What I'm trying to point out is that this 'inference' we're all drawing is now being reported repeatedly as an actual statement he made. Which is completely untrue.

It's like if I said "adam has threatened to kick me in the bollocks. Well, if he does so, he should remember I have steel toe-capped boots too!" and the press all reported that as "Normille threatens to kick adam in the bollocks".

It ignores both the fact that I actually said I'd only retaliate if adam kicked me in the bollocks first AND the fact that I didn't actually say I would kick adam in the bollocks, but just reminded him that he wasn't the only one wearing big boots.

It may sound pedantic. But reporting what you inferred from what someone said as a direct quote attributed to that person is not honest journalism.