Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces • Hacker News Board

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#711

Post by slaw » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:12 AM UTC

RC_ITR wrote: post #333

squarefoot wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Russian forces seem to be trying to encircle or assault Kyiv. Yes, but although Putin is a bloody bastard, he's not stupid. His plan isn't to take entire control of Ukraine militarily but to swap the legit government with a puppet one he would control at will. Once he succeed, which is a matter of a few days, he'll gradually withdraw most of the forces, things will slowly return to normal and in a few years Ukr…

That's such a straightforward narrative, but then why has no major power ever been able to annex and occupy an unwilling nation before? Everywhere Russia has taken to date was already a separatist region, but I'm really racking my brain to think of times when a country 'just simply annexed' another area by force since the fall of the Raj.

Turkey conquered part of Cyprus in 1974

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#712

Post by throwawaylinux » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:18 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #706

throwawaylinux wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely curious do people really want to get (presumably other people's sons) into war over this? I hope this doesn't sound flippant or taking light of Russia's actions because it's not intended to be. But what is the decision process behind supporting a choice to start sending other people to kill and die for your desired outcome here? And do you also believe wars should be initiated against China to liberate…

If you think Putin's next stop after Ukraine might be another country, then another, until he's planning his victory celebration in Paris, you may want to stop him early. Or maybe instead of sweeping up through NATO he decides owning the worlds oil would be nice and starts cutting down to the Middle East.

> If you think Putin's next stop after Ukraine might be another country, then another, until he's planning his victory celebration in Paris,

Well, do you think that? My question was for you but it's fair I answer yours.

> you may want to stop him early.

What "you" is that? The people of those countries that would be invaded along the way?

If I thought that and was a person from one of those other countries, I would probably think it's preferable to build defenses of my country rather than engage in expeditionary warfare in the east near Russian supply lines and air space. Difficult question though I'm certainly no military strategist.

On the first question, I do not think Putin's next stop is likely to be that or possibly even the regions of Ukraine where there are fewer Russians/less pro-Russian support. But such things should always be considered and I'm no military or geopolitical analyst. What I can see is that from the amount of money western european states spend on their defenses they do not consider such a risk likely either, and they do employ many such strategists. So as a person not from one of those countries I certainly wouldn't support my country getting involved in military action in the region first.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#713

Post by jollybean » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:21 AM UTC

dudeinhawaii wrote: post #428

I'm genuinely curious at what point a bully threatening you with MAD can be stopped if you value the existence of your own civilization? Say Russian conquers all of Ukraine and moves troops to the Polish border and parks some tanks a bit inside. What then? Strongly worded essays? If Russia isn't raining hell on Poland, then NATO is forced to .. apply sanctions, make threats, but take no action since the escalation an…

Because Putin is not insane and does not want to destroy Russia.

He wants to take it, and he can threaten and get away with it because the West won't react.

If the US 'gave' the Ukranians some drones and guided missiles and then 'fired' said missiles for the Ukrainians at Russian forces in Ukraine, at the bhest of Ukraine, what's he going to do?

Start lobbing nukes?

In fact, the Nuke/MAD part is what makes it maybe safer to react. As long as the US isn't invading anything it's hard to see what he could justify doing.

If he did a nuclear test, as a 'scary demonstration' - he would then lose the world's support. Even China would balk. He would be firmly nuts.

Russians out in the open, not in their own country with defences are easy targets. The US could do 'generational' damage to Russian forces in literally just a few days.

The US/West should probably be doing everything the can do short of invading.

NATO doesn't have the guts, it would have to be an American President.

Trump has the 'gall' but he's not a military person and a loose cannon. Biden is far to effete. I think possibly GW Bush II surrounded by neocons, would have done something, and so would his father who ejected Saddam from Kuwait and then sat back.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#714

Post by sammyjoe72 » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:22 AM UTC

lordnacho wrote: post #477

dudeinhawaii wrote: post #428

I'm genuinely curious at what point a bully threatening you with MAD can be stopped if you value the existence of your own civilization? Say Russian conquers all of Ukraine and moves troops to the Polish border and parks some tanks a bit inside. What then? Strongly worded essays? If Russia isn't raining hell on Poland, then NATO is forced to .. apply sanctions, make threats, but take no action since the escalation an…

There's this concept in game theory that it's sometimes worth it to hurt yourself in order to hurt an uncooperative player. If you are always thinking "how do I minimize harm to myself" you get salamied to death. Same as in a poker game, you can't fold every time someone raises big, just because you don't know which times he actually has good cards. If you do he ends up with all your chips. Other thing is about MAD.…

The issue has always been escalation, if your enemy takes out your forward warning systems, you have to assume a full scale attack is coming, and thus you have to respond with a full scale attack yourself, damn the rest.

This was discussed at length during the 70s and 80s, and a big reason why the superpowers started to reduce their arsenals, because there is no winner after the first nuke is launched, not even a small scale exchange can be trusted to remain small.

This is a terrifying time indeed

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#715

Post by slaw » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:24 AM UTC

RC_ITR wrote: post #352

bombcar wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tibet?

