Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#31

Post by newaccount2021 »

hwers wrote: post #21

I can't really tell what's going on here. Is the EU and America supposed to be helping out but it's all promises without real counter attacks? Is this just the calm before the storm as russia places their troops in the right spots while everyone looks on? Anyone who's smarter than me who could enlighten me?

EU is incapable and the US doesn't have near enough assets nearby

in any case, Putin would likely respond with a nuke (he already basically hinted this), this is an endgame for everyone, Ukraine, Russia, Putin...there will be no de-escalation or peace process. Putin already said Ukraine "does not need to exist"...either the Ukrainians can fight him off or not. Probably not. Sanctions won't matter. Scolding Putin at the UN won't matter. China will golf-clap the whole thing. By the end of 2022, the only issue will be when the West just recognizes the new borders or not.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#32

Post by stickfigure »

madaxe_again wrote: post #12
stickfigure wrote: post #6

Is there any strategic significance to this? I thought it was closed?

Two strategic points off the top of my head: One, the railhead. Afaik it’s operational and modern, as they used it for moving material for constructing the sarcophagus. Goes straight to Kiev. Makes for easy onwards transport of materiel from Belarus. Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possi…

> Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possible.

Does the wind only blow west? This seems pretty far fetched.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#33

Post by codezero »

Calavar wrote: post #19
madaxe_again wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two strategic points off the top of my head: One, the railhead. Afaik it’s operational and modern, as they used it for moving material for constructing the sarcophagus. Goes straight to Kiev. Makes for easy onwards transport of materiel from Belarus. Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possi…

> Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possible. If they wanted to go that extreme, they always had the option of just launching nukes. Capturing the reactor and blowing the sarcophagus just seems like a lot of needless extra steps.

Plausible deniability is a good reason not to use nukes. They could have a military accident, or blame a saboteur for some sort of weapons cache exploding in-situ and claim it was not intentional.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#34

Post by unionpivo »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #23
Calavar wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possible. If they wanted to go that extreme, they always had the option of just launching nukes. Capturing the reactor and blowing the sarcophagus just seems like a lot of needless extra steps.

Maybe I read too much scifi, but can't nukes be intercepted in key locations? They might be able to land them in more remote places, but wouldn't hitting cities be difficult? I was under the impression developed nations have missile interception technologies. But yeah, I've read books not based in reality and watched some netflix in my days, so I could be in fantasy land. Kind of sobering to write this out and realiz…

intercepting few (up to few dozen) missiles sure.

Intercepting hundreds potentially thousands ? Not really.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#35

Post by ojbyrne »

Calavar wrote: post #19
madaxe_again wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two strategic points off the top of my head: One, the railhead. Afaik it’s operational and modern, as they used it for moving material for constructing the sarcophagus. Goes straight to Kiev. Makes for easy onwards transport of materiel from Belarus. Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possi…

> Two, a gun to the head of Europe. They could threaten to destroy the containment, and/or to bomb the reactor building to aerosolise as much radioactive material as possible. If they wanted to go that extreme, they always had the option of just launching nukes. Capturing the reactor and blowing the sarcophagus just seems like a lot of needless extra steps.

It gives some deniability. "In desperation, the Ukrainian government has shelled the Chernobyl site."

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#36

Post by Hamuko »

Sebb767 wrote: post #15
shiado wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theoretically the whole area could be turned into a dirty bomb with a few strategic strikes and it would be carried down a river destroying vast areas of Ukraine for millennia.

If Russia really wanted to create nuclear fallout problems, they have weapons that do so far more targeted and effectively.

It'd be easier to cover up by claiming it was an accident or they were fired on by the Ukranians. You don't really have the same leeway when you drop a nuke.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#37

Post by [deleted] »

Sebb767 wrote: post #15
shiado wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theoretically the whole area could be turned into a dirty bomb with a few strategic strikes and it would be carried down a river destroying vast areas of Ukraine for millennia.

If Russia really wanted to create nuclear fallout problems, they have weapons that do so far more targeted and effectively.

[deleted]

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#38

Post by dathinab »

stickfigure wrote: post #6

Is there any strategic significance to this? I thought it was closed?

It's a side you can't really bomb/air attack.

It's a side both EU and Russia are worried about I think.

Putin is afraid that Ukraine will somehow put together a form a nuclear bomb and use it "in desperation", and remainders in it could be used to build a dirty pseudo atom-bomb (or maybe we should call it radiation bomb).

It's also is a nice path into the Ukrain with no civilians/camera etc. around to get in their way.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#39

Post by TameAntelope »

hwers wrote: post #21

I can't really tell what's going on here. Is the EU and America supposed to be helping out but it's all promises without real counter attacks? Is this just the calm before the storm as russia places their troops in the right spots while everyone looks on? Anyone who's smarter than me who could enlighten me?

Ukraine isn't part of NATO, I think it's a big reason why troop deployment hasn't happened.
Post reply on HN