Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces • Hacker News Board

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#201

Post by hutzlibu » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #149

charliea0 wrote: post #119

The Russian forces seem to be trying to encircle or assault Kyiv. I think they've taken the nuclear plant because it is a defensible point along their shortest line of advance. They wouldn't want to move past it without controlling the site.

Also, either side would be pretty reluctant to bomb it, or otherwise battle too hard close to it. It's a great position to hold if you can.

"It's a great position to hold if you can."

It is a great position to hold and fight in, because the area is pretty empty of civilians. And russia must avoid ukranian (russian in their eyes) civilian casualties, to not loose the little popular support they have for this war.

And neither side will be so stupid to directly bomb the remains of the reactor, but I think it would need a serious direct bombing, for radiation to leak out. I don't think there can be still a major uncontrolled chain reaction. The worst that can happen under normal circumstances, is radiation leaking out.

(but all this is from the back of my head knowledge, about documentaries about chernobyl, I might be wrong)

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#202

Post by jcims » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

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?

I just had two chinooks fly overhead from the direction of Wright Patt. I see them maybe once a year.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#203

Post by alecbz » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #148

mikeyouse wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Totally agree. Just clarifying that the limiting factor on international responses isn’t Ukraine’s NATO nonmembership.

I think people are implying "obviously we'd like to avoid direct military conflict with Russia if possible", so given that there's nothing strongly compelling us to intervene directly (like Ukraine being in NATO), we're obviously not.

(I'm unclear on how true the silent implication is, but seems reasonable).

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#204

Post by willis936 » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:57 PM UTC

StillBored wrote: post #176

willis936 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Costs money and political capital. What it buys is defense of Ukrainian sovereignty and escalates conflict with a dangerous, poor nuclear superpower. Ukraine is being handed to Putin. He gets to flex his strongman ego and the world gets to not be ended (today).

Which sounds disturbingly like British/French response to the Rhineland/Austria lead up to WWII.

Indeed. Some things are different today. Nukes, cyber weapons, NATO borders being tougher than the League of Nations, the imperial country having a weak economy, and the whole thing is a war without a cause.

Russia invading a NATO country would be akin to walking on a landmine. Putin's not a fool, so it is very unlikely to happen.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#205

Post by awb » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:57 PM UTC

BitwiseFool wrote: post #80

stickfigure wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that is true, then every explosion contaminates the vehicles and personnel staged in the immediate vicinity. Doesn't sound so brilliant to me.

True, but the Russians are also counting on the idea that Ukrainian forces do not want to release that fallout back on to their own territory and that European forces do not want radioactive particles wafting back over into continental Europe. Russia has calculated that while an attack would be bad for the Russian forces at Chernobyl, it would actually be much worse for the allied forces.

> True, but the Russians are also counting on the idea that Ukrainian forces do not want to release that fallout back on to their own territory

Unless there is no Ukraine. Blowing it up is the closest thing Ukraine has to a nuke and it would take out any troops stationed there. It would be a horrific thing to do though and I don't think the Ukrainian leadership has the demeanor to do it.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#206

Post by pkaye » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:58 PM UTC

adrr wrote: post #179

nuccy wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine signed a Budapest memorandum [1] where US, France, UK and Russia guaranteed its territory integrity in exhange for the 3rd in the world arsenal of nuclear weapons. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur...

US, France and UK have guaranteed that no country will ever dismantle their nukes for a piece of paper. This will make the world much more dangerous with Iran pursing nukes which will be shortly followed by Saudi Arabia. North Korea will never disarm. Proliferation will continue and technology advancements will make it easier for countries to acquire nukes.

Russia is who broke this agreement yet you are blaming the others?

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#207

Post by ethbr0 » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:58 PM UTC

aszen wrote: post #164

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.

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.

Russia has been trying to produce PAK-FA / Su-57 fighters since 2010.

They currently have ~4.

There's a reason Russia invests so much in SAM systems. They expect NATO to have air superiority.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#208

Post by saiya-jin » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:58 PM UTC

Terry_Roll wrote: post #90

whatshisface wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear whether every financial weapon will be used. For example, > The foreign ministers of the Baltic states called for Russia to be cut off from SWIFT, the global intermediary for banks' financial transactions. However, other EU member states were reluctant, both because European lenders held most of the nearly $30 billion in foreign bank's exposure to Russia and because China has developed an alternative t…

Russia and China have developed their own equivalent of SWIFT, so again this is a sanction which will benefit Russia just like the oil price going up will benefit them because Russia has the largest oil reserves in the world. Plus with Chernobyl, some of the fuel rods may well be weapons grade still, and Chernobyl almost bankrupted Russia, it certainly helped break up the Soviet Union according to Gorbachev, its also…

> I'm now thinking Russia is the next country to get a massive improvement in quality of life and infrastructure

That's practically impossible. They could have done in in last 30 years, but almost all the profit went to pockets of Kremlin's pyramid of power and tunneled to tax havens across the world. Corruption, laziness, incompetence of key people, and in some form also in the rest of nation will effectively prevent that.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#209

Post by agumonkey » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:59 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #194

agumonkey wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO for more details did this affect Russia negatively ? from my seat it was no biggie, and nothing came out of the baltic states joining.. no threats, accident, economic problems in the news.. but maybe i'm just blind

From Russias POV it was.

I'm trying to assess how much of it is a blow to russian empire desire and paranoia, or if there were some more tangible / material effects. I can understand they really don't want a US driven group nearby for multiple reasons.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#210

Post by bayesian_horse » Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 7:59 PM UTC

charliea0 wrote: post #119

The Russian forces seem to be trying to encircle or assault Kyiv. I think they've taken the nuclear plant because it is a defensible point along their shortest line of advance. They wouldn't want to move past it without controlling the site.

I think they seized it because they need the general area to move their troops. In that case they can't tolerate Ukrainian troops there, but somebody has to be in control and responsible for this site to ensure, among other things, no terrorists make off with radioactive material.

I'm totally condemning the Russian actions, but in this particular case they may be acting somewhat responsibly. Unlike with the bombing of civilians or the whole damn war in the first place!