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

161–170 of 1001 posts

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#161

Post by djrogers »

ncallaway wrote: post #30
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?

The EU and America have promised to help with economic sanctions on Russia and by providing military aid and lethal aid. The EU and America have explicitly not promised to help out with direct military action against Russia. The United States and Biden have said multiple times that the US will not have forces engage Russia directly in Ukraine. What specific promises are you referring to?

>. What specific promises are you referring to?

The Budapest Memorandum. 1994 wasn't that long ago...

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#162

Post by mvc »

mikeyouse wrote: post #92
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited Ukraine not being in NATO means we aren’t obligated to intervene. We regularly intervene in various things without a treaty requiring it.

Intervening militarily invites a counter response from Russia and could lead to outright war between NATO and Russia. It's one thing to assist Kuwait, quite another to send troops to fight a nuclear-armed adversary.

So we wait until they're doing this in Poland? I think I've seen this one before. Doesn't end well for anyone involved.

Better to hit an enemy when they're not expecting it.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#163

Post by the_snooze »

gambiting wrote: post #118
jaywalk wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should always be plenty of doubt in your mind if you're saying that the US will use nukes in any situation short of someone else using them first.

The difference is that US is actually putting their troops and equipment in Poland though. I also think that attack on Poland would trigger full out response by US.

Poland is a NATO state. An attack on Poland would trigger World War 3 because the whole alliance is set up to jump in.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#164

Post by aszen »

ethbr0 wrote: post #85
Johnny555 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt that NATO would be willing to enforce this no-fly zone in a non-NATO nation, that would mean being willing to shoot down Russian military aircraft, which would surely escalate the war.

Neither Iraq (1991+) nor Bosnia and Herzegovina (1993+) were NATO members, and it served its purpose there. And hence declaring it before Russia invaded. Which forces Russia to choose to shoot down NATO aircraft, or operate outside those zones.

Simple fact is western powers don't have the capability to maintain any sort of airspace over ukraine or other nearby countries. Russia is not a weak country that can be deterred by a no fly zone.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#165

Post by heartbreak »

netsharc wrote: post #122
Thaxll wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putin would have never invaded a NATO country.

Feels like until 5AM local this morning we all thought he'd never do a full invasion of Ukraine either... But in general I'd agree with you. On the other hand, who and literally what army would stop them?

> Who and literally what army would stop them?

Among several others, the United States military. Which, contrary to claims made elsewhere in this thread, is a pretty formidable defensive force. In fact, it even has aircraft carriers that can move under their own power.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#166

Post by jl6 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #58
jl6 wrote: post #27

I guess this indicates that Russia intends to completely subdue Ukraine and back it into a corner. In such a scenario, a desperate Ukraine government could wield the plant as leverage by threatening some catastrophe. By removing it from their hands, Ukraine is denied this weapon of last resort. And Russia gains another weapon of last resort, should anyone think of putting them in the same position.

I fail to imagine how the reactor could practically be used as a weapon.

Scorched Earth. Ukraine decides the only tactic left is to deny its enemy use of the area++.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#167

Post by trhway »

rmk wrote: post #70
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 is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited. Russia intends to use Chernobyl as a deterrent to NATO, according to the report (how, I do not know). It is also not straightforward to put a NATO ally right on Russia's vulnerable flank (it's endless plains and flat ground from Ukraine to Moscow, which has always been a source of strategic vulnerability for Moscow), so admitting Ukraine to NATO was ne…

>In fact, the US has had to tread very carefully simply to place missiles that are capable of carrying nuclear warheads in Poland, which is a neighbor of Ukraine.

according to Putin that treading is a major motivation for his current actions.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#168

Post by crisdux »

lend000 wrote: post #91

It's hard to view the events unfolding with an objective gaze. Virtually all of western journalism condemns Russia's attacks unilaterally, which seems reasonable, considering people are dying to grow a dictator's empire. But then I read about the history of the conflict and see that Ukraine has had separatist states and civil war for years. It isn't like Ukraine is a stable, peaceful, and unwitting nation, like, say,…

This isn't a Ukrainian or Russian perspective, but an alternative perspective.

John Mearsheimer gives a popular alternative perspective. He has a realist foreign policy perspective suggesting that the US and the west provoked Russia by trying to push Ukraine to join NATO and by intervening in the protests/coup in 2013/2014. Russia has a legitimate security interest in ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO and become militarized.

https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-t...

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#169

Post by jaywalk »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #137
jaywalk wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should always be plenty of doubt in your mind if you're saying that the US will use nukes in any situation short of someone else using them first.

The US is the only country that used nukes.

Completely irrelevant.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#170

Post by aszen »

Johnny555 wrote: post #134
ethbr0 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither Iraq (1991+) nor Bosnia and Herzegovina (1993+) were NATO members, and it served its purpose there. And hence declaring it before Russia invaded. Which forces Russia to choose to shoot down NATO aircraft, or operate outside those zones.

When Iraq invaded Kuwait, we were willing to fight (and eventually did fight) a war with Iraq. NATO is not prepared or willing to start a war with Russia.

You are forgetting the fact that the odds are heavily against NATO, in a RAND wargame it was found that russia can occupy the baltic States within 48 hours while nato would be still warning up
Post reply on HN