Tibet was under control of the Qing Dynasty (i.e. China) until its end in 1912. From 1912-1950, Tibet (due to its remoteness) acted as an de facto independent region, despite Western legal precedent stating it was still under the control of Beijing. When attempting to get de jure independence from China in 1951, China asserted control over the region. So sort of, but not really.

So if you occupy country for long enough it’s ok to invade it when it tries to get independent?

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#716

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:26 AM UTC

csee wrote: post #659

kodah wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I think we are well past the point of nuclear armaments. I think, if there is war, it'll be a ground and air war that's like a sophisticated yet familiar chess game and a side war that is mostly anti-war propaganda, pro-Russia propaganda, misinformation, and attacks on IOT and public infrastructure that exhaust the citizenry out of watching the fighting.

Then when Putin starts losing and faces a coup from disgruntled people at home? You sure that megalomaniac won't decide to go nuclear when pushed into a corner?

[deleted]

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#717

Post by 5e92cb50239222b » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:29 AM UTC

natmaka wrote: post #692

aksss wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may get downvoted into oblivion for saying this, but -- I think it's wishful thinking to imagine soldiers will make the 'right' decision when the call comes. During the Tiananmen Square debacle/massacre, interviews with people there indicate that many/most never imagined the "people's" army would act against them - they were considered on the same side. Yet act against them they did. Similarly, I think you see some…

For many (most?), even cops, heavily beating up people who didn't nor do anything violent or amoral/immoral isn't easy. Isn't violent repression nearly always triggered by protesters' violence (sometimes only by a fraction of them, sometimes by people acting up in order to trigger repression, sometimes through misinterpretation or some fake-flag operation...) ? Isn't a well-rehearsed then conducted (in order to avoid…

> Isn't a well-rehearsed then conducted (in order to avoid and isolate provocations) peaceful protest efficient against it?

Of course not. In Russia peaceful protesters are routinely beaten for standing with a piece of paper. There wasn't much violence from protester's side for about a decade now because you get 3-7 years in prison for throwing a paper cup at a riot cop, or touching his helmet (not striking — simply touching). You can be peaceful all you like, it won't help you to get out of it unscathed. Just yesterday we got a few fresh examples (ironically from anti-war protests).

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#718

Post by markdown » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:34 AM UTC

beloch wrote: post #703

dudeinhawaii wrote: post #428

I'm genuinely curious at what point a bully threatening you with MAD can be stopped if you value the existence of your own civilization? Say Russian conquers all of Ukraine and moves troops to the Polish border and parks some tanks a bit inside. What then? Strongly worded essays? If Russia isn't raining hell on Poland, then NATO is forced to .. apply sanctions, make threats, but take no action since the escalation an…

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but Poland is. If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily . Russia can attack non-NATO countries and intimidate NATO into doing nothing, but to attack a NATO member would automatically bring the whole alliance into the war. The whole point of alliances like NATO is to prevent countries from being picked off by a bully the way U…

You seem to have missed the point.

> If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily

And? They can't actually respond militarily because MAD.

NATO is useless if the enemy knows you won't initiate MAD, but they can (democracy vs dictatorship).

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#719

Post by HWR_14 » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:35 AM UTC

throwawaylinux wrote: post #712

HWR_14 wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think Putin's next stop after Ukraine might be another country, then another, until he's planning his victory celebration in Paris, you may want to stop him early. Or maybe instead of sweeping up through NATO he decides owning the worlds oil would be nice and starts cutting down to the Middle East.

> If you think Putin's next stop after Ukraine might be another country, then another, until he's planning his victory celebration in Paris, Well, do you think that? My question was for you but it's fair I answer yours. > you may want to stop him early. What "you" is that? The people of those countries that would be invaded along the way? If I thought that and was a person from one of those other countries, I would p…

I don't think Putin is going to stop after Ukraine - he may temporarily stop to rebuild and plan the next war, but my belief is he will keep salami slicing until war is joined because he crosses some line that people stand up to him. Better to do it cheaper.

The "you" was, well, everyone in the world. I don't really subscribe to the strange belief that I should only care about human suffering of my countrymen. However, if you do, the bigger the war gets, the worse it will be and the more far afield it will bring in other countries.

As far as "far from Russia's supply lines", their old border won't matter, they'll still be close to their bases in what was once Ukraine. Oh, and they'll have more resources from Ukraine. Plus, you won't have the 7th largest army in the world absorbing the brunt of their attack.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#720

Post by ed » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 5:37 AM UTC

beloch wrote: post #703

dudeinhawaii wrote: post #428

I'm genuinely curious at what point a bully threatening you with MAD can be stopped if you value the existence of your own civilization? Say Russian conquers all of Ukraine and moves troops to the Polish border and parks some tanks a bit inside. What then? Strongly worded essays? If Russia isn't raining hell on Poland, then NATO is forced to .. apply sanctions, make threats, but take no action since the escalation an…

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but Poland is. If Russia attacks a member of NATO then all members of NATO are obligated to join in defence militarily . Russia can attack non-NATO countries and intimidate NATO into doing nothing, but to attack a NATO member would automatically bring the whole alliance into the war. The whole point of alliances like NATO is to prevent countries from being picked off by a bully the way U…

> 2. Develop nuclear weapons.

Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine had nuclear weapons but gave them up because Russia agreed not to invade them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur...